Prestige Rankings by "those who know"

College Search & Selection
1

<p>We've had a post on what, generally, the high school or college crowd think are the most prestigious schools. I'm now curious, how do you think those that are "in the know" (i.e. college graduates, employers, those working in graduate admissions offices, etc.) would rank colleges based on prestige? Put another way, how do those on the OTHER end (employers, those in grad schools now, etc.) view the hierarchy? </p>

<p>Here's my stab at it, and I'm going to create my hierarchy in TIERS. Going by a specific numerical ranking is needlessly difficult. If you feel the need to rank numerically, go ahead, but I feel it's kind of a useless exercise. (PS, I'm only assessing the private schools in this hierarchy.)</p>

<p>Tier 1</p>

<p>Harvard, Yale, Princeton, Stanford, Cal Tech, MIT</p>

<p>Tier 2</p>

<p>Columbia, Chicago, Penn, Dartmouth, Duke</p>

<p>Tier 3</p>

<p>Brown (still doesn't have the strongest academic rep from what I've seen), Cornell, Northwestern, Hopkins, Rice, Georgetown, Wash U (Wash U is probably toward the bottom of this tier)</p>

<p>Tier 4</p>

<p>Vanderbilt, Emory, Notre Dame</p>

<ul>
<li><p>I'd imagine that, by those who go through college, are more aware of the college marketplace, and are employers, certain changes occur in the prestige hierarchy. Some trends:</p></li>
<li><p>Chicago rises considerably from being a somewhat unknown commodity to those in high school to a very respected, high;y reputable institution. </p></li>
<li><p>Brown falls a bit given its lackluster identity as a sort of wanna-be research university, but one that falls short of what's offered at Columbia, Chicago, Penn, etc. </p></li>
<li><p>The top six stay consistent. There really is a gap between all of those schools and the rest.</p></li>
</ul>

2

<p>I would put Penn in first tier and bump cal tech down to second tier.</p>

3

<p>Penn definitely belongs in Tier 1</p>

4

<p>Chicago’s jump from 15th in 2006 to 9th in 2007 surely did help boost them up. Chicago’s use of the Common app certainly helped facilitate greater ease of application to UofC… I remember when I applied to Chicago, I had to use their application form and it wasn’t on Common apps.</p>

<p>You might as well include Cooper Union or Juilliard if you are including Caltech.</p>

5

<p>I don’t know why Brown gets dissed so much here. Any school accepting under 11% has a pretty specular student body, and in my book, and as an employer, that makes a school top tier.</p>

<p>For undergrad education, being a great research institution is unnecessary and probably a negative. That’s why, IMO, Princeton, Dartmouth, Amherst, Williams and Swat are the top undergrad schools in the Country.</p>

1 Like
6

<p>^ It’s the secret that no one wants to admit ! Research universities = don’t give a crap about their undergraduate students… even though we constitute like 18-20% of their operating revenue income via tuition and etc…</p>

<p>Sometimes I wonder why I didn’t go to a state school… where education in basic sciences are probably on par right across the board… public schools can survive by charging students a fair price on tuition, why can’t private schools do the same? (yes, i understand public schools are supported by the state… lol)</p>

<p>Brown is not renown for research but makes up for it by being highly selective with a very enviable SAT and GPA scores… Brown students are very intelligent. Some people dont take Brown seriously for academics for some reason…</p>

7

<p>Wow you guys really see Penn as being on the same level as Harvard or Yale? I hafta say I’m a little surprised at this. Maybe in some areas (like Wharton and its rep with the business crowd), but overall, I’d be reluctant to put Penn on par with a Yale or Harvard. If you look at the resources, overall faculty, the ways the graduates are sought, etc., I still think the schools in my very top tier have an edge over a Penn or any of the other “lower” schools.</p>

<p>Caltech is probably too much of a boutique to be included in the ranking. I agree about that.</p>

8

<p>hmom, if that’s the case, why is Brown trying to turn itself into more of a research institution, and why are the Dartmouth alumni currently up in arms because Dart is slowly trying to become more of a research institution as well? This is the current trend that major schools (save for the truly small LACs) want to follow for various reasons (more federal dollars and subsidies, increased prominence of the school and ability to lure in better faculty, etc.)</p>

<p>Also, Brown gets “dissed” on because, while it has an exceptional student body, the rest of the school doesn’t actually match up. The school doesn’t have particularly great financial resources, Brown IS a research university, but they’re not particularly strong on that front, the faculty isn’t particularly accomplished in comparison to what’s offered at a Chicago or Columbia, and the continued high level of grade inflation, with no + or - grades, certainly doesn’t help either.</p>

