<p>United Kingdom:</p>
<h2>Harvard</h2>
<p>Oxbridge</p>
<h2>Yale, Princeton, Stanford</h2>
<hr>
<hr>
<h2>LSE/Columbia/Wharton/MIT</h2>
<hr>
<hr>
<p>other non-HYP ivies</p>
<p>South</p>
<p>HYP
Duke
Vanderbilt
William & Mary
Wake Forest
W&L/Davidson
Emory
“UVA/Carolina”</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Actually, there are significantly more Sloan Management majors than there are economics majors.</p>
<p>Incidentally, I would consider the availability of the Sloan management program to be a significant plus in favor of MIT, as MIT is one of the few top schools that offers management as an undergraduate major.</p>
<p>RML,
Re your comment,</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Of course they aren’t perfect, mostly due to the fact that 25% of the ranking is determined by the corrupt PA scoring. </p>
<p>Re your challenge,</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>based on what? </p>
<p>Student strength? Nope
Class Sizes? No
Institutional Resources for undergrads? Uh-uh. </p>
<p>Please provide evidence that supports your contention. I doubt that you can. This is where the hype meets the reality. </p>
<p>The reality is that, for most undergraduates, compared to Emory, Vanderbilt, and Notre Dame, the main (only?) thing that U Michigan has going for it is a higher PA score that is based on…who knows what? Do you think that PA scores are an accurate reflection of the undergraduate academics? How do you define that? How do you measure that at any of these colleges and then how do you compare those measurements? </p>
<p>There is plenty of opinion on these schools that can be found outside of USNWR, particularly as it relates to what a student will actually experience on a college’s campus. In some cases, it is based on a lot more data points than a bunch of academics with an axe to grind. </p>
<p>For example, after asking the opinions of over 68,000 students at 273 colleges, College Prew… ler awarded unbiased grades based on Academics which they defined as “indicating that professors are knowledgeable, accessible, and genuinely interested in their students’ welfare. Other determining factors include class size, how well professors communicate, and whether or not classes are engaging.”</p>
<p>Here is how those colleges graded:</p>
<p>A Emory
A Vanderbilt
A- Notre Dame</p>
<p>B+ U Michigan </p>
<p>BTW, UC Berkeley, UCLA and USC also graded well. Each received an A-. </p>
<p>Re another comment,</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Putting aside for the moment the fact that the business world is about a lot more than banking/finance, I concur that it does well in that field. So do many colleges. Do you realize that Ross represented 5.5% of U Michigan’s graduating class? Should the reputation of such a small program be used as a proxy for the whole college? I don’t think so. </p>
<p>My point is not that U Michigan is not a good place. For many students, it can be. But IMO you lack an understanding of the quality at other schools where the research and grad-school reputation might not be as strong, but the undergrad student quality and overall undergraduate setting is materially stronger. </p>
<p>To build your awareness and understanding, my recommendation is simple—go visit and/or recruit at places like Emory, Vanderbilt, Notre Dame and you will see what I mean about the quality of the students and the quality of the academic environment. For students, the CP grades are a lot closer to the on-campus reality than the PA scores.</p>
<p>Can’t we go back to the point of the thread? I imagine the interest in your personal debate about Michigan is pretty limited. </p>
<p>My offering is an outside the US perspective of everyday people (not exactly representative however as its a big world out there!):</p>
<p>Big Famous names, not that one knows how to rank them beyond Harvard and Yale:</p>
<p>Harvard
Yale</p>
<p>Stanford/Princeton/MIT</p>
<p>All others based on how much you see them on TV in sports.</p>
<p>hawkette, </p>
<p>The problem with your assertion is that you’re trying to differentiate inconsequential factors that are useless in assessing the true academic standard of the school. If Emory has 7 students per class, for example, how is that different – in terms of learning - from a class with 8 or 9 students? </p>
<p>In short, your factors for academic standard aren’t helpful. </p>
<p>You mentioned student strength. How do you measure that? Through SATs? You’re funny. Michigan, like Berkeley, doesn’t super score. Michigan doesn’t put too much emphasis on SATs too. And, Michigan is huge and runs by departments. At Michigan you have Ross, Engineering, a world-class computer science program and physical and biological science programs. Students at those programs are far from so-so. Frankly speaking, they’re even better than Emory’s, because those are oversubscribed programs at Michigan and are much, much harder programs to get onto. Do you think Goizueta is superior to Ross? Hell NO! And I would go far in saying that even the top employers would rather have a Ross graduate than a Goizueta graduate joining in their elite circle. You’ve mentioned Ross constitutes 5.5% of Michigan. Yes, you’re right. That’s because Michigan, like I’ve been telling you, is huge and as a result runs on per department. Yet you keep on misunderstanding that. Is that really hard to understand?</p>
