Top 25 Undergraduate Universities

<p>I have received a pm request for the numbers behind the USNWR Classroom Teaching Survey and thought it might be best to share them with the full forum. </p>

<p>This survey was done in the mid-90s and it is possible that it may not be representative of what is actually taking place today. Still, I think that the results may speak to a campus's academic culture and the importance of teaching excellence. As a prospective student, I would consider these rankings in combination with the Faculty Resources rankings provided by USNWR as these will provide good clues about what type of classroom experience an undergraduate is likely to encounter. </p>

<p>USNWR did separate rankings for national universities and for LACs. Here are both:</p>

<pre><code>NATIONAL UNIVERSITIES
</code></pre>

<p>1 Dartmouth
2 Brown
3 W&M
4 Rice
5 Princeton
6 Stanford
7 Duke
8 Miami U (OH)
9 Notre Dame
10 Yale
11 U Virginia
12 U Chicago
13 Emory
13 UC Santa Cruz
15 Vanderbilt
16 Boston College
17 Harvard
18 Northwestern
19 Caltech
20 Wake Forest
20 U North Carolina
22 BYU
22 Wash U
24 Georgetown
24 Tufts</p>

<p>For all of the colleges that did not make the list, I assigned a grade of 25, but it is quite possible that it could have been much worse. </p>

<pre><code>LACs
</code></pre>

<p>1 Carleton
2 Swarthmore
3 Williams
4 Grinnell
5 Amherst
6 Earlham
7 Haverford
8 St. John's
9 Colorado College
10 Davidson
11 Oberlin
12 Pomona
12 Wellesley
14 Bowdoin
15 St. Olaf
16 Bryn Mawr
16 Macalester
18 Bates
18 Middlebury
18 Reed
21 Kenyon
21 Spelman
23 Smith
24 Sewanee
25 Centre</p>

<p>A much more subjective list, attributable to, um, a friend: </p>

<p>Harvard
MIT
Princeton
Stanford
Chicago
Berkeley
Caltech
Columbia
Harvey Mudd
Michigan
UCLA
Minnesota </p>

<p>This is BIG-TIME debatable, and I'm not going to take it to 25 entries.</p>

<p>token: WOW, I'm shocked that Berkeley isn't in there (in your original post, that is....if the latest one is edited, disregard this Q). Any reasoning behind that? I realize it's grad schools are very prestigious, but seriously, I know of many, many people who've turned down Stanford/CalTech/MIT undergrad to go there. Doesn't really make sense.</p>

<p>thejoker:

[Quote]
It is an elite private school and better for ug than a huge public.

[/Quote]
Says who? Other than your ambitious little self? ^_^ Many ranking systems list Berkeley as one of the top-10 institutions in the WORLD. Wisconsin is tied with Harvard for producing the most CEOs of Fortune-500 companies (and for half the cost of tuition, too). Private doesn't necessarily mean better. It can, and it can't.</p>

<p>
[quote]
1 , 3.7 , Stanford
2 , 6.85 , Duke
3 , 7.55 , Princeton
4 , 12.25 , Yale
5 , 12.65 , Dartmouth
6 , 12.65 , Notre Dame
7 , 12.95 , Brown
8 , 13.35 , Harvard
9 , 13.75 , Northwestern
10 , 14.1 , Rice
11 , 14.15 , U Penn
12 , 14.25 , Vanderbilt
13 , 14.4 , U Virginia
14 , 17.6 , UC Berkeley
15 , 17.7 , U Chicago

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Hawkette, I am afraid that looking at a list that places Duke ahead of Princeton or Harvard, and Notre Dame or ... Berkeley ahead of Columbia makes me long for the much maligned peer assessment. </p>

<p>If this list is an answer to a question, it must one hell of a screwy question. Just to make sure, we are talking about quality of education at the undergraduate level, aren't we?</p>

