<p>What you guys think of this....</p>
<p>Is this pretty accurate?</p>
<p>My thoughts on the rankings</p>
<p>1) anyone on this board could do one like it in 15 mins. . .</p>
<p>2) close to worthless, unless it's news that Harvard and Yale are prestigious.</p>
<p>It seems relatively accurate. Mixing the LACs with Research universities is never a good idea. But since they do, it is important to understand that the difference between say #5 and #40 is truly insignificant. Rice is way too low in my opinion. Rice belongs in the top 25.</p>
<ol>
<li> Harvard</li>
<li> Princeton</li>
<li> Yale</li>
<li> Stanford</li>
</ol>
<p>pretty much agree (my replacements in parentheses)</p>
<ol>
<li> Dartmouth (MIT)</li>
<li> MIT (Columbia)</li>
<li> Amherst (CalTech)</li>
<li> Williams (Brown)</li>
<li> Columbia University (Dartmouth)</li>
<li> California Institute of Technology (UPenn)</li>
<li> Brown (Williams)</li>
<li> Duke </li>
<li> University of Pennsylvania (Cornell)</li>
<li> University of Chicago (Cal)</li>
<li> Swarthmore (UChicago)</li>
<li> Northwestern University</li>
<li> Cornell University (Amherst)</li>
<li> Johns Hopkins</li>
<li> University of California-Berkeley (Swarthmore)</li>
<li> Bowdoin (Georgetown)</li>
</ol>
<p>I'd agree with Alexandre that mixing LACs is kind of like mixing apples and oranges. Also agree that Rice is way low (but in top 25?) - UVA also seems to get the shaft a bit (but not as much as Rice)</p>
<p>Ivygrad, I agree with some of your corrections. MIT and CalTech in particular. But I think you put Cal way too low. Cal should be in the top 7 or 8. Williams and Georgetown are way too high. If you go all the way down to 20, Michigan should be in there, even if you include LACs. Among research universities, Michigan is anywhere between 8 and 17.</p>
<p>See, this is the problem with subjective rankings of unquantifiable things like "prestige." One person's subjective opinion of what is a "prestigious" school is likely to be different from anothers. These are all subjective OPINIONS on something that can not be measured. </p>
<p>What does it matter whether Alexandre or Ivy-Grad or the Brody group or ANYONE thinks is a "prestigious" school? Suffice it to say, that the only opinion that really matters in the end on subjective things like "prestige", is your own. If you need other people to tell you what to think about such nebulous things as "prestige" then you have a serious self-confidence problem.</p>
<p>I agree Carolyn. Prestige in meaningless. At the highest levels...where it really matters, prestige and academic reputation/excellence are one and the same. More importantly, as you point out, a person should pick a school based on fit rather than "prestige" or academic excellence/reputation.</p>
<p>LOL. I told my son last week that when he is ready to get married. We will post all his girlfriends' stats in the message boards. He should pick the one most prestige as raking by message boards or US News and World Report. Love doesnt count. It only count what are they raking by others.</p>
<p>It doesn't even have Carnegie Mellon on the list.</p>
<p>t1388:</p>
<p>What a perfect analogy. Picking a college or university from a "prestige" ranking really is the same as picking a wife based on the results of a popularity contest. It really is THAT superficial. </p>
<p>Carolyn is right. It shows a lack of self-confidence to choose a college and relying instead on external "approval".</p>
<p>IMO, the ranking lists have some merit when it comes to broad ranges of schools. For example, they may help identify schools you haven't heard of that are considered superb academic institutions. Or, they may identify well-known schools that aren't considered that good. But, we are talking about large categories of schools. Within a broad range, relying on minute differences in rank is silly.</p>
<p>In many cases, you can't even compare similarly ranked colleges because they are SO different. I mean, how do you compare CalTech and Brown? Or Williams and Berkeley? The style of education at these schools is so different that prestige isn't even a relevant issue.</p>
<p>Once you've narrowed it down to a particular type of school, the differences academically are miniscule and the choice really does boil down to personal preference: location, campus culture, blond/brunette, blue eyes/brown eyes, etc. I mean, if you prefer NoCal to Ann Arbor (or vice versa), does it really matter if Berkeley or UMich is higher ranked on some College Counselor for Hire's website? They WANT you to get caught up in the designer-label college prestige frenzy because that insecurity is what makes someone pay big money to use their services.</p>
<p>Interestdad: </p>
<p>Great comments. I am always struck by the necessity to quantify everything in our world. I am particularly struck with the rankings because there is no methodology. It's like the Gourman report, the National Research Council rankings, or even US News. We don't see how a school gets a certain ranking.</p>
<p>I wouldnt say Carnegie Mellon is top 20! Maybe hovering around 25...its a top science school, but not top 20 overall.</p>
<p>Excellent posts Carolyn and Interesteddad. That is absolutely correct. It is unfortunate that so many students on this website are so obsessed by rankings. In the UAE alone. roughly 4 or 5 students I know of chose universities purely because of rankings and perception. They should focus more on fit. In terms of quality, I always try to promote ratings rather than rankings, by listing over 40 universities and colleges that fit a student's credentials and academic interests. There really are that many excellent universities and colleges for each type of student.</p>