<p>just wondering..... why isnt NYU not under the CC Top Universities forum?? any specific reason?</p>
<p>The top universities on CC reflect US News rankings. I believe it goes up to number 25 and NYU is 37. US News is subjective, so you really shouldn't worry about it! :) <a href="http://www.usnews.com/usnews/edu/college/rankings/brief/natudoc/tier1/t1natudoc_brief.php%5B/url%5D">http://www.usnews.com/usnews/edu/college/rankings/brief/natudoc/tier1/t1natudoc_brief.php</a></p>
<p>USNews penalizes larger schools because of the student/faculty ratio or whatever else. US News penalizes schools that don't follow the traditional curriculum (Northeastern comes to mind) and US News penalizes schools that don't use the "recruit and reject" campaign to get more applicants. USNews penalizes schools that look at applicants more holistically. I'm sure everyone will agree that Washington University in St Louis doesn't belong in the top 15.</p>
<p>I won't agree with that. I live in St. Louis and from what I can tell if you attend WU you are getting a pretty high quality education. If I hadn't lived here for 18 years and if they had a quality film program I could see my self being very happy there.</p>
<p>A great (and I think appropriate) quote from a wonderful msnbc article by the President of Wheaton College:</p>
<p>"As a social scientist, I am acutely aware that quantitative measures of quality are inherently imperfect. Combining many disparate measures into a single ranking does students a disservice by pretending it's possible to reduce the multiple dimensions of a college experience to a single number. This can make schools of similar quality appear far apart. The difference in scores between schools among the "top 50 national liberal arts colleges" is so small as to be meaningless. At the same time a single ranking can obscure real differences. </p>
<p>Equally important is the fact that the rankings reflect a skewed picture of higher education. The ratings are overly reliant on measuring each college's wealth and reputation, "measuring inputs such as faculty salaries, test scores of incoming freshmen and alumni giving rather than what kind of learning is really taking place on campus," according to an article published by U.S. News itself."</p>
<p>NYU UGADMISSIONS, with regard to what you said above, what do you think is more important: going to a more reputable college (say, top 25 in usnews rankings) and being one of the better students with some extracurricular involvement or going to a lesser known school (say top 75 in the usnews rankings) and being one of the best students academically and having significant extracurricular involvement? PM me if you want. I would really appreciate an honest answer, since I am an international student and I don't have whom to ask.</p>
<p>To be very honest, I think what I was trying to convey by referencing that quote is that concepts like "reputable" and "prestigious" are relative to the type of things that you individually are looking for out of a college education and undergraduate experience. I always tell students, rather then let someone else tell you what the top 25 best schools are, figure out what is important to you and do your own ranking of the best colleges basing it on those schools that are going to meet your own individual needs. That may be a school that is recognized by something like US News or not, but what is most important is what you get out of your college experience and the best way to make sure that experience is meaningful is by figuring out what it is that you want.</p>
<p>Hope that helps! Feel free to let me know if you have any other questions.</p>
<p>NYU UGADMISSIONS, thank you so much for your reply! It was indeed helpful. Coming from a country in which education is completely number-based and in which therefore prestige/ranking is of the utmost importance (the philosophy of most of the top candidates who apply to US from my country is "Ivy League or bust"), I find your answer reassuring that personal success can be achieved at schools that do not necessarily fit the definition of usnews's "top university". Again, thank you for your reply.</p>
<p>You are very welcome!</p>
<p>I still say what I have said on another thread --that to achieve greatness NYU must meet the financial need of accepted students. Many of the top accepted students go elsewhere, because they cannot afford NYU. And not meeting need limits a certain kind of diversity as well. Any school that requires significant wealth or significant debt from so many students still must grow into greatness. I believe, strongly, that what I have said, above, is one objective measure of greatness in a University. NYU has the potential for greatness but lingers below for legitimate reasons IMO.</p>
<p>well, the only way i see to fix that is to get rich after college and give nyu money to give to incoming students later on!</p>
<p>=)</p>
<p>I'm actually very distressed about the policies that NYU employs regarding admissions. I'd say that the very best candidate from my school was rejected, while NYU accepted from the very same school candidates with better SAT scores but almost same grades. These candidates where literally blobs, they had no clubs or involvement of any kind. The other candidate was the best candidate in regards to excellet grades and world class extracurriculars. Ironically, this last candidate was accepted at Princeton, one of the most selective schools in the world. I really don't know, this says a lot about NYU method of accepting students, SAT should really not determine all.</p>
<p>Despite the rhetoric NYU and other top unis are more concerned with academics than ECs. SATs and GPAs play huge roles, and with GPAs similar SATs were deciding factors. </p>
<p>If he were an intel finalist or something, that is a different story.</p>
<p>I also find that comment about NYU and SATs disturbing. The trend seems to be that they want to average in as many high SAT scores as they can to boost their numbers and are perfectly willing to ignore that which can not be numerically abused. Personality seems to lose to scores and percents. That's terrible.</p>
<p>You mention how one got into Princeton - an extremely prestiguous institution. They see the applicant for who he is, not just his numbers. His admission there (at a school tied for first in the nation) explains precisely why NYU, going out of its way to be ranked higher, will never reach that goal in their present system. Right now they just don't get it.</p>
<p>And how do you know that these "blobs" are not the better choices? Maybe their essays were amazing, and showed who they really are, and maybe that cannot be said for this "great candidate."</p>
<p>I have a friend who got rejected, too. She had a higher SAT score than me, a higher GPA than me, a MILLION more ECs than me. One reason I know I got chosen and she didnt? The specific school I applied to as compared to the one she did. That factors in as well. And I really do believe that NYU takes the essays into great consideration. They strike me as much less likely to base things just on grades/SATs than other "high up there" schools. Sure, of course those are important things that are considered, and they should be, but I just don't believe that's all. The only people I've seen so far who say that are the ones that get rejected to be quite honest.</p>
<p>Just my two cents...</p>
<p>Actually, he was an Intel ISEF grand award winner, and in regards to their essays I understand your point but considering that Princeton is part of the Common Application as is NYU I'd believe he should have sent the same essays to each school.</p>