<p>Generally I agree with that assessment, thoughtprocess, but in my opinion, a few of those schools named--WashU/Tufts/Emory/Bowdoin/Pomona/Claremont--are, if not quite Ivy equals, also very exceptional schools.</p>
<p>This article was published in August 2006 and discussed extensively here.</p>
<p>The whole point of the article is to showcase 25 schools the authors believe are alternatives to the schools already considered "elite" in the U.S. This elite list includes the eight Ivy League schools, plus Stanford, MIT, UChicago, Georgetown, Johns Hopkins University, and Duke.</p>
<p>Advantageous - do you mean Claremont McKenna?</p>
<p>MikeU wrote:</p>
<br>
<p>This elite list includes the eight Ivy League schools, plus Stanford, MIT, UChicago, Georgetown, Johns Hopkins University, and Duke.<</p>
<br>
<p>It also quite specifically mentioned, "[s]maller liberal-arts colleges -- like Williams, Amherst, Middlebury, Swarthmore and Wesleyan."</p>
<p>Yes johnwesley. I didn't mean to discount those schools you mention.</p>
<p>Time Magazine ran a similar article in August 2006 entitled "Who Needs Harvard". <a href="http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1226150-3,00.html%5B/url%5D">http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1226150-3,00.html</a>
From the article:</p>
<p>"For students aspiring to go to graduate school, the more personalized education offered at small schools can often provide the best preparation. Pomona College sent a higher percentage of its students to Harvard Law in 2005 than Brown or Duke. The academic might of these less fabled colleges was never a secret, but it's becoming more appreciated than ever before. "Most of the good, small schools were church related to begin with, and it was bad form to beat your chest and brag," Pope says."</p>
<p>Sarahsdad, Pomona still sent a significantly lower percentage of students to other top 15 professional schools (including Harvard med and business, not just law) - Duke ranks in top 10, Brown top 15 for feeder rates into top 15 professional schools overall, not just 1 of the 15.</p>
<p>thoughtprocess: Yeah, I meant Claremont McKenna...kind of zoned out while typing, sorry. It's my understanding that Pomona is now the class of the Claremonts (didn't it have a really low acceptance rate this year? Like, in the teens?), but Claremont McKenna isn't far behind (nor is Harvey Mudd, although a totally different kind of school)). </p>
<p>I wondered if this was the same article from 2006, but there wasn't a link, so I wasn't sure....I remember only finding it mildly interesting back then. I come down on the side of the folks who find this more of a ploy to sell magazines than anything, but hey. I DO own the magazine, so who am I to talk? :) Plus, why no Wellesley love? They skipped right over it...I know it has a more limited appeal because it's single sex, but still. Boo. Plus, I know I'm biased because I disliked it so much, but why would they skip over Wellesley, Bowdoin, Pomona, and Haverford straight to Wesleyan? Each of those schools is at least as good (if not better) than Wesleyan. I know I'm analyzing it too much, but it just seems kind of arbitrary. That's the issue that people had with the article the first time around, as I recall.</p>
<p>TTP: Yes, your data is from the same WSJ article referenced on CC many times, now perhaps outdated (from 2003): <a href="http://www.collegejournal.com/special/top50feeder.pdf%5B/url%5D">http://www.collegejournal.com/special/top50feeder.pdf</a></p>
<p>Top Feeder Schools: (To the top 5 Med, Law, and Business Grad Schools)</p>
<h1>6 Duke</h1>
<h1>12 Brown</h1>
<h1>13 Pomona</h1>
<p>People on the board always forget about Carleton-- another top elite LAC. In fact, its academics is definitely on par with Amherst Williams Swarthmore, just that it has a rural location compared to the EAST COAST schools.</p>
<p>Yes, Carleton too. I left it out because I doubted whether people would agree with me that it should be included, but just because a school is a little off the everyday man's radar (Northfield isn't on the east coast, so Carleton might as well not exist! :)) doesn't mean it deserves forgetting. Anyway, point being, all of the top 10 or so LAC's offer an absolutely excellent education to rival that of nearly every school, including many of the top 20 Universities. LAC's are still undervalued by the general, non-CC population, in my opinion. A school needn't be a research university to offer an excellent undergrad education.</p>
<p>45 minutes from Minny/St. Paul, better than many of the out east schools.</p>
