<p>Now you use Columbia, not your beloved Brown? I know why: the former is always ranked higher than Northwestern while the latter has been ranked lower most of the time. The former has highly ranked graduate programs with many Nobel winners while the latter has mediocre graduate program and most of them are ranked <em>lower</em> than Northwestern's. The former has higher PA score while the latter has the same PA score as Northwestern. Even I'd agree that Columbia is slightly better. But Brown? not really (THEY ARE ON PAR)! </p>
<p>Are you going to use Harvard next time to make a slam dunk? It's kinda nice you have 8 to choose and you can pick and choose on different occasions. 8 on 1. Can you play fair next time? :rolleyes:</p>
The 8 ivy's were all marooned on a desert island. Harvard appointed himself the president for life and set out to get everyone else to bow to him. Columbia started a newspaper for the residents of the island. Yale set up a stage and put on a show every night. Dartmouth distilled the juice from the island fruits and set up a bar. Princeton set up an exclusive eating club and invited the others to apply for membership, but had no food. Penn tried to get the others to trade between themselves and skim off a commission for himself. Cornell planted a garden to grow food while he was building a boat so they could all get off the Island.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>You forgot the punchline!</p>
<p>...</p>
<p>Cornell's garden yielded bountiful food and soon the Big Red Boat was ready to set sail with ample provisions. As they all climbed onto the boat, Dartmouth looked around the island one last time and belched, saying, "Funny how we haven't missed Brown at all."</p>
<p>ok well, that doesn't really say anything about the reputation and perceived prestige of the schools though. "which sounds better" sounds more like a reputation deal, not how many students were hired by firms. I personally could care less about which one has a better rep, though I would choose Columbia given the choice.</p>
<p>I agree Northwestern is unrelated to this thread. But nobody would have talked about it if Bescraze didn't bring up the non-Ivies out of nowhere and pave the way for Northwestern/Chicago/WashU bashing. This guy just has the ability to do that even in a totally unrelated thread.</p>
<p>The stereotype of the Ivy schools is that they are better than all other schools. This categorization of the Ivy League schools invites comparisons by necessity. Two objective factors that make-up a university's quality are SAT scores of the studentbody & endowment funds. When measured by those standards, then half the Ivies are clearly surpassed by a number of schools. CalTech & Harvey Mudd beat all the Ivies in terms of quality of the studentbody when measured by standardized test scores.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Two objective factors that make-up a university's quality are SAT scores of the student body & endowment funds.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>But we know that those two factors do a disservice to the environment that a school may provide. Some schools have different sources of funding than others. For instance, if Cornell's funding from the state of New York was considered to be an endowment, it would equate to an extra $3.5 billion in endowment. And SAT scores are well known to be biased in favor of students from high-income families. On top of that, they often do not capture the particular academic strengths of certain types of students.</p>
<p>I agree that it is difficult to compare publics ,or, in this case, a quasi-public with privates. Both Cornell & Berkeley, for example, belong at or near the top of any list comprised of the best universities in the world. And this applies to both measures as public schools have a somewhat different mission in the respect of mandates regarding admitting & educating state residents which somewhat restricts the applicant pool with respect to standardized test scores when mandates geographically restrict the applicant pool for a certain percentage of slots.</p>
<p>Sam lee you truly are delusional. How do I love Brown? I do love Columbia, but rather I recognize Brown as a great , which you because of some weird insecurity complex fail to do.
[quote]
agree Northwestern is unrelated to this thread. But nobody would have talked about it if Bescraze didn't bring up the non-Ivies out of nowhere and pave the way for Northwestern/Chicago/WashU bashing.
[/quote]
O and fyi I never bashed those schools. My best friend goes to Wash U and I think it, like those other 2 schools are fantastic. They are in the top 15 top schools in this country undoubtedly, but that does not mean I think they are as good as most of the Ivy league. Being realistic is not bashing a school. You deal way too much in absolutes.
[quote]
Two objective factors that make-up a university's quality are SAT scores of the studentbody & endowment funds.
[/quote]
Wow what a limited way in evaluating a school. Endowment funds are obviously very important, but SATs in a certain range are so limited. I would much rather take acceptance rates, since they show to what extent a school can really search for the best all around applicant.
In conclusion:
[quote]
even I'd agree that Columbia is slightly better.
