<p>We all take Princeton Review rankings with a grain of salt, but the distinction between these categories in the new 2011 PR Rankings is too overwhelming to ignore:</p>
<p>Professors Get High Marks:</p>
<p>1 - Reed College
2 - Wellesley College
3 - Middlebury College
4 - Sweet Briar College
5 - Davidson College
6 - Franklin W. Olin College of Engineering
7 - Hampden-Sydney College
8 - College of William and Mary
9 - New College of Florida
10 - Harvey Mudd College
11 - Whitman College
12 - Kenyon College
13 - Sarah Lawrence College
14 - Austin College
15 - Wittenberg University
16 - Carleton College
17 - Oglethorpe University
18 - Wabash College<br>
19 - Randolph College
20 - Swarthmore College </p>
<p>Professors Get Low Marks:</p>
<p>1 - University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
2 - Cal Tech
3 - United States Merchant Marine Academy
4 - University of California--San Diego
5 - Stevens Institute of Technology
6 - Illinois Institute of Technology
7 - New Jersey Institute of Technology
8 - Georgia Tech
9 - Rutgers
10 - University of California--Riverside
11 - University of Rhode Island
12 - Case Western Reserve University
13 - Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute
14 - University of Toronto
15 - University of Connecticut
16 - Washington State University
17 - University of New Hampshire
18 - State University of New York--University at Buffalo
19 - Michigan Technological University
20 - Iowa State University </p>
<p>So that's 19.5 LACs out of 20 in the first group (I'll give William & Mary half-and-half status) and 20 Research Us out of 20 in the latter. That's about as close to a 1.0 correlation as it gets!</p>
<p>Many ibn the second group may not be LACs but they are hardly major research Us either. Stevens? USMM, IIT, NJIT, UCR, URI, RPI, WSU, UNH, MTech are almost all techy schools–not major research schools. Maybe it’s the tech thing.</p>
<p>Reinforces the stereotype that techies, esp. those at the top, lack humanity, the capacity to connect with other human beings? And reveals that LAC fanboys/fangirls really believe in the philosophy preached by these schools–delusional?</p>
<p>I second the comment about it being a tech thing. There are fewer English-speaking grad students in the technical majors and, therefore, fewer professors who speak English well. It’s very difficult to understand lectures given in a heavy accent. That’s why the teachers get poor ratings. In addition, I agree, that many tech-y people don’t have good people skills - at least not the kind of people skills required to make lectures interesting.</p>
<p>Chicago - 36.00 percent
Duke - 40.84 percent
Northwestern - 31.72 percent
Johns Hopkins - 31.31 percent
WUSTL - too abysmal to be found anywhere</p>
<p>At some point, one outgrows the gratuitous slam against a rival college.</p>
<p>Yield for WUSTL is exactly the same as Johns Hopkins, 30 percent, according to the 2010 USNWR data. Northwestern was a whopping 2 percent higher.</p>
<p>& of course the professors at small LACs are going to be better; classrooms aren’t taught by TAs and headed by professors who aren’t there because they are discovering some obscure addition to the table of elements.</p>
<p>Not so fast, KWU. You picked the top five LACs, but not the top five research U’s. According to the US Dept of Ed, for the Class of '13, their yields are:</p>
<p>HYPSM stand within their own tier, and very rarely would one turn down these schools for others that simply don’t compare in terms of popular recognition. The non-HYP Ivy League schools also exude a preternatural mystique that render all of them, with the exception of Cornell, perhaps, nearly irresistible to most admitted students.</p>
<p>Therefore, it is the reasonable course of action to compare institutions that aren’t members of this popular athletic conference.</p>
<p>Chicago and Duke, at least, are peers the Ivy League schools in most every respect besides inflated popular appeal.</p>
<p>kwu, I have some concerns you should take into consideration. First of all, very few people in the real world will appreciate a Yale degree over a Columbia degree. Sure its Yale, but I doubt any judgement based solely on a university degree will be much different between X, who has a degree from Duke, and Y, who has a degree from Princeton.
Please understand. In the real world, HYPSM is NOT the pinnacle of accomplishment. Nor is it viewed in such a pedestal. This is coming from an “HYPSM” student. There were times at both Duke and MIT when I wished I was at a community college, going to parties, and getting paid to have sex like the Jersey Shore cast. :o</p>
<p>Secondly, many people are unable to name Ivies. Stanford and Duke are actually commonly mistaken as Ivies. I can’t believe the number of times I had to correct the locals, who’d come over to visit my parents, that MIT and Duke aren’t Ivies, but amazing colleges who rival them in all aspects. Besides, when people say “Ivy,” they almost always include Stanford, MIT, UChicago, and Duke as the Ivy Plus.
[Ivy</a> League - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia](<a href=“Ivy League - Wikipedia”>Ivy League - Wikipedia)</p>
<p>
I’ve seen it in use several times.
I would also like to give Caltech some credit. Caltech has often been included among the “Ivy Plus,” but I understand that majority of people aren’t always interested in science, engineering, and math.</p>
<p>The only exception, as I must grudgingly admit, is Harvard. Its name blows some people’s minds out for some reason…</p>
<p>Picking the top five LACs does not make much of a difference. Yields at the USNWR top 20 LACs all range from the high 20 to the mid 40 percents. There is not the huge drop off we see among universities after the top 5.</p>
<p>“Secondly, many people are unable to name Ivies. Stanford and Duke are actually commonly mistaken as Ivies. I can’t believe the number of times I had to cect the locals, who’d come over to visit my parents, that MIT and Duke aren’t Ivies, but amazing colleges who rival them in all aspects.” </p>
<p>Where are these locals? Do they even live in this country? Once again a Dukie is placing his ug alma mater at the same level as Stanford. Give it up already. You go to MIT now. MIT is up there Stanford HYP. Duke is not. Furthermore, Duke does not “rival” HYPSM in “all aspects.” I personally don’t know ANYONE who thinks Duke is in the Ivy League. Your very good ug experience lead you to a superior graduate program at MIT. Just leave it at that.</p>
<p>The top LAC’s usually have higher alumni giving rates and stronger alumni networks-Williams, Davidson, Holy Cross, Amherst, Bowdoin. Most of these schools have giving rates >50% with Holy Cross at 54%. Not sure how many top National Universities approach that with exception of Princeton and Dartmouth.</p>
<p>It may be that the professors at LACs are not really any better than those at top universities, but they may seem better–and get better marks–because the students get to know them better and have more personal interactions. If so, that’s one of the selling points of LACs.</p>