<p>Princeton or Harvard? Both are the no.1 university in US according to the rankings. However, which one is better? Which one is better at biomedical sciences for undergrads?</p>
<p>It may be that I higher fraction of Harvard undergrads are pre-med, and concentrating in biology of a related field.</p>
<p>Here are the latest USNews departmental rankings (from the 2006 Graduate program ranking of faculties):</p>
<ol>
<li> Stanford University (CA) 4.9</li>
<li> Harvard University (MA) 4.8
Massachusetts Institute of Technology 4.8
University of CaliforniaBerkeley 4.8</li>
<li> California Institute of Technology 4.7
Johns Hopkins University (MD) 4.7
University of CaliforniaSan Francisco 4.7</li>
<li> Rockefeller University (NY) 4.6</li>
<li> Princeton University (NJ) 4.5
Scripps Research Institute (CA) 4.5
Yale University (CT) 4.5</li>
</ol>
<p>^ implies that Harvard is better.</p>
<p>But it probably doesn't matter. The difference is, if you go by this list, the difference between 4.5 and 4.8. Seriously--they're both great.</p>
<p>Depends if you like Jersey or Boston better</p>
<p>Don't worry about it until you have an acceptance in hand from each school. Until then you are worrying about a choice you don't yet have.</p>
<p>Of course this a graduate program ranking, so talking about undergrad is completely unrelated.</p>
<p>The Faculty of Arts & Sciences in not split into two parts - for grads and undergrads - it the same faculty.</p>
<p>Byerly, I think the idea is that having a highly ranked graduate department doesn't really matter very much when it comes to an undergrad education. This is how the elite LAC's can deliver a strong undergrad education despite not having any ranked departments. Merely looking at departmental rankings would have you believe that Williams, Amherst, and Swarthmore are some of the worst schools in the world, and we all know that that's not true.</p>
<p>Let's face it. Princeton is basically a LAC. It's small, like a LAC. It's undergraduate-focused, like a LAC. It is mostly comprised of undergrads, and not grad-students, just like a LAC. Hence, looking at departmental rankings is a tremendously unfair way to measure Princeton just like it's a tremendously unfair way to measure any of the LAC's.</p>
<p>Yeah, don't listen to what Byerly says about everything being the same for undergrads and grads.</p>
<p>You are fooling yourself if you think that Harvard's 13000 grad population has the same effect on your education as Princeton's 2000 graduate students.</p>
<p>"Hence, looking at departmental rankings is a tremendously unfair way to measure Princeton just like it's a tremendously unfair way to measure any of the LAC's."</p>
<p>Or a tremendously unfair way to measure institutions in general.</p>
<p>What "sakky" says is both absurd and totally irrelevant. If one is comparing math or history faculties, and departments in two institutions are ranked by USNews, the rankings are far more valid than anything out there as measures of the quality of the undergrad programs at those institutions - including the views of people such as "Sakky".</p>
<p>It goes without saying that the math or history department at a little LAC in Iowa or Northern Maine could not thus be compared, since departments at those schools would not have been ranked, reputationally, by USNews or other respected rankings such as published by THES or the (outdated) NRC lists.</p>
<p>Finally, your Princeton example is quite ignorant, as, in fact, the ratio of graduate students to undergrads sharing the same faculty is virtually identical at Princeton, Yale and Harvard.</p>
<p>I'll let you in on a secret: Yale College is not less "undergraduate centered" because the University has a law school while Princeton does not; nor is Harvard College less "undergraduate centered" because Harvard University has a Medical School. Do you know why, "Sakky"? Because the Professional Schools have their own faculties!!! Are you surprised? I thought you might be!</p>
<p>Byerly, what's up with these quotes around my name? Do I call you "Byerly"? Are you calling me out? </p>
<p>I would also be careful about who you go aroud calling 'ignorant'. I believe there are rules on this board about refraining from personal insults. I respect your opinions, so you should respect others. Nor am I "surprised" at anything you have said.</p>
<p>I stand by what I said. Princeton is basically a LAC that just so happens to have a bunch of graduate schools. I would personally classify Princeton as a LAC. After all, I'll let you in on a little secret. Bryn Mawr is classified as a LAC despite offering various PhD programs, and in fact, one of it's calling cards is that it was the first women's college to offer doctorates. If Bryn Mawr can be classified as a LAC, then why can't Princeton? Then we would have to rely on other means to compare Harvard to any other LAC. After all, nobody goes around saying that Harvard is better than Williams just because Harvard appears in the departmental rankings and Williams doesn't. So why should Princeton be "punished" for having its departments appear in those departmental rankings? </p>