<p>In terms of Teaching Quality, the USNews ranked Michigan number 11 along with several other prominent schools. But Emory and Vanderbilt aren’t even ranked. Yet here you are insisting that Emory and Vanderbilt are still better than Michigan. You’re contradicting your own source. </p>
<p>You’ve also questioned the PA. What? Are you kidding me? What does a school mean to everyone without prestige? Would you pay 50K to a school that doesn’t have prestige? Would the top employers hire someone from a school that’s not prestigious? A school without prestige is just as good as those schools in the bottom of the league table. Look at the PA scores of those schools ranked at the bottom of USNews so you would know that PA, academic quality and employers’ preferences go hand-in-hand. The more prestigious the school, the higher the academic quality it has and the better opportunities there are for their graduates.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Now, let me ask you this question: If you’re bent on majoring in business no matter what as you love that program, would you ignore Ross because it’s part of Michigan and head for Vandi or Emory because they’re private schools and they’re in the top 20 according to USNews? Would you really do that? Maybe you will, given your intense love for Emory and Vandi, but I’m sure a lot of people wouldn’t do what you’ll do. </p>
<p>Michigan has also a much superior engineering and science programs than either Vandi or Emory. Programs under those departments would rate better. Students would choose Michigan than Emory and Vandi for those programs. </p>
<p>Would people pick Vandi or Emory for engineering, computer science, physical science or biological science over Michigan? I don’t know. Maybe if you’re from the South you will, or if you’re just being you, a die-hard supporter of Emory and Vandi. But when you will have a general consensus across America, I’m sure your data would change drastically. </p>
<p>To recap, Michigan is huge and runs by departments. Emory, Vandi and the like, on the other hand, run as a whole. Some departments at Michigan are just average and can’t hold a candle against Emory or Vandi in academic standard, prestige and opportunities after graduation. In such case, I would very much prefer Vandi or Emory over those departments at Michigan. </p>
<p>However, there are also many departments at Michigan that are quite competitive and oversubscribed and are very much worth attending than places like Emory and Vandi. For example, I would rather go to Ross than go to Brown or Cornell or Rice, or Chicago. I would have a much secured financial stability, employer preferences, prestige, etc, coming out of Michigan-Ross than out of Emory or of an ordinary program at the lower ivies, Chicago, Duke, Rice, JHU or Northwestern. Heck, I would even rather have a BA from Ross than a History or social science from Yale or Princeton. However, there is no program at Emory or Vandi that’s worth attending than any of the lower ivies. I would rather attend Brown or Chicago or Cornell than go to Goizueta.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Outside of the US, it really varies. </p>
<p>I’ve met a lot of people mostly engineers and science majors who think Berkeley is the school to go to and Yale sucks. On the other hand, I’ve also met people who think Yale is superior to Harvard. And there are people outside of the US who think Cornell is superior to Princeton. </p>
<p>Outside of the US, I think that after Harvard, there’s no clear 2nd or 3rd and so forth. The only thing I know is that, Stanford, MIT, Berkeley, Yale are regarded just as prestigious. Princeton gets respect only to some groups, mostly those who care. Michigan, Cornell, Chicago, Columbia, Northwestern, JHU, UCLA are the next set of schools that many people outside of America would rather go to.</p>
<p>Who makes decisions based on what other people think? How lame. Especially when those people really don’t know, in the first place.</p>
<p>Management consultants are such free and independent thinkers…</p>
<p>RML,
Despite your best efforts, your trivialization of various measurements, mischaracterizations of my views, and uninformed statements on schools you know little to nothing about cannot hide the fact that our differences come down to what we value.</p>
<p>You value “prestige” and generally you mean that in terms of how those in academia assign prestige. Matters such as student quality, class size, graduation rates, teaching quality, institutional support,etc. mean little to you as long as the PA voters like the research record of the university as a whole. </p>
