<p>From the top 3 thread, just wanted to clarify this. Rice University is a very good school and perhaps the top <em>undergraduate</em> college in Texas, but to say it is the best university in the state is a huge stretch. That desgination clearly belongs to UT-Austin. UT is ranked higher than Rice in nearly EVERY academic discipline both schools share and it is possible to count on one hand the number of fields Rice is stronger than UT in. This is readily apparent from academic ranking sources like the National Research Council report, in which UT was #1 in Texas (and top 20 in the nation) in practically every academic field evaluated. The NRC report is probably the gold standard in this regard, but even the departmental rankings in USNWR report demonstrate this. (Not to mention the London Times, Shanghai Jiaotong, Center, and numerous other field-specific.) Any of these rankings show UT is stronger in the hard sciences, engineering, arts, business, etc. (UT has more engineering faculty inducted in the NAE than Rice and A&M combined - both of which are strong engineering schools in their own right.) Then UT also excels in programs Rice doesn't have like law and film. UT's sheer size and wealth is the reason its programs are so well regarded. Not to mention other ancillary factors like one of the largest academic library collections in North America, the largest university art museum, one of the most highly regarded libraries in the world with the Ransom Humanities Research Center - which isn't even part of the main library sustem, the largest performing arts complex, and to top it all off - an outstanding athletic program. It's interesting how many people confuse undergraduate reputation with overall institutional strength. Rice is certainly more selective at the undergraduate level, but selectivity does not equate to stronger faculty and programs. While it can be argued that stronger peers do contribute to a richer undergraduate academic experience, it does not mean that the university itself is necessarily "stronger". What's really interesting is that even according to the USNWR undergrad/college rankings, UT and Rice are tied in the academic reputation ranking (4.1?)! </p>
<p>There are some areas where Rice is slightly stronger (biomedical engineering and architecture come to mind, yet even in these fields UT is very strong.)</p>
<p>Just needed to clarify the record in this regard. There's no way to realistically compare the two and say Rice is a stronger institution. A stronger undergrad program, most likely, but overall university strength is based on graduate programs, research, etc. - the entire package in addition to undergrad. The data supporting this is readily available in any of the listed sources.</p>
<p>Rice definitely has a better and (arguably) much more prestigious undergraduate reputation than UT Austin.</p>
<p>With that said, UT Austin is underrated as an institution. It's definitely one of the top public schools in the nation, yet it struggles to earn the respect of UC Berkeley, Michigan, and UVa. Even UCLA, UNC-Chapel Hill and Wisconsin-Madison earn more respect than UT Austin (from both laypeople and the elitist prestige wh0res who dominate these message boards). For whatever reason, UT Austin doesn't really have the cache outside Texas. </p>
<p>UT Austin is definitely working hard to become a top notch school. i respect the institution a lot, yet i seem to afford it much more respect than most ppl are willing (again, it seems funny that even UCLA and UNC-Chapel Hill earn much more respect than UT). </p>
<p>UT Austin does have several top graduate programs. I do think that the one thing that does separate it from Berkeley and Michigan is that it doesn't really have any DISTINGUISHED (read: Top 3-5 programs). UT Austin's graduate programs are all around very solid (Top 10-20), but I don't believe any of UT Austin's schools rank about Top 10 or so. </p>
<p>Purdue University gets a lot of respect for its Top 5 engineering program; Washington gets respect for its top notch medical school. Berkeley and Michigan both have MANY departments in the Top 3-10, etc.</p>
<p>I totally agree Rice has a better undergrad program/reputation (although actually their undergrad peer reputation ranks are exactly the same in USNWR). My point was that as an overall instituion, UT is much stronger. Its goal is certainly to be the Berkeley or Michigan of Texas, while at the same time catering mainly to Texans. (And no, before you respond, I'm NOT saying UT is in the same league as those 2 schools - but then again, neither are most Ivys really.) I wouldn't put UVA in the same league as UT either - for undergrad, it is certainly superior, but as a research university, it lags far behind UT. Agreed there are not a lot of top 1-5 grad programs (again, really only Berkeley, Harvard, Stanford, etc. can boast this.) However, UT does have a few top 10 (according to the NRC at least) - Civil Eng (4), Comp. Sci (7), Aerospace Eng (8), Classics (8), Astronomy/Astrophysics (10), Ecology/Evolution (10) and Chemical Engineering (10), and as you said many others in the top 20. Some indivdidual fields are ranked higher by USNWR. It is definitely underrated! You have to admit UT does have very good academic breadth, if not quite the depth of Michigan and Berkeley. It is very hard and takes a lot of resources for a university to have as many top ranked fields as UT does, even if they are not necessarily top 5. I think the hardest thing for UT to shake is its undergraduate reputation of not being selective. Since by law UT has to admit 90% of undergrads from in-state, it can never be as selective as UVA or Michigan. Unfortunately, many lay people translate this to mean it is not academically on par. You mentioned lack of respect and used Purdue's top 5 engineering program as an example. It is interesting that although it can be argued UT has a stronger faculty than GaTech or Purdue (its faculty NAE membership is 4th after only MIT, Stanford, and Berkeley), engineering is yet another field UT doesn't get quite the same respect as a "top 5". I do hope UT one day gets the national respect of, say Berkeley. In the meantime, however, it should at least get the proper respect within Texas compared to Rice.</p>
