<p>yeah no one really answered that question yet. What do you guys mean by manipulating? outright dishonesty? im guessing its more sneaky than that.</p>
<p>and this is going to sound stupid</p>
<p>"Academically, they are roughly balanced. Penn is slightly stronger in social sciences, Columbia is slightly stronger in humanities."</p>
<p>What's the difference between those? which one is history?</p>
<p>History goes in the "roughly balanced" section as both departments have their fair share of past and present luminaries. It would probably depend in no small part what area of history you wanted to study.</p>
<p>As for accusations of "manipulation," I too would love to hear what Penn did in particular. Work to increase applications? Every school has done that. The only truly shady thing that I know of is Columbia's refusal to count SEAS stats with CC's in their compilation of information while Penn counts all four undergraduate schools.</p>
<p>^The separation of SEAS and CC has nothing to do with USNews.</p>
<p>And JohnnyK, since you asked...
Here's one of the ways Penn and Duke have inflated their rankings over the last few years:
When USNews made the change from count "Average Class Size" to "% of Classes Under 20/Over 50," Penn and Duke both took notice and have manipulated their class sizes to boost themselves, without ever changing their average.</p>
<p>As you can see, Penn has raised it's % of classes under 20 stat by 5%, while most schools, besides Duke and Princeton, have remained relatively constant.</p>
<p>Penn and Duke are also among the few schools that have decreased their percentage of classes over 50.</p>
<p>In general, looking at the rankings over the years, we can see how little they really mean. Schools jump all over the place: Caltech moved from 9th to 1st in one year, Penn has been everywhere from 4th to 13th.
The only relative constant is that, with the exception of one year, HYP have always been the top 3.</p>
<p>I will repeat what i said in the nearly identical thread...</p>
<p>Penn and Duke reduce class sizes, which arguably improves undergraduate education, and this still counts as manipulation?</p>
<p>The undergrads of Columbia and other schools would be lucky to have such "manipulation" wrought upon them...</p>
<p>"ok and i read in the Columbia FinAid package that my finaid wont change much over the next 4 years. How true is this?"</p>
<p>I don't know about Columbia's financial aid, but I know about Penn from my friend who goes there that they give you favorable financial aid the 1st year to attract you there, and as the years progress they give you less and less aid.</p>
<p>My Penn FinAid has been consistent. It is difficult to make sweeping generalizations on the process, but if we go by the numbers....</p>
<p>This year Penn will spend $90 million on undergraduate FinAid (an increase of $7 million over last year). Penn has an undergraduate student body of ~9700.</p>
<p>Columbia has ~6800 undergrads (<em>cough</em> lower acceptance rate <em>cough</em>). This about 70% of the size of Penn's student body. Therefore, if Columbia spends more than 70% of the money Penn does (which at $90 million would mean a budget of more than $63 million for CU), then they spend more on undergraduate financial aid.</p>
<p>According to the Columbia Spectator, Columbia's FinAid budget is $58.5 million.</p>
<p>Therefore, Penn spends more per student on FinAid.</p>
<p>Columbia has about 5300 undergraduate students (CC/SEAS)</p>
<p>Wikipedia (that fountain of truthiness) says 6,819. (justification given here <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Columbia_University#Undergraduate_Population%5B/url%5D">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Columbia_University#Undergraduate_Population</a>)</p>
<p>This says that CC (as of 2005) has 4,224 and SEAS has another 1,431 which would put it at 5600ish.</p>
<p>It would appear CU awards FinAid to CGS students (<a href="http://www.gs.columbia.edu/index_finaid.htm%5B/url%5D">http://www.gs.columbia.edu/index_finaid.htm</a>) which would bring the total up to 7,255</p>
<p>Numbers are scary.</p>
<p>Yes about 5600 CC/SEAS students. GS should not be counted as undergrads. Harvard Extension and UPenn GS students are not normally included when counting undergrad population. Harvard undergrad population can be as big as 20,000 if Extension Undergrad degree candidates are included.</p>