<p>Look, nobody is saying that Harvard is a bad place to be for undergrad or that Harvard is automatically worse than Princeton. What I am saying is that departmental rankings have little to do with it. After all, Berkeley has excellent departmental rankings - in fact in many departments, often times better than Yale's, Princeton's, or even Harvard's, but that doesn't necessarily make Berkeley a great undergraduate school.</p>
<p>But fine, have it your way. If departmental rankings are so important when determining undergraduate program quality, then I suppose we have no choice but to conclude that Berkeley is equal to or maybe even better than Harvard. After all, I can use the same logic that you use - the same Berkeley faculty teaches both grad and undergrad. So if Berkeley can score highly in its graduate departmental rankings, then that must automatically make Berkeley a great place for undergrad too, right? I know that a lot of the people on the Berkeley board would love to hear this.</p>
<p>Just stop mouthing the tiresome cliche about this or that school being "undergraduate centered."</p>
<p>This dubious claim is always thrown out as some big plus by schools which have little else to brag about, because ... surprise, surprise ... the place has no PhD program or professional school.</p>
<p>So Becker College is "undergraduate centered?" Big deal.</p>
<p>Oh... and in my opinion, Berkeley is vastly underrated as an undergraduate institution, despite the fact that it is not (shudder) "undergraduate centered." If only it had decent dorms and a less sleazy setting I'd highly recommend it over some of those teeny LACs in the boondocks that are, by definition, "undergraduate focussed."</p>
<p>Byerly what do you think of Amherst and Williams?</p>
<p>i think princeton has cooler faculty members.</p>
<p>and the movie beautiful mind made princeton look even cooler.</p>
<p>but i think harvard wins</p>
<p>Amherst and Williams are extremely fine schools - although both (particularly Williams) suffer, in the mind of some, because they are in relatively remote locations.</p>
<p>"Berkeley is vastly underrated as an undergraduate institution"
That can't possibly be true. I know from experience. </p>
<p>It's not about the faculty, "Byerly." It's about the administration, use of funds, fundraising, attitudes of the faculty, etc. You'll notice that in the many articles published after the canning of Summers that several criticized Harvard for having self-satisfied faculty that ignored undergraduates. </p>
<p>Harvard is frequently criticized by undergraduates for having "unreachable" faculty. That can't be an example of Harvard's "vaunted" (by you, and you alone) "undergraduate focus," can it?</p>
<p>Harvard is Harvard. You can't get a name bigger and more prestigious than that. As much Yale thinks it is, or Princeton touting the undergrad focus, overall there's nowhere in the world that can match Harvard on overall academic strength.</p>
<p>I haven't studied at both, or either for that matter, but what I hear about both is places is one of contrast. One is located in the urban centre of Boston with MIT just down the road, the other is located in suburban jersey. One prides itself on its overall academic strenth, the other prides itself on its focus on undergrads and specific grad departments. I know you disagree byerly but from what I've heard- Princeton's undergrad focus claim isn't one without merit. One has a victorian brick styled dorms and the other has gothic castle like ones. One has a huge city to absorb in your free time, the other has its own wonders on campus.</p>
<p>If we all percieve the world differently, doesn't that imply that whats one perfect dream can be another's nightmare? Do yourself a favour and visit and sleep over or whatever and try to absorb the life and feel of both places. Who knows- you might fall in love with one more than the other :)</p>
<p>I hope I may be allowed to insert my 2-cents. Faculty ratings for grad schools can be taken into consideration in one's choice with some credibility, I think. But we also ought to consider the fact that not all grad.-professors pay all taht much attention to undergrads. My dad teachers at notre dame, and he loves teaching undergrads, but plenty of his colleagues avoid them like the plague, and when they do get undergrads forced upon them, generally neglect them...specific professors in one's field of interest seem to be a better gauge of what you want, and the students in those fields seem like the best sources of said information (even "ratemyprofessors.com", if one is willing to take the risk of psychotic postings). I went to harvard summer school, got a great regular professor, but had plenty of friends there who got absolutely abysmal professors (in their minds), even some who had been there for decades. I'd recommend, more than anything, visiting the school, seeing if you like the atmosphere, it's a personal choice, at that elite a level, no "studies" and "rankkings" are going to make one school stand out much from the other. peace</p>