<p>
[quote]
All your stupid universities in the U.S are specialised in a certain field
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Well here's someone who doesn't have a clue!</p>
<p>undsiputable top 6 universities...after that list eveyone is just going to start putting schools of their own preference lol =D
1.Harvard
2.Princeton
3.Yale
4.Stanford
5.MIT
6.Caltech</p>
<p>The top 4, yes...The MIT and Cal Tech are more difficult, sort of like that young cousin in the family you see at reunions and you know he's smart because when he gets in trouble it's for taking apart the TV, but you're not sure you want to sit next to him at the Thanksgiving table...sort of...and the yield on the Chicago is the home run answer because that is the dirty little unspoken secret...higher yield = higher desireability, Harvard always ahead of Princeton and Yale...but it doesn t sell as well as expected graduation rate+ avg. SATs + top 10% of HS... so it's the lost stepchild.</p>
<p>If we go by yield rate, then there are 138 schools that are better than even harvard, including Bob Jones U and probably a lot of Community Colleges (this is according to the revealed preference ranking). Caltech would be 854th, yale 309th, etc.</p>
<p>And if we go by SATs, Deep Springs would be in the top 10 and the students of Simon's Rock College would all be stupid.
The graduation rate doesn't take the number of athletes who go pro into account, or the percentage of low income students, or if a business major drops out because he "failed" or because he can successfully start and run his own business without finishing his degree.
And forget about acceptance rates. We all know that schools have self-selecting student bodies, don't we ^^
And the class rank... come on, a top 10% class rank in a messy public school in NY is not the same as top 10% in a New England prep school.
You think those are better indicators of the quality of a school?</p>
<p>The yield rate demonstrates the desireability of a school; there are many schools similar to Chicago, but Bob Jones or Berea are fairly unique. Even community colleges have a special target student body. Besides, acceptance rate and yield rate are so closely interrelated (as demonstrated above) that either both of them or none should factor into rankings.</p>
<ol>
<li>Harvard</li>
<li>Yale</li>
<li>Princeton</li>
<li>Dartmouth <-- (Probably higher, but peeps argue when HYP is not 123)</li>
<li>Stamford</li>
<li>MIT</li>
<li>Columbia</li>
<li>Amherst</li>
<li>Brown</li>
<li>UPenn</li>
</ol>
<p>Harvard
Yale
Princeton
Stanford
MIT
CalTech
Dartmouth
Duke
Columbia
Brown</p>
<p>I don't think NE prep schools have class rank in most cases anymore precisely for the reason you cite. Even if Harvard is generally viewed as better than Princeton or Dartmouth that doesn't change the fact that I would much rather be at either of the latter two. I think people lose sight of these personal fit/enjoyment type of considerations. What is Harvard really going to get you that these other two can't?</p>
<p>Yes, I wish athletes could somehow be removed from the equation. For example, at Wake we are the 3rd smallest D-1 school, and we are in the best athletic conference (unlike the first two smallest school). Needless to say, we have 10% of our student body on athletic scholarship. This surely will pull down our statistics.</p>
<p>Smartest students:
Harvard
Princeton
Yale
Stanford
MIT
Cal Tech
Columbia
Duke
Dartmouth
Penn</p>
<p>No state school has any legitimate claim on having a top 10 student body.</p>
<p>willmingtonwave, out of curiosity, what two schools are you counting smaller than wake? Rice and Tulsa? Cuz if you count Div IAA there are many more.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.brookings.edu/views/articles/20040902easterbrook.htm%5B/url%5D">http://www.brookings.edu/views/articles/20040902easterbrook.htm</a>
get a life O.o</p>
<p>So, non-ivies are less sexy than ivies, according to this article?</p>