<p>Whoops; slight inaccuracy. Rochester Institute of Tech should’ve been 660.2952249 mHYPes, moving it slightly above FIU, who gets the new bottom spot.</p>
<p>My own rankings – private universities:</p>
<ol>
<li>Harvard, Yale, Princeton</li>
<li>MIT, Stanford, UChicago, Columbia, Penn</li>
<li>Brown, Cornell, Dartmouth, Duke, Northwestern</li>
<li>Johns Hopkins</li>
<li>Vanderbilt, Washington U, Rice, Georgetown, Notre Dame</li>
<li>Carnegie Mellon, Emory, USC, Boston College</li>
<li>Tufts, Brandeis, Case Western, Wake Forest, NYU</li>
</ol>
<p>Public universities:
- UC Berkeley
- Michigan
- Virginia
- UCLA, UNC
- Wisconsin, Georgia Tech, Washington, Texas, William & Mary
- PSU, Minnesota, CU-Boulder, Texas A&M, Maryland, Rutgers, other top UCs…</p>
<p>Top LACs:
- Amherst, Williams
- Swat, Pomona
- Middlebury, Bowdoin, Carleton, Haverford, Wellesley
- Grinnell, Reed, CMC, Vassar, Harvey Mudd, Oberlin
- Washington & Lee, Davidson, Hamilton, Bates, Colby, Smith, Bryn Mawr, Kenyon
- Holy Cross, Macalester, Scripps, Barnard, Bard, Richmond, Trinity</p>
<p>…something like that. I did this off the top of my head, so if I left out any “no-brainers”, feel free to augment my lists as you see fit. </p>
<p>Among the elite companies and grad schools (where name-brand actually matters), I think </p>
<p>HYPSM, Penn-Wharton
Columbia, Caltech, Chicago
rest of Penn, Brown, Duke, Dartmouth
Cornell, NW, JHU, GTown, Vandy, WUSTL, UVA, UMich, maybe some more </p>
<p>Once you’re at this level, though, I think the prestige difference between institutions doesn’t mean much, and it’s more on you to perform academically and leadership-wise. Lay prestige is very regional and doesn’t mean much in my experience. </p>
<p>^ Yes, your opinion is definitely the opinion of ‘prestigious’ grad schools and ‘elite’ employers. How many kids goes Chicago send to HLS, HBS, JHU SOM, Wharton, McKinsey or Goldman? Compare that to the number of kids that Duke/Penn sends to those institutions. Then come back to us. </p>
<p>@HouseOfCats I’m glad you speak for the entire world. Yale and Princeton definitely have a better global reputation than Harvard and Stanford (insert sarcasm) and the global powerhouse that is Georgetown clearly decimates MIT (insert double dose of sarcasm). </p>
<p>This absurd thread should really be closed. People like madglav, prezbucky etc. are posting repeatedly in an attempt to make their preferred universities appear to be more ‘prestigious’. This is becoming a farce. </p>
<p>The prestige of an undergraduate degree is only important insofar as it increases an applicant’s chance for acceptance at a top graduate program. </p>
<p>Going to Yale for undergrad + going to an average graduate school < Going to Bucknell for undergrad + going to an outstanding graduate school. </p>
<p>That being said, attending a prestigious liberal arts college/research university will drastically improve a candidates employment prospects if he or she is not planning on completing a professional degree (MBA, JD, PhD, etc.).</p>
<p>To use the previous example, a Yale/Williams graduate’s chances at landing a job at a place like McKinsey are astronomically higher than those of a Emory/Bucknell graduate. These are just schools that have a huge prestige cap, and they could be replaced by similar ones. It is not my intention to single out any school. </p>
<p>I think the obsession with rankings is pretty ridiculous, but I also think that people who have zero concern with prestige are being either disingenuous or dense. What truly baffles me is how people can be so obsessed with attending the top ranked school only to major in something useless like comp lit. </p>
<p>At the end of the day, an English major from UPenn will be serving fries to a computer science/engineering/economics major from Penn State. </p>
<p>This thread depresses me, the entire milliharvard idea, everything… especially the random decimal points. Eugh.</p>
<p>That being said, I would say that the ‘prestigiosity’ of an institution, if measurable at all, should be measured in tiers. I would say two universities are of the same ‘tier’ if cross admits to both universities do not show a clear preference for one over the other. It would not be surprising if a Harvard-Yale admit chose Yale over Harvard; therefore they are of the same tier—it would, however, be unusual for one to choose Emory over Duke; thus, Emory and Duke, in my book, would belong to different tiers. Public Universities would comprise a entirely different set of tiers, since choosing UVa over Harvard might make sense depending on family resources. I will not rank liberal arts colleges, since they are only known to be prestigious among the select, educated few who have heard of them in the first place.</p>
<p>1st Tier: Harvard, Yale, Princeton, Stanford, MIT, Wharton (Penn)</p>
<p>2nd Tier: Columbia, UChicago, Penn, Duke, Caltech, Brown, Dartmouth</p>
<p>3rd Tier: Cornell (I feel as though Cornell is the catch-all for rejects of the above schools, even though I personally believe it deserves to be more highly regarded)</p>