<p>Also, the very notion of the open curriculum, the fact that students can design their own majors, and the fact that Brown traditionally attracts a very “super duper liberal” student body doesn’t really help its image as a serious place of higher learning. Personally, I think this is unfounded - I’ve met a lot of great, serious, and accomplished graduates from Brown. At the same time, I do think the academic opportunities available to me at Chicago exceed what’s present at Brown. If Brown was a LAC, maybe it’d be a different story - but it’s not, it’s a research univ that has not yet come to take its full shape.</p>

9

<p>Penn has Wharton, top 10 law, and top 5 med, uber low acceptance rate, huge endowment, and has skyrocketed in the rankings to national preeminece of the past decade from being the worst Ivy to one comparable to Columbia, Dartmouth, etc… in just under 20 yrs…lol</p>

<p>Just for fun, Princeton has no law, bus, or med. Yale has the #1 law school, not sure about business, top 10 med. Harvard pretty much owns the law, bus, and med trifecta… </p>

<p>Penn is pretty good. Penn is ranked #1 in financial resources in faculty… pretty much mastered that factor in USNews… one of the reasons why it was ranked top 5 a few years back…</p>

10

<p>Hmom5, where do you consider Yale in terms of undergraduate education?</p>

11

<p>

</p>

<p>I don’t want to mean to any Caltech fans out there, but with an undergraduate population of 800 students with a heavy emphasis on math, science, and engineering… how are you guys any different from Cooper Union (another highly ultra selective school, 800 student population, heavy emphasis on architecture, fine arts, and engineering), or Juillard (another uber select school, 900 student population, heavy emphasis on dance, performance, music)…</p>

<p>Caltech’s total undergraduate population is more or less than 10% of Cal Berkeley’s entering freshman class lol… How many alumns does Caltech have? My graduating high school class of 400 students is more than double that of Caltech’s entering freshman class lol.</p>

<p>Such an uber small school… It should be considered in a separate category just like how LACs are considered a separate type of “colleges”. Math and Science specialty colleges lol.</p>

12

<p>Phead - for professional schools alone, you’re right. Penn has extremely good professional schools. Compare all the rest, though, to what’s offered (and when comparable) to the HYP level schools:</p>

<p>All of HYPS greatly surpass Penn in terms of financial resources. For college selectivity and strength of student body, all of HYPS surpass the Penn range of selectivity considerably. Also, you never focused on the strength of the actual ACADEMIC departments at Penn. The professional schools are great. For history, english, sociology, economics, art history etc etc etc. HYPS generally hold a considerable edge over Penn. In terms of scholarship produced, all of HYPS again hold a considerable edge. </p>

<p>I have no way to quantify this, but I’m assuming, in terms of employment opportunities and connections, HYPS also over considerable advantages over Penn (minus perhaps wharton and business). For instance, a financial firm will go deeper into a class at Princeton in comparison to non-Wharton Penn, and in all the other competitive fields students may choose to enter (competing for Rhodes Scholarships, teaching at competitive prep schools, fulbrights, marshalls, etc etc.) HYPS considerably outperforms Penn. </p>

<p>With all this in mind, by aggregate, I don’t see Penn on the HYPS level. Yes, Penn may be comparable in terms of professional schools alone, but for all other components of a comprehensive research university (a strong liberal arts college, great academic depts, etc.), Penn falls behind these other institutions.</p>

13

<p>

</p>

<p>I thought Penn is ranked #1 in financial resources according to US New and World report.</p>

<p>Academically, I guess Penn isn’t on par with HYPSM according to the Peer review ranking. Penn shouldn’t be with HYPS but it’s a rising star no doubt.</p>

14

<p>Let’s separate the apples from the oranges. Are we talking about undergrad education or U’s as a whole?</p>

<p>IMO, Brown and Amherst get nothing taken away for open curriculum. They are not trade schools. They are schools allowing kids to dig in to intellectual endeavors without fear. This is what a liberal arts education should be about.</p>

<p>Yale is a outstanding on every front in my opinion amciw, but personally I would choose one of the more undergrad focused schools if I had it to do over again. I was a Wharton undergrad.</p>

<p>For undergrad education, peer review has no standing IMO. These are profs judging other profs on their research and has zero to do with undergrad teaching. Most great researchers are rarely seen in an undergrad classroom.</p>

15

<p>hmom - we’re talking about the ways “those who know” perceive the hierarchy of the private colleges in America. (My hierarchy did not include LACs, so just the colleges linked to the larger research universities - i.e. US News “Nat’l Research Univs.”)</p>

<p>Also, you’re right - Brown perhaps should NOT be derided as much as it is, but for whatever reason, in my experience, Brown is somehow seen as less rigorous or less respected an institution in comparison to places like a Columbia or (more recently) a Penn. I’m not saying this is “right,” but just generally what seems to be the case.</p>

