The most prestigious schools to the sight of top professionals schools:

Graduate School
241

<p>Pizzagirl, I am not going to debate this issue with you here and now, but I disagree with you on many levels, particularly about strength of student body, resources and class size. </p>

<p>What I will say is that those largely exaggerated (often mythically so) qualities do not make schools like Cal or Michigan any less brilliant. No university can appeal to all, and I would not mind if posters restricted their criticism to questions of fit. What I mind is when they equate poor fit with institutional quality.</p>

242

<p>Good enough, warblersrule…I think.</p>

<p>But I can’t comment on reponses or retorts to quotes or posts of mine that don’t exist. My originating thoughts are… poof…gone or never existed. ;)</p>

243

<p>

</p>

<p>It is best to be surrounded by as many motivated people with common goals and interests. It is also great to be surrounded by many people with different ambitions. The few top-caliber publics win in both of these regards.</p>

<p>You mentioned “what matters for a given individual is whether the college helps him do what he wants to do”. I would argue that much of our progress and learning is actually driven by our peers.</p>

<p>Who cares about the “averages”. What should matter are the amount of top-calibre students you will be able to associate with as you navigate through the school and form groups of friends, in addition to joining great clubs. What is also important is variety / the diversity of the student body, in addition to the quality of top-calibre faculty that you will have access to (including even graduate schools).</p>

<p>Unfortunately, US News has given everyone the idea that numeric averages matter more than raw measures of the playing ground you will have access to, as an (I assume) ambitious go-getter.</p>

<p>Listing all these numbers, without correcting for size, is definitely an important measure. You can see how many “top-quality”, like-minded kids you will be able to meet and compete with. Averages mean less in the self-selecting real world.</p>

<p>In other words, if at Cal or Michigan, I want to start a finance club which attracts the best kids on campus, that club will potentially be able to populate with more top-students than at other higher-ranked schools.</p>

<p>There are obviously the classic downsides such as crowding, but that’s really only significant in lower-division classes, where even Harvard and Yale deal with the huge lecture halls. I often go to office hours, which are rarely crowded. You can definitely get to know your professors without the “insane effort” everyone warned me about.</p>

<p>I am saying these things, because the “warnings” of Cal I was given are completely untrue. I was honestly worried, but the arguments were completely unfounded and it gives me anguish to know that kids are probably making shifty decisions because of poor information. Please accept my humble, honest views of a school I actually attend. Many of my friends attend HYP, and we have incredibly similar opportunities, though theirs are definitely superior.</p>

<p>However I honestly believe that at Cal I have more opportunities than my friends have at WashU or Emory. I just have to walk to my professors office, or do some more research on the best professors / courses / clubs /activities etc. Big deal… At least some of the best is here at my disposal, including tons of HYP-level kids, and yes the superb graduate faculty, students and courses which are all superimposed on the campus as well.</p>

<p>My point lies in the realization that “averages” mean less once you’re navigating through ECs (especially those which are selective), and that we should consider self-selection potential.</p>

<p>The numbers listed in this thread only confirm my opinion that many of my peers will go on to incredible professional and graduate programs. Let’s not get caught up on the “tail-end” by bringing up (wait for it…) averages.</p>

244

<p>I’m also a big fan of LACs and small schools in general. Kids should decide based on fit, as Alexandre said. “I like Brown over Cal because of the atmosphere” etc is perfectly great, but they should not choose based on unfounded “warnings” and mis-represented data. “I choose Brown over Cal because it has a higher-quality student body” is an unfortunately misguided decision.</p>

<p>I believe in raw numbers, in addition to averages, because I consider self-selection. This factor is especially dramatic with the top big-publics, for which I think US News should adjust their methodology, if they are to give a more fair ranking to curious students, who may then make a decision based solely on personal fit.</p>

<p>I believe, strongly and honestly, in these arguments, and hope that anyone who agrees will spread the word.</p>

245

<p>“So now what were you saying again about “not knowing what it’s like at top schools”? Nice try.”</p>

<p>My bad, Pizzagirl. I always found my peer’s opinions in college to be extremely valuable, and considered access to my peers to be one of the most valuable resources my college offered. However, the there is a need to draw the line in order to determine “the most prestigious schools to the sight of top professionals schools.” When Vanderbilt Law, etc. are included, of course there are going to be fewer undergrads from HYPSM, etc. and more undergrads from UGA, Florida, etc. It doesn’t mean that UGA, Florida, etc. are more prestigious in the eyes of “top” professional schools. My basic point is, there can be no talk on what are “the most prestigious schools to the sight of top professionals schools” without defining “top.”</p>

