<p>Of course many in New England hear "Northwestern" and equate it with the academic quality of Northeastern...probably something that will always dampen NW's prestige there.</p>
<p>I live in Ohio and Northwestern has always seemed to have a lot of prestige with people here. The prestige probably decreases outside of the mid-west.</p>
<p>I think that many of the "obvious" schools that people seem to think should be on that list (stanford, cal, NW ,etc.) are not because the quality of these schools is generally well-known. Many of the schools listed were schools that were significantly improving quality.</p>
<p>Most schools are regional, with the exceptions of a few that are widely known. This is not something that affects just NU. Several of the Ivy League schools are more regional if you ask me.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I think that many of the "obvious" schools that people seem to think should be on that list (stanford, cal, NW ,etc.) are not because the quality of these schools is generally well-known. Many of the schools listed were schools that were significantly improving quality.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Exactly, they purposely avoided obvious picks because this was an introduction of up and coming colleges as well publics gaining strength, with that said, I am totally surprised by Rice being on the list because I would think it's already known as the Ivy of the South and really doesn't need the recognition, but oh well.</p>
<p>I concur with larationalist. All arguments to the contrary are futile, mwa ha ha!</p>
<p>Then again, I'm a Princeton 2010er! ;)</p>
<p>But in all seriousness, I held the same view even before I applied to the (real) Ivies.</p>
<p>this list is suppose to be a list to suggest very good colleges that are outside of people's radar.. the the north east ivy league and north east top lacs. it's strange that bowdoin and colgate are on this list as they've been around for a while and their quality is pretty much old news. i wouldn't expect WAS, wellesley, wesleyan, haverford, middlebury, carleton to be on that list as wwell cause their quality is old news for those in the know. i can undersatnd pomona because people just think about north east. i do find it strange that grinnell isn't on that list cause it's in the same boat as pomona not being in the north east.</p>
<p>It isn't a matter of improving quality but rising profile. As noted, Bowdoin, for example, has been a great school for a long time, and there are other long-established first-rate schools on the list too. It seemed a pretty randon assortment to me, in fact--perhaps it is as much a tool to sell this year's Kaplan as anything else.</p>
<p>As a Chicagoan, with many friends and family who graduated from Northwestern and/or Chicago, I like the idea that those two schools are not obsessed with rankings or what "lists" they are on. Frankly, what makes them a better choice than the "Obsession U's" is their uniqueness and their dedication to their students.</p>
<p>uchicago is one of the best schools in the nation and they have an acceptance rate of 40% last year.</p>
<p>What is the point you are trying to make, kgo?</p>
<p>They're already assuming that Duke, Northwestern, and Chicago have reached ivy status.</p>
<p>The 25 are schools that formerly had excellent but more regional appeal, or if they had national reputations (like Notre Dame) they weren't considered ACADEMIC alternatives to the traditional powerhouses (Ivies, Northwestern, Chicago, Berkelely, Duke, Stanford, etc.). Now with the admissions glut at the traditional top schools, there are enough superb students to fill the traditional powerhouses plus schools like these 25. The key to understanding the "Ivy League" reference is that the term has two distinct meanings...in upper case it's the 8-team athletic conference. In lower case "ivy league" refers to colleges and other things (even haircuts and sportcoats) that are high in quality and that at least somewhat emulate the traditional Northeast style (note that Deep Springs didn't make the list). Google "ivy league haircut" for more info on ivy league things that are not colleges.</p>
<p>Wow, if your school isn't on the list stop whining. Whoever made the list obviously thought about the list and did it for a reason and just because YOU are going to some school doesn't mean it should be on the list. Ya it may be weird that NU and Duke aren't on the list but its not the end of the world</p>
<p>The list of "25 New Ivies" is actually kinda familiar to those of us who've been trawling for schools these last two years. It was interesting - and rather bold on the part of Newsweek - to include the public universities, like Virginia, UCLA, Michigan and North Carolina. It would be hard to argue with their inclusion.</p>
<p>I have a question, though:
Other than those state universities, do the other 21 "new Ivies" have enough name recognition where it counts (job recruiters, grad schools, etc.)?
Or will those who graduate from, say, Wash U in St. Louis, have to explain for the rest of their lives that their alma mater is not in the Pacific Northwest?</p>
<p>These are hardly new or young schools, most are well known and have been around for a long time. </p>
<p>As far as name recognition, recruiters and grad schools ought to be familiar with all these schools since it's their business to be, but some of the smaller LACs like Kenyon and Macalester or Reed might not be on the radar screen for some recruiters. WashU's "problem" is just the confusing name, not that recruiters or grad schools aren't familiar with it.</p>
<p>The title wasn't "The Next Best 25 Schools After Ivies, MIT, Stanford etc". Just an arbitrary number to make a point. Maybe it should have been 50 new ivies, but even then not everyone would be happy;).</p>
<p>
[quote]
They're already assuming that [Stanford, MIT], Duke, Northwestern, and Chicago have reached Ivy status.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>In other words, this "25" list represents a list of "Top Tier II" schools at best.</p>
<p>
[quote]
include the public universities, like Virginia, UCLA, Michigan and North Carolina
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Curious that the No. 1 public - Cal - is not on this list, which further strengthens point no. 1 above - i.e. this is a Top Tier II list at best.</p>
<p>The real acid test is, are there any schools on that list that will have higher cross admits vs. any of the Ivies + S / M / Duke, NW, Chic?</p>
<p>No.</p>
<p>I think that's the whole point: the top tier 2 schools, if you wish, are stronger than ever because of the overflow of top students to the obvious 15 or so schools. This list of 25 isn't there to compete with the ivies, rather to benefit from their selectivity.</p>
<p>I don't want Northwestern to be "ivy status"! If I wanted that, I would have gone to Yale or Penn or Cornell!</p>