16

<p>hmom, it depends on the peer review. Some peer reviews are pretty telling. For example, the peer assessment rating published by the USNWR asks deans of admissions and universityies preseidents (not mere researchers), to rate peer institutions as UNDERGRADUATE institutions. It is very explicit in this. There is no way that Dartmouth would have a peer rating significantly higher than UT-Austin or Wisconsin-Madison if the peer assessment rating were a gauge for research output. Make no mistake about it, those deans of undergraduate admissions and university presidents are clearly instructed to AND estimating the relative rating of their peer institutions as it pertains to undergraduate education. Statistical outliers are left out of the final average rating. </p>

<p>And one must not downplay the importance of academe’s opinion. Those are the same people who admit applicants to graduate school. Whether the peer assessment score is an accurate reflection of the quality of undergraduate instititons is another story.</p>

<p>Opinions of universities according to the general public have also been carried out by several sources. Generally speaking, large publics, athletic powerhouses and research leviathans do best in those types of ratings.</p>

<p>There are two ratings that have not been captured that I think would be interesting:</p>

<p>1) An average rating of undergraduate institutions according to intellectuals (authors, intellectuals, poets, nobel prize winners etc…)</p>

<p>2) An average rating of undergraduate institutions according to corporate leaders (CEO, HR heads, gurus etc…) </p>

<p>Again, all of those opinions will not measure actual quality of undergraduate education. That’s because there is no way of measuring such an entity. There are literally thousands of variables that go into determining the quality of undergraduate education, least of which is individual search for knowledge.</p>

17

<p>From my perspective Penn is about on par with Harvard when it comes to opportunities in finance and consulting. People on this board tend to exaggerate the disparity between Wharton and the rest of the University which, in reality, is minimal these days. The on campus recruiting at Penn is incredible in a normal year (not 2009) in terms of who recruits on campus and the alumni network extends into nearly every so called elite corporation, LP, SPE, and LLC in America which is a testament to the University’s reputation in the eyes of “those who know.” If you ask around Wall Street, browse various firms’ websites, and examine published numbers you will find that Penn is just as well represented, if not more so, than schools like Yale and MIT. Penn’s med school is ranked 4th in the country and within that profession only Hopkins and Harvard would be considered more prestigious. On the flip side Yale places better than Penn in politics and law without question and MIT in engineering. Of course there are other differences, however, I will not belabor the point. In a high schooler’s eyes I am sure HYPMC are considered more prestigious which is due to a number of cultural factors that are in play, however, in the professional and post graduate academic worlds I highly doubt a Yale, Caltech, or MIT is seen as a Tier above Penn.</p>

18

<p>The answer to your question can actually be found on here – [Harvard</a> Number One University in Eyes of Public](<a href=“Harvard Number One University in Eyes of Public”>Harvard Number One University in Eyes of Public)</p>

<p>*
Clearly, the prestige of Harvard (and to a lesser degree Yale and Stanford) is fairly universal across regions of the country. But there are distinctions in the top five within each region: Princeton, MIT, Penn State and Penn do best in the East, Duke and Texas A & M in the South, Michigan and Notre Dame in the Midwest, and Berkeley and UCLA in the West.</p>

<p>**What about post-graduates themselves, who might be expected to know better than others what schools are prestigious, given that they applied to schools at least twice (for undergraduate and graduate work) and most likely spent a good deal of time evaluating schools? Here’s the list of schools most often mentioned by college graduates with at least some post-graduate education:</p>

<p>Harvard - 29%
Stanford - 27</p>

<p>Yale - 14
MIT - 11</p>

<p>Berkeley - 7
Princeton - 7
Michigan - 7**</p>

<p>The biggest difference here is the relatively higher rating for Stanford, which almost ties Harvard among this group.</p>

<p>Survey Methods</p>

<p>The most recent results are based on telephone interviews with 1,003 national adults, aged 18+, conducted July 18-20, 2003. For results based on the total sample of national adults, one can say with 95% confidence that the margin of sampling error is ±3 percentage points. *</p>

19

<p>

</p>

<p>Sorry; but I have to disagree with this one. hmom probably didn’t major in science or engineering, thus her obvious lack of view on this matter. The truth is, unless you’re majoring in social science or liberal arts, curriculum that has a strong integration with research is a million times ideal and better than that hasn’t. I cannot imagine one would learn so much in, say, chemical engineering, with zero research works on the field. </p>

<p>

I haven’t heard of Swat and I’m not really sure how is education done at Amherst and Williams, but at Princeton, research is highly integrated with their curriculum. Dartmouth is gradually going into that direction and is investing heavily to improve on that area. </p>

<p>Harvard, MIT, Stanford, Yale and Caltech are all research-led universities. The next tier schools --Columbia, UPenn, Duke, Chicago, NU, JHU, Rice and the like are research-led institutions as well.</p>

20

<p>For a future scientist, I’d rank MIT, Caltech, Princeton, & Stanford at the top. For math major, I’d include Harvard. I don’t know enough about Yale programs to include in this list.</p>

<p>Since I don’t live in New England, I’m less concerned with the Ivy name than I am with the quality of courses, ease to join labs, and quality of professors.</p>