When I’m calculating the highly scientific algorithms that result in the prestigiosity index, one of the biggest challenges is how to figure in the defensiveness exhibited on behalf of certain schools (most notably, Berkeley and Penn). Are these complaints an indicator of more prestigiosity, or less? But rest assured, the end result is entirely fair and based on sound methodology.
@irlandaise right with you. It’s bookmarked and I always smile when I see it pop back up on my page 
The strategery used in these prestigiosity rankings is remarkulous.
I agree it is the best measuring stick of crazed college desirability.
I might nitpick that Duke should be lower. Hard to take them that serious.
But your scientific method is near flawless.
Why is MIT in the top list? It’s a tech school that isn’t on par with Haaarvard, P, Y and S. It belongs with Harvey Mudd, Cal Tech, Olin and Cooper Union…Definitely not on the same level as HPYS.
Because the primary criterion for a high rating on the list is the measured (by me) desire of students posting on CC to attend the school. MIT (along with Caltech) is a strong competitor to HPYS when it comes to this criterion.
Also be aware that the prestigiosity rankings, while of course an entirely legitimate and scientific ranking system, also serve as a commentary on ranking systems in general.
For lazy people, below are the most recent prestigiosity ratings (in milliHarvards)–I haven’t seen anything in the most recent discussions to suggest changes:
Harvard: 1000 mH
Yale/Princeton: 998 mH
MIT (or Caltech): 997.365782322119 mH
Stanford: 995 mH (998 west of the Mississippi)
Penn (Wharton): 992
Duke: 990 mH (995 south of the Mason Dixon line)
Columbia: 990 mH
Williams, Amherst, Swarthmore: 988 mH
Brown: 987 mH
Penn (other than Wharton), Dartmouth: 985 mH
Cornell (CAS and engineering): 980 mH
Chicago: 980 mH
Northwestern, WUSTL, Rice: 975 mH
Johns Hopkins, Vanderbilt, Emory: 950 mH
Tufts, Georgetown, Wesleyan, Middlebury, Bowdoin: 925 mH
University of Virginia: 900 mH (950 in Virginia; 990 in Virginia excluding Northern Virginia)
UC Berkeley: 900 mH
Michigan 890 mH
UCLA, CMU, Notre Dame: 880
CC Darlings (in alphabetical order):
Alabama (for merit scholarships)
Carleton
Claremont Colleges
Deep Springs
Grinnell
Harvey Mudd
Kenyon
Macalester
Oberlin
Reed
Smith
St. Johns
@SeattleTW I’m confused as to how MIT isn’t on par with the rest mentioned. Commonly, it is so on par that it is specifically mentioned in addition to the Ivies, etc.
Yes, we often see HYPSM here on cc. Also, note the specific numerical rating given to MIT, and ponder the careful, exacting scientific methodology put into this ranking system.
On most blogs I’m used to HYSP only, but I’ll go with the flow if you say so. I do recall attending a conference at MIT and asked no fewer than five students for directions to the B school. None spoke sufficient English so I spent 20 minutes looking for an American student who politely pointed the way. Is the school that heavily international?
Not lost on me.
I think a Sub-Forum entitled “Hunt’s Rankings” would be a useful, nay, a critically important addition to this website.
Refresh my memory - Is the higher the percentage of “what are my chances” type threads on the individual college CC bulletin board taken into consideration in the prestigiosity rankin? 
UChicago is too low on this list. I propose we focus on prestigiosity, as viewed by various institutions like elite employers graduate schools, professional schools, -and International notoriety- and not just popularity among kids in high school
But it’s not just kids in high school. It’s CC kids in high school. Different animal altogether.
@Hunt where is Vassar on your list?
Williams ,Amherst and Swarthmore are way inflated. Your prestigiosity has Swarthmore above 4 Ivies? Me detects a flaw.
Williams and Amherst should be around 940, below Johns Hopkins and Swarthmore, if listed, should be 920ish. Below Bowdoin
Well, it is refreshing to see people quibbling about the placement of schools other than Berkeley.
My perception is that Swarthmore gets mentioned much more often on CC as a prime destination for brainy kids than does Bowdoin. And that perception–as mediated through the highly scientific and mathematical algorithm I use, of course–is what counts.
Extra credit question: What does this discussion tell you about ranking systems?
They follow the urban dictionary definition http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=rank
Although there is no questioning the mathematical rigor of this ranking system, the fact that the Webb Institute does not appear on the list suggests that the people who post on CC:
- Do not hang out with the America's Cup crowd
- Have never commissioned their own custom yacht
- Cannot trace their lineage to either the Mayflower or the Arbella.
Although this does raise some serious concerns about a ranking methodology that uses CC input as a gauge of prestigiousity, in no way does this invalidate the creator’s claim that the resulting rank is at least as useful as that of USNews.
Ooh! I know! I know!
Answer: Because people are social animals and acutely aware of both rank and status, such systems are useful, popular and ubiquitous.
Did I win?
Ok , put Swarthmore wherever you want in relation to Bowdoin. But above 4 Ivies? I re-assert my claim that Swartmore, Williams and Amherst should be around 940. Coming to this conclusion using your scientific method of casually perusing threads and “chance me’s”.