<p>By the way, I do think Wisconsin's reputation is well deserved. I would put it above UT, but I wouldn't put UNC or UVA over UT (again, as overall university strength - not just undergrad). And Washington does have a great med school, but I believe UT still has broader strength.</p>
<p>You are probably right. But the thing I disagree with you the most on is the following. Just like you say people confuse a good undergraduate program for overall reputation, you confuse good departmental rankings, wealth, and other factors you mention for overall reputation. The name of your thread gives it all away. It assumes that the undergraduate reputation is less important. Hypocritical if you ask me. This is especially inappropriate since this is a college search board for prospective undergraduates.</p>
<p>It's also interesting how you mention that people confuse undergraduate quality for overall reputation when people make the opposite generalization a lot more often. People assume schools like Berkeley's undergraduate program is as strong as its overall one.</p>
<p>Actually, I do agree with what you said regarding the opposite generalization. I think what I meant to say is that many people automatically tend to assume the harder a school is to get in to, the better the institution. Many universities have become quite selective in a bid to increase their image in this regard. You are correct, though, that in most cases, it's the grad reputation that influences the overall rep. That's why I think public schools like UT (and maybe Wisconsin, Illinois, etc.) are such an anomaly; it does have very strong grad programs (and I think for the most part, people realize this), yet there are those that assume more selective schools like, say, Notre Dame or Vanderbilt are "better" overall. So I guess unless a school has the stratospheric grad reputation of a Berkeley, it might get overshadowed if it's undergrad reputation is vastly different from its graduate programs/research.</p>
<p>Berkeley's graduate program is easily in the top 5. I don't think anyone claims this about its undergraduate program. So people can differentiate between the two.</p>
<p>Guys, I think you are all missing the point here.</p>
<p>UT and Rice and Berkeley, they are all great schools, and there is no point in comparing them, for all of their Grad and Undergrad programs should be praised.</p>
<p>The point that needs to be emphasized the most on this forum is that WashU is a terrible school that cannot be trusted. It is the epitome of all evil in the world. Ann Coulter is an alumnus!</p>
<p>As long as we can all, as CC members, agree that WashU is completely worthless to the face of the earth simply because it has a marketing team, then we are all okay.</p>
<p>
[quote]
UT Austin's graduate programs are all around very solid (Top 10-20), but I don't believe any of UT Austin's schools rank about Top 10 or so.
[/quote]
In addition to what JWT listed on post #3, UT-Austin does have a few more highly ranked programs. For example, according to US News:</p>
<p>All that plus most of its programs are ranked in the top 20. UT-Austin does enjoy a lot of respect from its academic peers. If you ask people from Texas, they will tell you that UT and Rice are the two best schools.</p>
<p>I believe what hurts UT's reputation is the high in-state quota (only 5% of the student body is from oos). And the top 10% rule doesn't help either.</p>
<p>I think it depends who you ask. My bet is that most of the people in Texas would rank UT much higher than Rice. The people in the northeast (predominantly represented on CC) would rank Rice. Maybe that is because Rice is a private school.</p>
<p>I've lived in Texas all my life and I'd say Texans would rank Rice higher. I'm not saying they know what they are talking about, but that's how it is.</p>
<p>Now if they are thinking of sports, it's a different story.</p>
<p>
[quote]
The point that needs to be emphasized the most on this forum is that WashU is a terrible school that cannot be trusted. It is the epitome of all evil in the world. Ann Coulter is an alumnus!
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Ann Coulter attended Cornell University, and has a law degree from the University of Michigan.</p>
<p>UCLAri, I'm not necessarily saying that UCLA doesn't deserve respect; au contraire, it's definitely a fantastic school.</p>
<p>I guess what I'm trying to say is that I think it's funny that some ppl have this really snobbish attitude that UCLA seems to be on a much higher level than UT Austin academically. Granted, UCLA has tougher admissions standards than UT Austin, but as a complete package, UT Austin is fairly comparable to some of the top publics out there (though it does fall slightly short of the Berkeley/Michigan level). </p>
<p>If you've read pateta's response, you'll see why I find humor in ppl's mentality that UCLA is considered much more prestigious than UT Austin (to the elitist snobs out there).</p>