<p>Columbia University Faculty have won many Nobel prizes in the last 10 years, e. g. Horst Stormer (Physics) Richard Axel (Medicine), Edmund Phelps (Economics), Joseph Stiglitz (economics-although he just came to Columbia), Orhan Pamuk (literature-new Faculty addition in SIPA), Eric Kandel (Medicine), William Vickrey (Economics-awarded 1996 now deceased), RObert Merton (SEAS grade-Economics 1997/I know this is not fair, but it's a recent one), RObert Mundell (Economics-1999), Richard Hamilton (foundation for Poincare Proof-over 40, but would have received Fields Medal otherwise with Pearlman), wow....Columbia University is def slipping...lol. What is wrong with playing of the fact that Columbia is located in NYC (the greatest city by an objective measure in the US and maybe, just maybe the world)? Part of the college experience is gaining real-world (read internship) knowledge while in college to apply to various fields. While it is true any IVY will allow one to be competitive for a Wall-Street position, most other industries require work experience prior to the entry level job, e.g. Journalism, TV, Marketing, Fashion, etc. Perhaps all students want to go to Wall Street? Also, the Columbia area has improved (due to gentrification) by leaps and bounds. The endowment investment returns have finally started growing competitive to Columbia's peer schools, e.g. 18% last year. Renovations to labs and facilities throughout campus etc...I am tired of writing, but I await your response ;)</p>
<p>
[quote]
Penn and Duke reduce class sizes, which arguably improves undergraduate education, and this still counts as manipulation?</p>
<p>The undergrads of Columbia and other schools would be lucky to have such "manipulation" wrought upon them...
[/quote]
they're not explaining it well, JohnnyK.</p>
<p>What is reported to USNWR is the Student/Teacher ratio. What is deceptive, at some schools, is who they count as "Teachers". In some extreme cases, administrative staff have been used to pad the teacher count in order to make the school look more attractive and seminar-like, when reality was starkly different.</p>
<p>I don't know the extent to which Penn does this, but their name has been tossed around as one such manipulator.</p>
<hr>
<p>That said, I think all of the squabbling over rankings, especially USNWR, is retarded. This thread should be about what makes Columbia great, not why Columbia deserves a higher ranking than Penn.</p>
<p>Could everyone please just agree to stop taking JohnnyK's bait, and start talking about why you love your school? Hausdorff made an OK start at it.</p>
<p>well said...</p>
<p>One this is for sure
If i go to UPenn, im sure as hell gonna meet Johnny.</p>
<p>Is there a difference in the level of prestige between the schools? Why are they similarly ranked but Penn has an almost 20% acceptance rate and Columbia has one around 8.6%.
One would assume Columbias ranking would be higher than Penn, Dartmouth and Duke whose admit rates are almost double. Does anyone think Columbia will move up in the rankings next year?</p>
<p>Your admission stats are flawed:</p>
<p>For the 2007 entering class, Penn admitted 15.9% of its applicants for a class of ~2500 students. Columbia admitted 10.4% of its class for a class of ~1500. </p>
<p>Columbia is VERY aggressive in (what many believe as misrepresentative) reporting of its stats. The 8.6% you quote is really 8.9% and only applies to the Lib Arts program. Including its Engineering school, the rate averages to 10.4% (still quite impressive, so it surprises me that CU so overtly tries to emphasize the smaller number). The have a huge inferiority complex and spend alotof time "chasing" HYP's numbers.</p>
<p>For the record, Penn's 2007 admit ratios within its units are roughly (estimated using last year's data): Wharton = ~8-10%, CAS = ~10-12%; Engineering = ~18-22%; Nursing = ~20-24%. Penn, like most schools, reports one number for it's entire entering class. It is -after all - one university lol</p>
<p>As to why Penn, Duke, et al rank above CU despite higher admission rates is simple. It's not all about having small class sizes and low rates. Check the (admittedly prestige driven) USNews formula.</p>
<p>I am going on the admission statistics that were posted in the New York times two days ago.</p>
<p>"For the record, Penn's 2007 admit ratios within its units are roughly (estimated using last year's data): Wharton = ~8-10%, CAS = ~10-12%; Engineering = ~18-22%; Nursing = ~20-24%. Penn, like most schools, reports one number for it's entire entering class. It is -after all - one university lol"</p>
<p>Can you post a link to this? I would have imagined that CAS should be around 13-15%.</p>
<p>
[quote]
One this is for sure
If i go to UPenn, im sure as hell gonna meet Johnny
[/quote]
</p>
<p>That Hansel is SO hot right now..</p>