<p>hmm... uc san fran, that's a small research, medical school or something. almost no undergrad goes there.</p>
<p>Actually it's not true that this poll doesn't reflect the quality of undergraduate education at the institutions. The top research schools normally have the most accomplished faculty. Top faculty = top department. The undergraduates benefit from the strong academic departments of these institutions. I don't understand how you can completely isolate the undergraduate education from the educational process or mission of the university. You really can't. The schools with the top faculty and top grad programs have the top departments. Without a doubt, undergrads will benefit from the strong academic departments.</p>
<p>Actually UCSF is highly ranked in the other 2 international academic polls as well (Times of London & Shanghai). So it's not really that much of a surprise to see it ranked here. Afterall this is also an international poll.</p>
<p>Graduate work doesn't mean trickling down at all and at state universities students are lucky if they get shoved into a large lecture room with an actual prefessor rather than a TA with hundreds of other students. Judging by your comments I guess Uchicago with its mass nobel laureates in grad work would provide the best ugrad education but this is not true (Princeton and Dartmouth actually win that prize and both are not known for grad work at all) Miriam Boo is a sad attempt at trolling for publics.</p>
<p>“I guess Uchicago with its mass nobel laureates in grad work would provide the best ugrad education but this is not true (Princeton and Dartmouth actually win that prize and both are not known for grad work at all)”</p>
<p>-Really, Princeton and Dartmouth, huh? Why? What about these schools makes their undergraduate programs better than similar schools?</p>
<p>Sternman, it's not necessary to "troll" for public universities. The academic excellence of the top public schools such as Berkeley, Michigan, UVA, & UCLA speaks for itself. Oh! Wait a minute! They all outrank NYU! Now who's "trolling"? Stop "trolling", you NYU "troll". Give it up. LOL!!</p>
<p>"Princeton and Dartmouth actually win that prize and both are not known for grad work at all"</p>
<p>Except for Princeton... which has one of the very best graduate schools in the world and has the fourth largest number of top-ten programs out of any graduate school in the country (two more than MIT).</p>
<p>What's your problem with UChicago ugrad?</p>
<p>"The methodology is quite clear in stating it has nothing to do with the quality of undergrad education. Its primary focus is research"</p>
<p>Then why is Duke ranked? No offense at all to Duke's top-notch undergrad program, but the grad school is not even close to top 20 in the world. It's (kind of) high rank in SJT poll, which is research-based, results from it's relatively strong bio program. I don't know why it ranks in THES, but not a lot in THES makes any sense (i.e. the extreme over-representation of British schools.)</p>
<p>I guess any of us could open up a hot dog stand and require respectable SAT scores. Thus we have NYU. Just joking so don't get riled. BTW, Chicago has a top 10 ranked undergrad program according to USN&WR so you might want to select a better example. I agree that Princeton should be ranked higher in the Newsweek poll. BTW, if you look at the other international academic polls, Dartmouth doesn't fare well either. So that's not much of a surprise at all. Dartmouth may offer a top notch quality undergrad education, but it just doesn't have the reputable faculty across all disciplines that Berkeley or Michigan have. Sorry, but faculty and departmental strength will always be major factors in assessing the quality of an institution. Well, they should. </p>
<p>Finallly, that tiresome argument about over-sized classes at public schools is old and far too over played. I can't speak for other public schools, but Michigan offers seminars to supplement lectures. This gives the students the opportunity to discuss the lecture material and pose questions in a more intimate & personalized setting. Also the 3rd & 4th year (upper level) courses are generally quite small in size. Large lecture classes aren't an issue in the 3rd & 4th years of study, generally speaking.</p>
<p>According to USN&WR, W&M > NYU. NYU=Wisconsin=Rochester=Boston College. Wisconsin is underrated IMO.</p>
<p>Why are we ragging on NYU? They don't have great breadth, but they have a very large number of fantastic programs (law, business, philosophy, etc.)</p>
<p>We're not necessarily ragging on NYU. NYU is NYU. It's more like we're ragging on Sternman. LOL!!</p>
<p>Yeah, sorry. I just looked up the start of this and your response is totally understandable. Please continue.</p>
<p>hey cool, my school (maryland) ranked higher globally than nationally. i could get used to this :-P</p>
<p>princeton 15th? lol</p>
<p>
[quote]
The schools with the top faculty and top grad programs have the top departments. Without a doubt, undergrads will benefit from the strong academic departments
[/quote]
</p>
<p>
[quote]
Dartmouth may offer a top notch quality undergrad education, but it just doesn't have the reputable faculty across all disciplines that Berkeley or Michigan have. Sorry, but faculty and departmental strength will always be major factors in assessing the quality of an institution.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>So then explain how the elite LAC's can offer such a strong education, with excellent placements into top graduate programs and top employers, despite not having any graduate departmental strength or faculty that engages in large-scale research. Harvey Mudd grads, for example, make similar starting salaries to the engineering grads of Berkeley, yet not all Mudd grads are engineers. Why are employers paying so much money to Mudd grads, if the Mudd grads are not well educated? Are they being stupid? </p>
<p>Look, the fact is, Dartmouth is a LAC and should be treated as a LAC. Nobody disputes the undergrad strength of schools like Williams, Amherst, Swarthmore, and Wellesley. So why dispute the undergrad strength of Dartmouth?</p>
<p>"Look, the fact is, Dartmouth is a LAC and should be treated as a LAC."</p>
<p>In that case, Harvard College and Yale College should be treated as LACs, too.</p>
<p>For a list of other ranking lists, see
<a href="http://www.tu-berlin.de/eng/service/ranking.htm#welt%5B/url%5D">http://www.tu-berlin.de/eng/service/ranking.htm#welt</a></p>
<p>I'm surprised that the ETH Zurich isn't higher....</p>
<p>Not really posterX, Dartmouth doesn't have most graduate programs (ex, no graduate econ) while Harvard and Yale do!!</p>
<p>
[quote]
In that case, Harvard College and Yale College should be treated as LACs, too.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Yale, maybe. Harvard? Not so much. LAC's are really about a state of mind and an educational philosophy, principally how much a school emphasizes small classes and undergraduate teaching. Harvard spends most of its resources on its graduate students. Harvard clearly places less emphasis on its undergrads than Princeton does. Yale is probably in the middle. </p>
<p>Dartmouth, Brown, and Princeton are definitely LAC's. They are LAC's that just happen to have graduate programs, but in terms of culture and philosophy, they are still LAC's. </p>
<p>Personally, I find the dichotomy between LAC and research university to be rather artificial. For example, Bryn Mawr has PhD programs, and in fact, its calling card is that it was the first women's college to offer PhD programs. Yet it is inexpicably classified as a LAC.</p>
<p>"Dartmouth, Brown, and Princeton are definitely LAC's. They are LAC's that just happen to have graduate programs, but in terms of culture and philosophy, they are still LAC's." </p>
<p>Actually, Yale has much more of an undergraduate-centered culture and philosophy than either Brown or Princeton. And I would say Harvard is more of an "LAC" than Princeton, too.</p>