<p>Just kidding =P</p>
<p>Penn > MIT is a bit dissatisfying though (as in, not fair)
I can't think of one thing Penn has better than MIT (in terms of financial endowment, student caliber, SAT scores, professors, research)
Not saying Penn is bad--- it certainly is amazing, just not > MIT.
Dartmouth should switch with Chicago.</p>
<p>Yeah, MIT will always be > Penn… in my heart.
And yeah, Dartmouth should switch with Chicago.
And WUSTL should move down a couple of spots. Or simply just…stop bribing USNWR.</p>
<p>Penn was in this position couple years ago and I think the year before also. So it’s not the first time it’s ranked higher than MIT. Rumor has it that one of the editors is a Penn alum. The school used to be ranked lower than top-15 in the earlier USN rankings if I am not mistaken. So I guess Penn’s rise in ranking has been more spectacular than any school including WashU. You can’t deny it’s business is > MIT though.</p>
<p>It’s not as bad as when Penn was 4th.
Anyways, Penn is an “in” school right now, so let them have their moment of glory before they go back down.</p>
<p>The “Penn is the ‘in’ school right now, it’ll go back down” gets a little old after hearing it for a solid decade…</p>
<p>One may have to accept the fact that Penn simply does not suck.</p>
<p>But even I must say that it is downright silly to say Penn > MIT, unless one is factoring in sex lives into the rankings or something…</p>
<p>i hate you.</p>
<p>Thanks, I get that a lot.</p>
<p>Uh, guys, there’s no mystery as to why Penn > MIT in the 2008 US News ranking, just as there was no mystery when Penn > MIT in 2005 and 2006, or when Penn = MIT in 2002 and 2003. The numbers behind these rankings are readily available, and you can easily see in which numbers Penn beat MIT, how all those numbers were weighted, and how they contributed to the overall scores that determined the rankings.</p>
<p>Now, impressionistically, most may feel that MIT is generally better and/or more prestigious than Penn. And this kind of comparison IS taken into account in the largest component of the US News ranking, Peer Assessment, where MIT’s 4.9 trumps Penn’s 4.5. But, as I stated in another thread, there is no mysterious black box behind these rankings, or as to why Penn > MIT in this or any other year.</p>
<p>You may disagree with the methodology of the US News ranking system–such as the use of certain components or the relative weighting of some components–but there really shouldn’t be any skepticism or astonishment as to how a particular school gets ranked over another. It’s really crystal clear.</p>
<p>Same goes for WUSTL, imo. It was always a respected regional university, with a strong emphasis on liberal arts and teaching but has worked steadily over the years to raise its national profile and has grown into a nationally — and even internationally — respected research university. </p>
<p>It has top-notch students, top-notch faculty, strong alumni support, strong endowment support, a beautiful and vibrant campus, and a far-thinking administration with an ongoing vision for maintaining and building on excellence in the future. It’s a terrific place. It is neither overrated nor overranked and it’s only going to get better.</p>
<p>Rice,Georgetown, W&M, Tufts and Wake Forest IMO are all underrated again.</p>
<p>I’m not sure why its surprising Penn is ahead of MIT - aside from PA score, everything used in US News is very clearly labeled. Penn has more resources per student, similar placement, and so on - MIT might be better in some ways, Penn in others.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Agreed. For some reason, these schools rarely get the respect they deserve.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Agreed. And I rather like Penn more simply because it’s broader than MIT – while MIT is branching out, it’s still very science-focused, whereas Penn offers much more. Just my opinion.</p>
<p>i hate you people that are discussing rankings so much</p>
<p>not you johnny kid don’t even know what you wrote that would make you think i was talking to you</p>
<p>Get off the site or simply don’t read it. The end.</p>
<p>if the PA score is such a good metric for comparison, then why does it fluctuate year to year. I believe 2 years ago, Duke had a 4.6 and so did Penn. Last year, both duke and penn had a 4.5. Now, Duke has gone down apparently from that. Rice at one point had a 4.3 and now is down to a perfect GPA average (lol) without A+s. And such a changing metric can completely impact the pecking order because a few points here and there can separate schools. This probably contributed to the downfall of a few schools it seems. I do think a PA score is necessary but I believe that is weighted too much. If the score was completely eliminated, places like JHU, Cornell, and Chicago would drop. Places like Rice, Northwestern, Wash U, and Dartmouth would rise unquestionably. If you look at top 15 now, only 4 schools are 4.4 and below. Is the quality of education necessarily better at JHU than it is at Dartmouth? NO. Does cutting-edge research have more of a presence at JHU than Dartmouth? I really don’t know.</p>
<p>what are we predicating?</p>
<p>Hmmm. Interesting thought. However, I believe that the faculty resources rank should be dropped. Then other schools would go up considerably, while many on top would decline. I, am, of course being facetious. Take out any major number and the rankings would switch around. So the point is really not valid.</p>
<p>Here is where we will be at… by 2010!</p>
<p>Harvard
Yale, Princeton
Caltech, Stanford
Duke
MIT, U-Penn
Columbia
Dartmouth, Cornell, Chicago
Brown, WUSTL
Northwestern, JHU</p>
<p>If Penn can get ahead of MIT.. Duke in the post lacrosse scandal era will be able to do so too..</p>
<p>the_prestige: I was thinking the same when I saw the title. lol</p>