<p>By contrast, I value the student’s actual experience during the four years on the college’s campus. I care how this experience will be shaped by the quality of his/he classmates, the size of the classroom in which he/she learns, the quality of the instruction that he/she receives and the institutional support, financial and otherwise, that is provided to the undergraduate. I think that prestige is hugely overrated and is a cancer to intelligent and considered thought about college selection. </p>
<p>Although I’d be happy to indulge yet again in a debate on which approach is the right one for the UNDERGRADUATE student, I’m not sure that this really helps out much with the thread’s topic. But you are very mistaken on the importance of things like PA scores and even the program differences as they apply to undergraduate study in the USA. This is not Europe (at least not yet) where such choices are often career-determining. </p>
<p>I can’t encourage you strongly enough to go and visit these colleges that you disdain (do you need a map?), but which most of us in America know as quality places. For example, I suspect that you’d never heard of Rice back in your native Italy. How about Dartmouth? Northwestern? Bowdoin? Haverford? Harvey Mudd? W&L? Does that mean that these aren’t prestigious or that they’re not great colleges for undergrad students? Does that mean that because you don’t see them as prestigious, they don’t have much value and the idea of spending $50k a year on any of these would be anathema and a clear mistake?? </p>
<p>What I don’t think you appreciate is that there are literally scores of excellent colleges throughout the USA with lower prestige within academia (and lower PA scores), but which regularly graduate outstanding students who go on to do great things in everything from banking/finance some might even have gone to Goizueta) to medicine to all types of small and big business enterprises to non-profit organizations (even including academia). That is part of the beauty of America and why we’re not Italy. </p>
<p>Btw, your Italian is coming out again. Vanderbilt’s nickname is Vandy with a “y.”</p>
<p>hawkette, I’m not defending RML, but don’t bring nationality jabs to the table. It’s such a personal and volatile issue (wars have been fought over this). There are a lot of international posters on this forum whose native/first language is not English.</p>
<p>ten,
Sorry, but it’s relevant as that non-US perspective clearly influences his ability to understand various US colleges and our system here. We all have differences and being too PC about understanding those differences serves no one. </p>
<p>I would expect similar responses from a native Italian if I were opining on the merits of U Bologna or U Rome vs the merits of a school in another Euro region, eg, U Arhus, U Granada, U Helsinki, etc.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I love the assumption that we’re all supposed to pay attention to how colleges rank, in the eyes of people who don’t really know anything other than what they’ve generally heard. “I’m really not familiar with anything other than HYP and a few others that I’ve heard of through sports, but my opinions should shape your decisions.” My “prestige” rankings of colleges in Italy would mean very little - so it would be stupid for someone to make their decisions based on that.</p>
<p>Globalization implies that we should take into account the international reputation of our universities in the States.</p>
<p>Chances are, you may end up working for an international company or an American company with international headquarters.</p>
<p>Massachusetts</p>
<ol>
<li>Harvard, MIT, Yale, Princeton</li>
<li>Brown, Columbia, Stanford, Caltech, Cornell, Duke</li>
<li>Cornell, Johns Hopkins, UChicago, UPenn, Berkeley, Georgetown</li>
<li>Michigan, CMU, WashU, Northwestern</li>
</ol>
<p>
I concur. None of the publics belong in this thread, per the OP’s question. It really is not that difficult to read and follow directions. Take it private messages, people. :rolleyes:</p>
<p>Phead128 – Cornell was included twice…did you mean to separate some of its colleges?</p>
<p>I may be a bit biased here but I tend to agree with Hawkette … I’m not going to say that I do not value PA scores but they are, I think, a poor indicator of a college’s academic reputation. Yes, there is a correlation between academic strengths and PA as RML correctly pointed out but to solely focus on that can be misleading. And it is also true that the USNEWS rankings are not perfect but seeing some of the other rankings out there, namely Forbes, USNEWS is godly!</p>
<p>^^ Berkeley and Michigan were included in Phead’s post…aren’t you going to criticize him for not following directions as well?</p>
<p>
Eh? It was a blanket statement meant to include anyone – including myself – who did not follow the directions.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>As are investment bankers. </p>
<p>Other professionals who need to market themselves to develop a clientele will often times actively tout their high-prestige credentials. For example, here’s a LASIK eye surgeon who prominently displays his Harvard MD on the front page of his website. </p>
<p>[San</a> Francisco LASIK Surgeon, San Jose LASIK Surgery and Wavefront Laser Vision Correction](<a href=“http://www.scotthyver.com/]San”>http://www.scotthyver.com/)</p>