<p>vc. with regards to ug education, private does not always mean better, but in the case of ND vs. UCLA or ND vs. Wisc, it certainly does. those two schools pride themselves on research, which is more important for grad school. Meanwhile for ug, those two publics have massive class sizes, lots of TA's, teachers focused more on research, lack of small, seminar classes, lack of personal avising and attention, which is so critical at the ug level. </p>

<p>The use of the # of Ceo's coming from a school is a null-set argument. Just because a student from a school became a Ceo does not mean it was b/c of that school. The list you are referring to is with numbers of 4, 5, or 6 ceo's: i.e., its not very accurate and very subject to chance.</p>

<p>Interesting that Harvey Mudd doesn't appear on anyones list? Reasons?</p>

<p>is wesleyan in the unfortunate position of being "between" LACs and Nat'l Unis?</p>

<p>Hawkette: I get your list, though I honestly don't see a 5-percent weight given to the quality of athletic hoopla (my term). But so be it. It's as good a list as any of the other totally subjective and personally biased lists posted. </p>

<p>Correction. It's better than, not as good as, the oddly skewed revealed preference survey list. (The survey must have included quite a few girls' prep schools to put Wellesley at #11). BYU is in the "top 25" but not Chicago? As someone else once said about the bias inherent in that survey: GIGO.</p>

<p>Is this exercise about the quality of UG education? Nah. It's one more version of the design-your-own ranking as has been done a zillion times before on CC. One person's impressions and opinions are as good as anyone else's.</p>

<p>After this, I have to continue studying for my math final.</p>

<p>Here's how I would rank them, in terms of quality of undergraduate education/selectivity/student body quality.</p>

<p>National Universities
1-Harvard
2-Princeton
3-Yale
4-Caltech
5-MIT
6-Dartmouth
7-Duke
8-Stanford
9-Columbia
9-Rice
11-WashU
12-Brown
13-UPenn
14-UChicago
15-Northwestern
16-Notre Dame
17-Georgetown
17-Carnegie Mellon
19-Johns Hopkins
20-Cornell
21-Tufts
22-Emory
23-Vanderbilt</p>

<p>Dartmouth & Duke, I think, have slightly stronger undergrad programs than Stanford or Columbia. Rice is underrated and easily beats many of the Ivies- I think it is Top Ten material.</p>

<p>I realize that my list doesn't have any of the top publics but I think in terms of undergrad education alone, privates have an advantage over publics. For similar reasons, this is why Cornell is fairly low on my list- strong graduate programs, not as strong undergraduate programs.</p>

<p>I, for one, would be thrilled to go to Berkeley, UVA, or Michigan for law school.</p>

<p>Referring to the revealed preferences rankings top 25, it was written: </p>

<p>


</p>

<p>I see your profile says "Location: SoCal," which makes clear that a lot of people you know get in-state tuition rates at Berkeley. You can see in a</a> post above that I have friends who have advised me that Berkeley is a great place for undergraduate study of certain subjects, but as an out-of-stater I can think of a LOT of colleges that would be sufficiently less expensive than Berkeley's usual price for out-of-state students that students admitted to other highly desired colleges might prefer them to Berkeley. The California view of the world is not the only view out there, and the revealed preferences working paper makes clear that there are regional differences in which colleges are preferred to which other colleges, which in some cases appear to be related to issues of price.</p>

<p>From a west coast kid's persepctive:</p>

<p>1-Harvard
2-Princeton
3-Stanford
4-Yale
5-MIT
6-Caltech
7-Dartmouth
8-Duke
9-Columbia
10-Berkeley
11-UChicago
12-UPenn
13-Cornell
14-Johns Hopkins
15-Michigan
16-UVa
17-UCLA
18-Brown
19-Rice
20-WUTSL
21-Northwestern
22-Notre Dame
23-Emory
24-UCSD
25-Georgetown</p>

<p>joker:

[Quote]
but in the case of ND vs. UCLA or ND vs. Wisc, it certainly does. those two schools pride themselves on research, which is more important for grad school. Meanwhile for ug, those two publics have massive class sizes, lots of TA's, teachers focused more on research, lack of small, seminar classes, lack of personal avising and attention, which is so critical at the ug level.

