<p>I still don't get this IVY stuff!!! for me it means nothing.. People thinks that because a university is a IVY means that is better them others but it's not like that take Brown for exemple it's an ivy school but it's no better then stanford or should i say has much much less international prestige than stanford...The ivy concept is so overated!!!!</p>
<p>They are going to sell alot of magazines!!!</p>
<p>mizo-
You have hit the nail on the head!!</p>
<p>Whatever. I totally reject the inclusion of the LACs in the list, as an "ivy alternative" should also be respected in ther research field to actually fit in. Nevertheless, I could care less if a school's ivy or not.</p>
<p>Are Dartmouth or Brown really respected for their research? Seems like they are more like the LACs in this regards.</p>
<p>Brown's research isn't too bad, but it is more of a large LAC.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Northwestern has yet to find its place in college rankings. It's certainy above most, if not all, of the schools on the top 25 list, but it's below schools like Stanford and Duke. I don't know what it's going to take for NU to be nationally recognize. Someone earlier argued that perhaps the writers thought that NU was already known enough to not be included, but I disagree. I can't tell you how many blank stares I get from people when I tell them I'm going to Northwestern. And I live in Ohio! OSU plays them in football every year! And football is our life here! If I said Stanford, though, I'm sure 99.9% of people would know what I'm talking about. I'm not exactly a prestige whore, but when I'm in a group and someone mentions they're going somewhere like Boston University, recieveing all these "Ohhhs" and "Ahhhs," and I mention I'm going to Northwestern only to get a "Is that in Washington?" response, well, it gets frustrating.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I agree completely. Every single word. Northwestern isn't widely recognized, no matter what people on CC may believe (besides, we're all more informed than the regular person about colleges). It gets shafted for not being recognized as a top college, yet it's never included in any "not quite ivies but still really good" lists. And I'm not even going to argue about the concept of Ivy status because that's a whole 'nother bucket of worms...</p>
<p>ITA that I don't like creating confusion about the term Ivy. A girl from our parish (county) got into Rhodes College in Memphis TN. Not only did our local paper insist that Rhodes is a member of the Ivy league...it went on about how she was going to be a "Rhodes scholar" like fellow matriculants "Bill and Hillary Clinton."</p>
<p>As far as I know, they never printed a retraction, and most people probably think that the girl supplied the false info to the paper.</p>
<p>I could have sworn that the Clintons are Georgetown, Wellesley, Yale and now Stanford alums! LOL That's hilarious!</p>
<p>I think this list is better titled "schools that sort of suck so we're putting them up to generate some noise and attention for our newspaper"*</p>
<p>*this is not to say that the schools on that list actually suck.</p>
<p>So I see that a lot of people are bashing this list, which is ok, but I dont understand why some people are talking crap about the top LACs. To me, I think its a shame that only the super ambitious people know of the top LACs. I'm sure that Haverford and Davidson kicks other highly ranked schools like Vanderbilt's ass when it comes to education, but because of their small size, they dont get the reputation they deserve. I especially feel sorry sometimes for people that get accepted there, and go there. I dont know how many times I've heard people say that someone going to CMC is an idiot just becuase they have never heard of it, while a person who goes to michigan is considered to be a genius despite the fact that CMC is probably better. So in short, dont bash LACs because of their reputation, and as for this list? Like its been stated, its just meant to explain schools that have little reputation, despite being exceptional. Schools like Notre Dame, which I also thot was a football party school, but is actually top-notch.</p>
<p>Yes, they should have separated the research universities from the LAC and made a section for the "new elite" LACs.</p>
<p>In any event, the best thing about the list is that it gives families more "legitimate" options to explore. The more popular the school the cooler it is to say you are sending your D or S there and you child will feel chic about the choice. In other words all these articles are giving us an out, even if our kids get admitted to a traditional elite school, they may choose a new elite which may be a better fit academically, socially and economically. For example, my D may now decide to choose Kenyon over Wellesley or Yale.</p>
<p>hopkin and college park arent listed, its all bs</p>
<p>perhaps what is really happening with these 25 schools is they are competitive enough with the ivys and top LACs to get the top students. The ivys and LACs are so busy staying politically, racially and economically correct not to mention athletically competitive, that there is less room to accept those addition hard working overachieving students that can easily qualify to meet their standards but because of space restrictions are turned away. No loss their are plenty of great schools getting great results and willing to take them!!</p>
<p>It is interesting that the authors decide that Middlebury has already been up there, while similarly strong academic schools that would have been mentioned in the same breath as Middlebury for decades (Bowdoin, Colgate, Rice, Tufts) have just arrived now. </p>
<p>In other cases where they don't specifically mention a school (like Northwestern) it's tough to tell if they intend to leave it out or to imply that it's already too well known to be mentioned further. However, it's not like Northwestern is so much more well known or respected that you could conclude that it's on an implicit level above UMichigan, Notre Dame, Rice, Tufts, WUSTL.</p>
<p>i second Hopkins.. definitely deserves to be on that list.</p>
<p>I would say that Northwestern is just as well known as all of those schools but Notre Dame, and as far as ND goes, that’s just because of football. I don’t know why Northwestern was left out, nor do I really care, as the list has many seemingly arbitrary schools on it. If the question is about how well known the schools are, they all seem like more regional schools to me- Rice, Tufts, WashU and Northwestern especially; they are big in their regions, but their fame dwindles the farther away one gets from the school. </p>
<p>On a side note, last year this same publication named Northwestern “Hottest Big 10 School”…. So who knows….</p>
<p>All of this ranking is very annoying. Now these particular schools will have students flocking to them only because they are on this rather arbitrary list and consequently they will accept a smaller percentage of applicants thereby becoming "very selective" and therefore--top notch schools (irony). It is all so ridiculous that people look for prestige over a good match. A good education comes from how the student uses the resources that a school has, not from a name.</p>
<p>I don't know what is up with all of the top LAC's getting attention. This is all part of the large college population. FYI, the Ivy League across the board broke records in applicants. Yes you may hear stories about a kid heading to a smaller school rather than an ivy, or you may hear about a school sending a higher percentage (which is to me a trick stat), but nevertheless the Ivy League name, connection, and aura is as popular as ever. I'll admit it. I'm heading to Columbia University not for the name, but for it's outstanding curriculum and opportunity compared to an LAC in the mountains somewhere. Yeah there may be Affirmative Action, legacy, or other predilections, but people still come for some reason...</p>
<p>"Yeah there may be Affirmative Action, legacy, or other predilections, but people still come for some reason..."</p>
<p>-Whats that really needed..... :rolleyes:</p>