<ol>
<li> Harvard University<br></li>
<li> Stanford University </li>
<li> Massachusetts Institute of Technology </li>
<li> Columbia University<br></li>
<li> Yale University </li>
<li> University of Michigan </li>
<li> University of Pennsylvania<br></li>
<li> University of Chicago </li>
<li> Cornell University </li>
<li>University of California, Berkeley </li>
<li>University of Texas at Austin </li>
<li>Northwestern University </li>
<li>Duke University </li>
<li>New York University </li>
<li>University of California, Los Angeles<br></li>
<li>Princeton University<br></li>
<li>Johns Hopkins University </li>
<li> University of Southern California </li>
<li>University of Virginia<br></li>
<li> ** Texas A&M University**<br></li>
<li>University of Notre Dame </li>
<li>Emory University </li>
<li>Washington University in St Louis </li>
<li>Rice University </li>
<li>Vanderbilt University </li>
</ol>
<p>My goal was to find the most well-rounded and influential universities given the following criteria. One point was given for possessing each criterion.</p>
<p>Well, a lot of the things you posted are dependent on size, so smaller colleges, even if they are better would have a harder chance meeting the criteria.</p>
<ol>
<li> Harvard University<br></li>
<li> Stanford University </li>
<li> Columbia University </li>
<li> Massachusetts Institute of Technology </li>
<li> Yale University
6 **University of Michigan **</li>
<li> University of Pennsylvania<br></li>
<li> University of Chicago </li>
<li> Cornell University </li>
<li>Duke University </li>
<li>University of California, Berkeley</li>
<li>University of Texas at Austin</li>
<li>Northwestern University </li>
<li>New York University </li>
<li>Johns Hopkins University </li>
<li>University of California, Los Angeles</li>
<li>Princeton University<br></li>
<li>Washington University in St Louis </li>
<li> University of Southern California </li>
<li>University of Virginia </li>
<li> Texas A&M University</li>
<li>University of Notre Dame </li>
<li>Emory University </li>
<li>Rice University </li>
<li>Vanderbilt University</li>
</ol>
<p>Very good analysis!!! This is better than the USNews rankings that only take into account arbitrary factors like retention rates and student-to-faculty ratios. This study actually takes into account departmental rankings. However, this ranking lacks individual academic subject areas like the hard sciences and liberal arts. This seems to just focus on professional school rankings.</p>
<p>Also, why were football and basketball statistics included.</p>
<p>I have noticed that the World Rankings seldom include Dartmouth as a top school, probably because it is rather small. Yet it is a coveted school among applicants. So rankings don’t always make sense. Similarly, few top liberal arts colleges would fit your criteria.</p>
<ul>
<li><p>I am sorry everyone. I forgot good ol’ Caltech. </p></li>
<li><p>I included top sports programs because that makes a well-rounded university. Football and to a lesser extent basketball it is critical for influence on the common man. UCLA is the #1 basketball program of all-time. That has a HUGE influence on average joe that does not care to know much about their academics. </p></li>
<li><p>In regards to small liberal arts colleges not being included. That was intentional. This is a list of universities not colleges. Although, Dartmouth was included, but did not score very high on the list. </p></li>
<li><p>I did debate on removing the extra point for being #1 in one of the fields, but being #1, again, is a major influence factor - so I kept it. But even if I did remove it, it wouldn’t make much of a difference. </p></li>
</ul>
<p>I wanted to keep this list unbiased as possible. For example, if I removed criterion #11, I would have put USC (my alma mater) and UCLA (USC’s rival) as equals, but UCLA is the #1 basketball program of all-time, and as mentioned before that has major influence. USC is #2 in football, which is still highly influential, but not as much as being #1 in something.</p>
<ul>
<li><p>These rankings consist of everything that makes a great university. #1 Top Graduate and Research; #2 Award winning faculty and alumni; #3 Excellent Undergraduate programs; #4 prestigious accreditation; #5 Sports to connect the world; #7-#9 and #12 top professional programs to influence the labor force; #10 Money for growth and stability.</p></li>
<li><p>I did not include the Arts and Sciences, because I feel #1, #2, and #3 would reflect strong art and sciences universities on the top - which it does. </p></li>
</ul>
<p>And finally, the final list:</p>
<ol>
<li> Harvard University </li>
<li> Stanford University </li>
<li> Columbia University </li>
<li> Massachusetts Institute of Technology </li>
<li> Yale University
6 University of Michigan </li>
<li> University of Pennsylvania </li>
<li> University of Chicago </li>
<li> Cornell University </li>
<li>Duke University </li>
<li>University of California, Berkeley</li>
<li> California Institute of Technology </li>
<li>University of Texas at Austin</li>
<li>Northwestern University </li>
<li>New York University </li>
<li>Johns Hopkins University </li>
<li>University of California, Los Angeles</li>
<li>Princeton University </li>
<li>Washington University in St Louis </li>
<li> University of Southern California </li>
<li>University of Virginia </li>
<li> Texas A&M University</li>
<li>University of Notre Dame </li>
<li>Emory University </li>
<li>Rice University</li>
</ol>
<p>In fact it is nearly the same set of schools as the US News T25 but with an extra thumb on the scale for state universities. It adds factors that are not relevant to academic quality (sports) and removes some that really are (class size, retention). That’s fine if you don’t care whether your intro classes are 300-student lectures or if 20% of your classmates fail to graduate, as long as you get a winning b-ball team. Not that schools like Texas don’t give you good academics, too.</p>
<p>The OP’s approach has a certain logic if you want to measure the influence of an entire university (including professional schools and a couple of sports programs). The Washington Monthly rankings try to measure influence, too, but based more on social impact than popular appeal. That’s the problem with trying to measure “well-rounded and influential”. It’s at least as arbitrary as the typical academic metrics. </p>
<p>The usual focus of this forum is on choosing a college (an undergraduate program). If you believe at all in rankings to support that goal, I think it makes sense to try to focus only on what matters most for undergraduate academic quality. The sports scene, the Greek scene, weather, the number of graduates in the Peace Corps, etc., etc., should be considered separately if you think they matter to personal “fit”.</p>