<p>4th Tier: Northwestern, Georgetown, WashU, JHU, Rice, Stern (NYU)</p>
<p>5th Tier: Vanderbilt, Emory, Nortre Dame, Carnegie Mellon, USC, Tufts</p>
<p>6th Tier: Boston College, Brandeis, NYU, University of Rochester</p>
<p>7th Tier: Boston University, Lehigh, Northeastern, GW, Tulane</p>
<p>Additionally, the 5 most and nearly equally as prestigious public universities are UCB, UCLA, UVa, UNC and UMichigan.</p>
<p>My rankings may be somewhat skewed by my east coast prejudices.</p>
<p>For the most part, I’d agree with the previous, but I would make a few changes:</p>
<ol>
<li>HYPSM, Penn (Wharton)</li>
<li>Columbia, Chicago, Caltech, Duke, Penn (avg.), Cornell (CAS and Engineering), Dartmouth</li>
<li>Cornell (avg.), Penn (non-Wharton), UC Berkeley, Brown</li>
<li>Northwestern, Gtown, JHU, Rice, Vanderbilt, UVA, Michigan, Cornell (rest of)</li>
<li>CMU, USC, Emory, Tufts, Notre Dame, UCLA, UNC</li>
</ol>
<p>After 5, it gets really muddy–many state colleges have to be included. Even T5 should be larger, IMO.</p>
<p>Main differences from the last one: Placed both average and non-standout programs for Penn and Cornell (since the variations in prestige exist more and have more of an effect for these two institutions than any other on this list), integrated the public universities, and rebalanced it from a more southern perspective.</p>
<p>I’m going to add some predictions of change (so when this thread is inevitably necroed again, there’s something to work off of).</p>
<p>Big Winners: Chicago, Caltech, Cornell, Duke. (+1 full tier for the institution as a whole).</p>
<p>Reasoning:</p>
<p>Chicago–Most prominent university in the Midwest, added to an intellectual bent–seen most like Yale among HYPS, but with a social sciences focus. Since it has the momentum right now (even with a 9.5% decrease in applications they still had a higher yield and lower acceptance rate). Likely to make the jump to tier 1 as student life improves and recent graduates prove their worth. Add that to the increasing Tech and Engineering opportunities, and this one is a strong chance.</p>
<p>Caltech–Already part of HYPMSC, its only problem is name recognition. I think that might be fixed.</p>
<p>Cornell–Due to its continual underdog status, many people don’t recognize its strengths. It has the chance to make a name for itself in tech development in the east (esp, with the NYCTech campus) and pull an eastern Stanford. I doubt it will join T1, but I could see it solidifying itself as a T2 in all respects (and eliminating many of the jokes around it). Also, Agriculture has the possibility of making a comeback as a hot industry, and Cornell can be the center of that.</p>
<p>Duke–Like Chicago, most prominent university in its region; its only problem is that it doesn’t have the momentum Chicago does right now, but it also has a high chance of moving up the ranks. Since it’s most like Pton among HYP in feel, it may very well serve the role of the non-ivy Princeton for applicants (like Stanford is the non-ivy Harvard and Chicago is the non-ivy Yale). Duke can also leverage something only Stanford can to among the top universities: weather. Who wants to spend four years in dreary New Haven or snowed-in Hanover when they could come to Durham and enjoy not freezing to death?</p>
<p>Carnegie Mellon–A seriously underrated school for STEM; due for a boost.</p>
<p>Rice–See CMU</p>
<p>Another school that might make the cut is Olin, but it will suffer in terms of name recognition due to its newness and small size.</p>
<p>Notable losers: Dartmouth, Penn (-1 tier overall or -1 tier for a major section)</p>
<p>Dartmouth–I think the Big Green is beginning to deal with systemic faults; what those are I don’t know. But the recent multi-year decline in applications, yield, and acceptance rate shows that something is definitely wrong.</p>
<p>Penn–Penn as a whole will stay the same, but Wharton will go through a decline. The finance industry is losing its luster, and Wharton’s rep will lag the decline by a few years. I do expect the engineering and arts and sciences schools to improve, though, so its an overall wash.</p>
<p>Ranking in 10-20 years:</p>
<ol>
<li>HYPSMCCD (or M8)</li>
<li>Columbia, Cornell, Penn (I could see Olin making it to here)</li>
<li>Dartmouth, Berkeley, Brown, Rice, CMU</li>
<li>Vandy, Northwestern, Gtown, Hopkins, UVA, Michigan</li>
<li>USC, UCLA, Notre Dame, Tufts, Emory, UNC</li>
</ol>
<p>Edit: and, preemptively, those who think Columbia will climb into T1 along with Chicago and Duke–I disagree. The northeast has 4 of the nation’s T1 schools already, so I give the advantage to the Midwest and South–also, there are significant disadvantages at having to fight against HYP every step of the way–Chicago can fight Northwestern and WUSTL; Duke, Vandy and Rice. In most measure of quality, Chicago and Duke will come out on top (though not by much), meaning that they appear better than Columbia, which will come out behind HYPM in most metrics. As such, advantage Chicago/Duke.</p>
