<p>Well, when I think of undergrad programs people would turn down for Stanford, I don't think of Penn, Cornell, or Duke.</p>
<p>
[quote]
After reading the responses, I would like to clarify that I'm only interested in the undergrad programs at those schools. When evaluating the schools, please only refer to their undergrad programs.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I'll add that there's a very high correlation between the quality of the undergrad program (in a specific area) and the quality of the grad program (again, in that specific area). Why? Because it's the same faculty, same research, same facilities, same courses, same library holdings, etc. I'd also argue that a top grad program will attract the strongest undergrads in that area.</p>
<p>
This is absolutely correct. Posters on CC often try to distinguish between undergrad and graduate ratings of specific liberal arts departments, but other than the somewhat controversial Gourman Report (which is essentilly one man's personal evaluation), there are no significant undergraduate-specific rankings of liberal arts departments. Accordingly, graduate rankings--such as the universally respected NRC rankings--are used as surrogates for undergraduate-specific rankings. This generally works well with rare exceptions, such as Williams College's preeminent Art History program, which doesn't appear in the NRC rankings because it's not a doctoral level program.</p>
<p>For the most part, however, undergrads at the top research universities will have access and exposure to the same faculty and resources that make many of their graduate programs so eminent, especially in the more advanced and major-related courses. This is one of the main features that attracts so many well-qualified undergrads to these schools.</p>
<p>knolwedgeforu wrote: "Tuck ranks number 2 by averaging the six major ranking for b-school."</p>
<p>Wait, WHAT?? Tuck is not even in contention. BW has them #11, Financial Times has #8, USNWR has #7. I don't know what the other three rankings are that you reference, but I doubt they go into negative integers, which would be needed to get Tuck up to #2 LOL Tuck is "the little engine that could" :)</p>
<p>edit -- wait a minute, maybe you're talking about Undergrad? If so, my above comment does not apply.</p>
<p>^ Tuck doesn't have an undergrad component.</p>
<p>
<p>These are not aiming at evaluating the qualities of Penn's undergrad programs.
See posts #22 and #23, above.</p>
<p>45 Percenter... then what rankings could knowledgeforu have been referencing... they must go #11, #8, #7, #-3, #-4, #-10.</p>
<p>Wharton is an inseparable part of Penn. To say you can go to Penn's College without benefitting from Wharton is as absurd as to say that you can go to Wharton without benefitting from The College. You couldn't disentangle the two if you tried.</p>
<p>The two schools at the heart of Penn give its students a superlative undergraduate experience, with a breadth in undergraduate studies that simply can't be matched by Stanford or any other school (let me know when undergrads are allowed to enroll in Stanford Law or Stanford GSB--the "G" stands for "Graduate," you know)</p>
<p>To be honest, ilovebagels, and I know we're obviously going to be biased, but I don't much care for business and don't want that to be tangled in with my undergraduate education. Why in the world would I want to do business, something which has little to nothing to do with my goals? And frankly, I'm turned off by such a "professionally" driven atmosphere. Stanford--as well as some other schools--gives me the breadth and depth of undergraduate study that suits my needs, as well as nearly all students (I'd say), just fine. Stanford has top-ten departments across the board; it excels in sciences, arts, humanities--you name it, it's there; it offers tons of leadership opportunities, internships, activities, facilities, faculty, research positions. More importantly, I don't see how business would somehow "enrich" one's education unless one's goals are heading in that direction anyway. Care to explain?</p>
<p>If you want to study business as an undergraduate, of course Wharton. Stanford doesn't even have an undergraduate program in business. I live in Philly, several of my friends' children are attending Wharton. It is a wonderful wonderful school, no doubt.</p>
<p>But for anything else, I would say Stanford.</p>
<p>In terms of MBA, Stanford is the hardest to get in, and on average, Stanford MBA graduates earn more after graduation. The ph.d programs of Stanford Business School is also unparallelly strong.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Care to explain?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Gladly, in brief (i've gone into depth in this on many a different post).</p>
<p>Basically in many fields, Wharton offers classes that are of immense benefit that DO add another perspective on the subject that is simply unavailable in "pure" liberal arts.</p>
<p>Psychology is enriched by marketing (even the Classical Studies on rhetoric can be enriched by good ol' MKTG--where else can you combine analysis of ethos and pathos with VALS target segmentation?)</p>
<p>About any social science field (from International Relations to Urban Studies) an be enriched with thought from Management, Business and Public Policy, Finance, Real Estate, etc.</p>
<p>And I don't even have to mention the natural synergies with a BA in theoretical economics and the abundance of Wharton's offerings in applied economics.</p>
<p>Obviously not every discipline can be equally enriched. Biochemists aren't going to get much out of Wharton--save for taking a class they might find interesting. Lord knows the MKTG-101 class is full of people from all 4 of Penn's undergraduate schools.</p>