[/quote]
[quote]
That's not true. I've lived in the Midwest and Columbia is still better there.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>One one last note. A question for you cayuga, is that state funding for all of Cornell are only for certain schools, such as agriculture and labor relations?</p>
<p>If objective measures such as endowment funds & SAT scores don't work for you, then lets consider the number of national Merit Scholars at each school. The top three are Harvard, Texas & Northwestern. A minor concern regarding acceptance rates is that larger schools realistically have to accept more students to fill each class. That is one reason that schools like Cornell & Northwestern have a higher acceptance rate--not the only reason--but, somewhat incredibly in NU's case-- maintain a higher SAT score of both accepted & matriculated students than some of the Ivies.</p>
<h1>of undergraduate students:</h1>
<p>Harvard 6,641
Yale 5,289
Princeton 4,485
Columbia 6,450
Dartmouth 4,109
Brown 5,790
Stanford 6,523
Northwestern 8,111
Cornell 13,510
Georgetown 6,789
MIT 4,119</p>
<p>I already said endowment is a good one. My only point for Sats when we are talking about scores of 1400+/2100+ that are like 20 points different it is irrelevant. National Merit Scholars are similar to SATs and are really irrelevant...I mean really.</p>
<p>Acceptance rates do matter the most, because if a school is larger and needs to accept more kids and has a lower rate, well then the quality of the students inevitably suffer. Trust me most Ivies can have extraordinarily high SAT scores if thats all they want, but a lot more goes into finding a good student that a standardized test score. </p>
<p>Anyway: NU facts: The middle 50 percent of test scores for entering students ranges from 30 to 34 on the ACT; on the SAT Reasoning Test, the critical reading range was 670 to 750 and the math from 680 to 770. The most reliable predictor of success at Northwestern is a strong academic performance at the secondary school level. The mean high school class rank of enrolled freshmen has been at the 94th percentile. from Frequently</a> asked questions, Freshman, Office of Undergraduate Admission - Northwestern University</p>
<p>For Columbia: mitted Student Statistics</p>
<pre><code>* Of schools that provided us with a class rank, approximately 93% of accepted students were in the top 10% of their graduating class; 98% were in the top 20% of their class.
* The middle 50% of admitted students scored between a 1400 and a 1540 on the Math and Critical Reading sections of the SAT.
* The middle 50% of admitted students scored between a 2090 and a 2300 on the Math, Critical Reading and Writing sections of the SAT.
* The middle 50% of admitted students scored between a 31 and a 35 on the ACT.
</code></pre>
<p>For the record I do think its pretty much irrelevant, but Columbia's are still higher and it has what a much lower acceptance rate It is 10.6% compared to NU accepted 25.3 percent of applicants (higher than last year)... Acceptances</a> up for 2012 - Campus</p>
<p>
[quote]
A question for you cayuga, is that state funding for all of Cornell are only for certain schools, such as agriculture and labor relations?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Yes and no. </p>
<p>Cornell runs four colleges through a contract with New York State -- Human Ecology, Industrial and Labor Relations, Agriculture and Life Sciences, and the Veterinary School. Combined, these schools receive over $150 MM a year in direct state support, yet they are considered to be private colleges in that the trustees of the University have ultimate say over their educational arrangement, not the State.</p>
<p>But Cornell also receives a lot of funding from the state for various other projects on campus, mostly reflecting different types of capital outlay. For instance, New York State chipped in $25 million for the new life sciences building that was just built, and $10 million to renovate classroom space and a large lecture hall/performing space. This type of funding really isn't just targeted to the 'contract' colleges, but rather to the University as a whole.</p>
<p>Bescraze: Congratulations! Finally! Although this does not disprove your claim that certain schools are never better than the Ivies. Essentially, the Ivy League is one of the most valuable brand names in the world. For years, Mercedes Benz cars were one of the least reliable brands according to Consumers Reports tests, yet they still sold & still carried high price tags. Students & the public swallow the Ivy brand hook, line & sinker without ever really checking under the hood.</p>
<p>Bescraze -- Not to get into this debate (I think you know where I feel on this) but you realize you are comparing admitted students to entering students right? And that acceptance rates are just about the most meaningless statistic of them all?</p>
<p>I wasn't able to find NU's 2012 data. I went on their website and what they had is what I got...not my fault NU felt the need not to be current.
[quote]
And that acceptance rates are just about the most meaningless statistic of them all?
[/quote]
That is just not true. It is probably one of the largest indicators of student quality, since it shows a universities ability to pick the best of the best. If you can back that statement up for large universities such as these (not niche schools like curtis) I would love to hear it</p>