246

<p>bookmarked.</p>

247

<p>“Pizzagirl, I cannot speak for others, but I personally do not get upset when Cal or Michigan are not uttered in the same breath as HYPSM. I do, however, get upset when Cal and Michigan are not given the due respect. Some posters on CC are so ignorant that they don’t even utter the top public universities in the same breath as othe top 20 universities.”</p>

<p>Well, this forum should offer plenty of just desserts to the top public universities. As shared in a thread years ago, it is easy to rank Cal in the top ten universities in the wordl, if not among the top 5. I also shared that Michigan should be among the top 20, and probably in the top 15. The difference, and most the rancor of some is that relies almost entirely on the strength of the graduate department and graduate student body. This also means that people and rightly so do not consider Cal and Michigan a top 20 destination for … Undergraduates. </p>

<p>And that is what infuriates the ignorants (to follow the words uttered above) who cannot accept that the rankings of Usnews are appropriate, or actually efectivein raising the rankings of state schools with crutches such as a moronic Peer assessment.</p>

<p>But again, none of that should not happen in this forum. This is a perfect place to convince aspiring grad students withiut interference of people who understand the diferences between UG and graduate excellence…</p>

248

<p>The question then becomes, xiggi, how does one disassociate grad reputation for undergrads trying to find a “destination”? Is it even possible, or important?</p>

<p>With the exceptions of most LACs, all Unis have grad programs. Thus, do you have any suggestions on how to separate say, Stanford’s grad reputation, from its undergrad? Or, Northwestern? Or, HYP?</p>

249

<p>Pizzagirl,</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>I’m actually from Chicago and spend a lot of time there (though immediate family is in California) - and as far as I know, Vanderbilt isn’t any more on people’s minds as Berkeley is. People know NU, Chicago, Urbana-Champagne, UIC, Loyola, Notre Dame. But not some school in the south.</p>

<p>Again, I’d say the familiarity that people have with Vanderbilt is from the usage of the name “Vanderbilt” in various other contexts. It’s the same reason that some people will refer to CMU as “Carnegie Mellon” or sometimes just “Carnegie” - because people already attach a level of prestige with that name from familiarity in other contexts.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>My challenge to you is to explain how prestige differs. If we’re talking prestige in academia, then I could see some differences from your explanation above; but when you talk about layman’s prestige, what you describe is the definition of prestige.</p>

<p>I’m not saying that this prestige matters at all, but it seems you’re splitting hairs where hairs can’t be split.</p>

<p>lesdia,</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>I’m not here to defend Berkeley - plenty of others are doing a bang-up job of that - but when misleading facts are presented, I feel the need to speak. Sure, Berkeley has a marginally smaller endowment, but it also gets state funding, which in endowment terms adds a few billion (if it gets, say, $300 million, then that’s an endowment equivalent of $6 billion). Berkeley also raises a significant larger amount of alumni donations than Vanderbilt.</p>

<p>Again, I’m not saying that this makes either one superior, but to state such numbers without context and then to follow with the conclusion “Vandy might have a slight edge over UCB for undergrad.” (I don’t know how those two facts are related here even if the numbers weren’t misleading.)</p>

250

<p>Good points phantasmagoric. I would add that Cal has no medical school and Vanderbilt does. Medical schools have a way of sucking up much of a university’s endowment.</p>

251

<p>

</p>

<p>I will not define it. Instead, I will list it down.</p>

<p>Business:
Harvard, Stanford, Wharton (Top 3)</p>

<h2>Kellogg, Chicago, MIT-Sloan</h2>

<p>Haas, Tuck, Columbia (in no order)
Ross, Fuqua, Yale, Stern, Darden, Johnson, Anderson (in no order)</p>

<p>Law:
Yale, Harvard, Stanford (Top 3)</p>

<h2>Columbia, NYU, Chicago</h2>

<p>Michigan, Berkeley, Penn, Northwestern, Virginia
Duke, Cornell, Georgetown</p>

<p>Medicine
Harvard, JHU (Top 2)
Yale, Duke, UCSF, UCLA, Penn, Michigan, Stanford, WashingtonUSL, Columbia, Washington, Chicago</p>

<p>Engineering:
MIT, Stanford, Berkeley, Caltech (Top 4)
Princeton, Cornell, Michigan, CMU</p>

252

<p>

</p>

<p>But, xiggi. No one here is claiming Cal undergrad is equal to HYPSM undergrad. I did not say that nor imply such notion or idea either. What I am saying is, there is a gap between HYPSM and the next group of schools below HYPSM. And that next group of schools comprised of several schools which include Berkeley, Michigan, UCLA and UVa. You do not agree with me because your definition of elite is different from mine. But my definition is always congruent with those of the top scholars, professors and top employers. </p>