<p>I think people need to reread the OP of this thread again and realize how silly they look taking it seriously.</p>
<p>And to convert all their predictions into milliHarvards.</p>
<p>Here here.</p>
<p>No less silly an exercise than hyper-obsessing over relative Ivy school reputations for the purpose of putting together a college list for one’s yet-to-be-born children.</p>
<p>Too much conjecture on each. Especially by those who have not attended the top rung of schools like harvard or stanford or have not worked for any of the elite employers they refer to like mckinsey. Here’s some advice, before you rank schools based on elite consulting placement, try to work in said company before you post nonsensical placement conjectures. Cornell and caltech for instance lag severely behind some of the other schools ranked below them in this thread for mckinsey placement.</p>
<p>In my defense for being so serious… it was 4am when I wrote that. In a more serious thread, that would be my honest opinion.</p>
<p>Though I’m going to be serious again when I write this: Why would you ever rank schools based on a specific sector like consulting? People change their majors, people change their career paths. If I were to look at placement into top PhD programs, I could make Chicago appear on par with HYPS, or if I wanted to look at top med schools, then Hopkins rises above the pack. Unless you 100% know that you want to go into a certain industry and will never change your mind… then I suppose you can use an industry ranking, but I would expect numbers outside of HYPS to change significantly from year-to-year.</p>
<p>and, for pure ‘prestigiosity’ as the OP put it:</p>
<p>HS
(gap)
YPMC
(gap)
Duke, Chicago, Columbia
Dartmouth, Brown, Penn
Cornell
Rest of CC Top Universities</p>
<p>There seems to be an unspoken, significant divide between HS and YPMC on this site. The veneration changes from almost worship to extreme respect.</p>
<p>In my opinion:</p>
<p>From the perspective of grad schools/employers:</p>
<p>Harvard, Stanford, Princeton, Yale, MIT
Columbia, Penn, Duke, Dartmouth
Brown, Chicago, Northwestern, Georgetown, JHU, Cornell etc. </p>
<p>From the perspective of academics:</p>
<p>Harvard, Princeton, Stanford, MIT, Yale
Columbia, Chicago
Penn, Duke, Cornell, JHU etc.
(gap)
Other top schools</p>
<p>@kaarboer Chicago doesn’t have an engineering school or a particularly strong computer science program. The future belongs to schools that excel in STEM (this is just my opinion).</p>
<p>@Misanthrope1 The CS program is strong, just small. And Chicago is dipping its toes into the water of engineering with the IME–I agree with your assessment, I just think Hyde Park has noticed this and is slowly moving to rectify it (though probably not as quickly as it should).</p>
<p>^ From what I hear, the CS program is very theoretical. That’s probably not a particularly good thing.</p>
<p>I’m also concerned that Chicago is accumulating too much debt and trying to move too quickly. This approach might not be sustainable in the long run!</p>
<p><a href=“Bloomberg - Are you a robot?”>Bloomberg - Are you a robot?;
<p><a href=“Higher Ed’s For-Profit Future”>https://www.jacobinmag.com/2014/06/higher-eds-for-profit-future/</a></p>
<p>“Few universities have embraced the corporatization of higher education with arms as wide as the University of Chicago.”</p>
<p>Until a few years ago, I think UChicago would have been with Brown or NW for corporate recruiting or grad school, but I think their numbers have greatly improved with stronger, professionally-oriented classes.
I would put UofC in the group right under HYPSM for both academia and professional purposes. </p>
<p>I visited UofC once, and at the analyst level, it seemed that most of the econ majors got good jobs at top investment banks and consulting firms. However, many of them seemed to think that the VP and MD/principal levels were lacking UChicago undergrads compared to say Columbia or Dartmouth because of the less pre-professionally focused, less-selective classes of the past. </p>
<p>With that said, I think
Tier 1a: HYPSM
Tier 1b: Columbia, Caltech, UChicago, UPenn
Tier 1c: Dartmouth, Brown, Duke
Tier 1d: Cornell, JHU, NW, Georgetown, Vandy, Rice, UMich, UVA, Berkeley, maybe a couple more </p>
<ol>
<li>The Jacobin isn’t exactly the most respected of media outlets, and that article’s only relevant section is taken from the Bloomberg article.</li>
<li>Chicago is in the process of a $4.5 Billion capital campaign, which would ease the debt load.</li>
<li>Money is cheap right now–many places are taking on debt because the Fed is keeping interest rates low in order to stimulate growth. There’s little danger to a school with excellent growth prospects taking on debt in order to fund expansion, as interest is at a low point.</li>
</ol>
<p>Misanthrope1 is the same person who bashes the University of Chicago whenever he/she can. He/she is no longer with us.</p>