<p>Rural not in the sense of distance from metropolitan area, but in the sense of FAR FROM THE EAST</p>
<p>thethoughtprocess,
For your statement, </p>
<p>"These "new Ivies" mentioned in the list aren't really on par with the actual Ivies" </p>
<p>I think you are making too broad a statement, both about the “new Ivies” and the real Ivies. HYP are clearly above these schools, but Columbia, Dartmouth, Brown, U Penn, and Cornell are on the same level, or even lag, some of the schools on the New Ivy list. I won’t comment on the LACs because they are not direct comps, but I think that the following, to different degrees, compare very well with the lower Ivies and are increasingly competitive in the cross-admit battles.</p>
<p>Definitely Competitive with Ivies
Emory University
University of Notre Dame
Rice University
Vanderbilt University
Washington University in St. Louis</p>
<p>Somewhat Competitive with Ivies
Carnegie Mellon
Tufts University
University of Southern California (my addition)
Wake Forest (my addition)</p>
<p>Competitive with Ivies primarily for In-State students
University of Michigan
University of North Carolina
University of California, Los Angeles
University of Texas (my addition)
University of Virginia
William & Mary</p>
<p>I think that the list already assumes that Duke, U Chicago, Northwestern, Johns Hopkins, UC Berkeley and Georgetown are Ivy level schools.</p>
<p>Personally, I disagree with ND and Wake Forest a bit, but I see what you are going for and agree with the rest. The only one I'm a little shaky on is UT-Austin--UIUC probably doesn't win many cross-admit battles (although in certain departments....), but it is at least as strong overall as UT-Austin, I think. </p>
<p>Certainly not in anything like the caliber of town, though :). Neither school is right for me, but I would definitely move to Austin, and you couldn't get me out of Champaign-Urbana fast enough!</p>
<p>Advantagious wrote:</p>
<br>
<p>Plus, I know I'm biased because I disliked it so much, but why would they skip over Wellesley, Bowdoin, Pomona, and Haverford straight to Wesleyan? Each of those schools is at least as good (if not better) than Wesleyan. I know I'm analyzing it too much, but it just seems kind of arbitrary. That's the issue that people had with the article the first time around, as I recall.<</p>
<br>
<p>Because all of those schools are creatures of the USNews poll. If it wasn't for that yearly poll, there would be no market for prestige schools in general (as Carolyn stated quite correctly in yesterday's NYTimes article); and, without the separate ranking for "National Liberal Arts Colleges" none of the LACs you mention would be on anyone's radar. Say what you will about Wesleyan, it's rep has never rested on its USNews ranking.</p>
<p>But they are still great schools that offer undergrad educations to rival, even if they don't quite equal, that of the best universities in the nation. I'm not quite sure what your point is (it seems to be that those schools don't deserved to be mentioned, which I vehemently disagree with), but I think that it is a good thing that LAC's have come onto people's radar in some fashion (still nothing like the Universities).</p>
<p>Sorry, but if you're trying to tell me that Wellesley, Haverford, Pomona, Carleton, etc, etc, don't match up to Wesleyan, I'm not buying it, nor do I buy that Wellesley's rep is built on the USN&WR list, while apparently Wesleyan is some god in the sky above the list. I admitted my bias against Wesleyan--to be frank, I was totally unimpressed with it's academic "mission" if you could even call it that--but I was not trying to deny it's status as a top school. I was simply questioning the fact that many excellent LAC's were omitted.</p>
<p>I wouldn't be too bent out of shape that Wellesley was not tagged as a "New Ivy". Remember that old saying, "be careful what you wish for." ;)</p>
<p>Well, it's just annoying to me to get a bunch of blank stares (which would be there if I was going to Wesleyan, btw...it's a good thing I disliked it, because it would be hell to explain that no, I was not going to Illinois Wesleyan, I was going to Wesleyan Wesleyan. People are already getting confused thinking Wellesley is Wesleyan) when I tell people where I'm going, so maybe I'm a little over-sensitive about it. My whole point was that the list, including the introduction, seemed very arbitrary--as I recall, this is a rehash of the general arguments that ensued the first time around. Anyway, I call a ceasefire! Neither school is hurting for applicants, last time I checked.</p>
<p>Where Does Nyu Fit Into All Of This Discussion?</p>