<p>

Well, a lot of people would not consider Rice, Emory, Vanderbilt or Notre Dame as a top 20 school for undergrads too. Different students have different list of top 20 schools. For example, CMU is a top 20 school for me and Emory is not. USNews says otherwise. But USNews does not dictate what those top 20 schools are. Whenever there’s a datum (or any compilation of some sort) that exists, Cal, Michigan, UCLA and UVa always emerge in the top 20.</p>

253

<p>RML, I do not see a difference between group three (which includes Haas) and group four (which includes Stern) in your MBA tiering. </p>

<p>Also, Michigan Law is generally lumped together with Chicago and NYU.</p>

<p>Finally, in your Engineering tiering, I would including GT and UIUC in your second group of Engineering programs.</p>

254

<p>Thanks for your post, Alexandre. I, too, don’t see any difference either. I grouped them that way because I know a lot of people would violently react if I would lump them together as you suggested. To be honest, I personally would not mind going to Ross instead of Haas or Columbia instead of Stern. They seem to belong to the same tier for me and all those schools offer almost identical opportunities after graduation. But to follow the direction of where IvyPBear is going, it’s either people would just pick those very top schools, HSW, for instance, or all those business schools in my list, top 16, or 17 if you will include UT-Austin McCombs.</p>

255

<p>Wow! I just realized Stanford and Harvard are “KING” when it comes to professional education. They both have been mentioned 3 times in 4 departments. Stanford’s other department (medicine) was mentioned in 2nd tier though whilst Harvard’s (engineering) was nonexistent in the elite group. </p>

<p>Apart from the two, the following schools have been mentioned at least once in the super elite group:</p>

<p>Berkeley - once (engineering)
Caltech - once (engineering)
John Hopkins - one (medicine)
MIT - once (engineering)
Penn - once (business)
Yale - once (law)</p>

<p>Just an observation.</p>

256

<p>“and as far as I know, Vanderbilt isn’t any more on people’s minds as Berkeley is.”</p>

<p>And, isn’t that the point, Phantasm? It is just as far as YOU know! Here you have a mother of twins who are bound to college THIS year after an extensive and comprehensive search and who LIVES in Chicago telling you what she KNOWS. Could it be that her kids attended schools that prepared children for a different college career. </p>

<p>However, setting aside Chicago, allow me to provide an additional viewpoint, and one that is EASILY backed up by data (college matriculation.) In Dallas, Texas, parents who send their children to the best private schools or make sure to move into the one of the local Shangri-Las would only consider sending their kids to Cal as a measure of ABSOLUTE last resort. There is NO doubt that people in Texas would prefer to send their children to one of the local flagships such as UT or TAMU or even to Tulane well before they would think about spending OOS money for Cal or UCLA or UCSD. This is what regional attractiveness does to people! </p>

<p>On the other hand, schools such as Northwestern, Vanderbilt, Rice, Emory, or Georgetown would be considered a VERY small step below Duke and Penn, the perennial favorites for people who are JUST outside the HYPSM range of admissions. Right or wrong, OOS PUBLIC schools are simply not attractive unless they would come at a bargain price. And again, this is for undergraduate purposes only and does not involve the same schools for graduate studies. </p>

<p>Fwiw, this is not a speculative opinion that is formed from thousands of miles away or from the other side of the world. This is a matter of FACT based on the matriculation of the schools I named in Dallas, Texas and based on several dozens of students from families I know. </p>

<p>To settle the issue in the fairest way … why don’t you post links to schools from Chicago that support your position, and I will match yours on a one-to-one basis.</p>

257

<p>"But, xiggi. No one here is claiming Cal undergrad is equal to HYPSM undergrad. I did not say that nor imply such notion or idea either. What I am saying is, there is a gap between HYPSM and the next group of schools below HYPSM. And that next group of schools comprised of several schools which include Berkeley, Michigan, UCLA and UVa. "</p>

<p>Your first statement is correct; the second is not. </p>

<p>There are at least two more groups between HYPSM and the schools you listed. At the national university level, there are the remaining Ivy League schools, Columbia, Duke, and Chicago. Then you have a substantial group of private school … well before the best public universities.</p>

258

<p>"With the exceptions of most LACs, all Unis have grad programs. Thus, do you have any suggestions on how to separate say, Stanford’s grad reputation, from its undergrad? Or, Northwestern? Or, HYP? "</p>

<p>Oh, that is easy … look at the number of OOS students and look at the transfer numbers from community colleges. </p>

<p>Seriously!</p>

259

<p>xiggi, I agree with what you said. I also think Cal isn’t that attractive to a lot of OOS kids and parents alike, unless they’re Cal alumni. But attractiveness is very different from prestige.</p>

260

<p>Both are matters of individual perception. Nobody claims that this is fair, correct, or justifiable.</p>

<p>Look at the yield numbers for Nebraska or BYU. People who apply there AND accept the invitation to attend do it because of a matter of preference. In their eyes, the schools are attractive and prestigious.</p>