[/Quote]

Depends on what major. Berkeley has the #3 undergrad engineering program in the country. Haas undergrad is EASILY more renowned that ND Mendoza. Same with Michigan Ross. In fact, 90% of Michigan's undergrad programs were ranked among the top-20 in the country.</p>

<p>Research is not "much more important for grad school" if you're a pre-med, engineering, chem, bio, biochem, or neuroscience major. Research is what gets you INTO grad school (at least the good ones).</p>

<p>Now, if you're an English major, that might be a different story. Then again, Berkeley also has one of the top-5 ranked undergrad English depts. in the country.</p>

<p>Same goes for ND vs UCLA. UCLA has BY FAR one of the best premed and psych programs in the country for undergrads.</p>

<p>I take it you don't have much experience with large schools; I applied to 11 universities including ND and BC, and I can tell you that I received a MUCH more personal experience with the Michigan and Wisconsin advisers, faculty and students than I did with ND or BC. Both of those schools had regional advisers regularly call me several times, inquiring about my senior year; at Michigan, I met with 2 advisers in one day, and met both a Stats and Geology professor in the same hour.</p>

<p>UCLA has fiat lux and cluster classes, which allow undergrads to get credits/units for small seminars ranging on things from '70s music culture to the Civil Rights Movement. With their honors program, you get special advisers and priority scheduling; same with the alumni scholars club.</p>

<p>As for why ND isn't ranked higher on people's list: perhaps their famously political approach to admissions made people question whether they were really attracting the best students possible; Maybe they simply felt the caliber of research/intellectual promise was higher at UCLA and other schools (eg Michigan) because of this. Or, perhaps the religious aspect has too much of a presence in some people's minds, eliminating potentially useful resources/research because of it (and I'm Catholic, so don't even start with the "it's not a bad thing" thing. For some people, it is). I'm sure many, many will disagree, and that's fine. ND is an amazing school. But it's not the only amazing school.</p>

<p>SO, in the future I suggest you don't make assumptions about specific universities unless you know them to be absolutely true.</p>

<p>Token: Berkeley OOS fees are virtually equal to many of the private universities you listed (many of which, from personal experience, don't give great financial aid). In fact, a majority of the schools you mentioned are MORE expensive than Berkeley OOS! A student paying 50k per year for Harvard could most certainly pay 44k per year to attend Berkeley, if they so choose (and, this is assuming they aren't under Harvard's tuition-cap plan). In fact, Georgetown is ~8-10k per year more than Berkeley OOS! But, you are entitled to your opinions, however...interesting they may be...and I will respect them!</p>

<p>
[Quote]
The California view of the world is not the only view out there

[/Quote]
Haha no kidding.</p>

<p>whoa, sorry for the long post, just needed to clear some things up!</p>

<p>interesting post vc08. thanks for being respectful. I respect your opinions too. But when I visited umich, I was taken to a bunch of lecture halls. No one really cared about me visiting there, evident by the lack of help that I received and the lack of literature I received post-acceptance. Meanwhile, at ND, numerous advisors just walked up to me and began talking to me. numerous random students and teachers all did the same. I sat in on a class: 20 students w/ a professor actively questioning the students. I could not get enough literature about how much advising they do, career center, etc. Each week, something else came in the mail from ND be it a course guide or a hand-written christmas card. On another class that I sat in on, the prof was asking students about when they would like to eat dinner at her house. At umich, all that happened was one lofty prof kept lecturing while TA's walked around the room. Umich sent me no literature about what advising programs they have, if they have any. </p>

<p>Private schools provide a much more personal experience, and, at the top privates, one can do research comparable at the ug. level to what one would be able to do at a top public. The rankings of specific programs is not as important as a ug. b/c as a ug. one is taking lots of general classes, not really getting into the specificity that separates a good grad school from a bad one.</p>

<ol>
<li>Penn</li>
</ol>

<p>2-25. some others...</p>

<p>Man, the more technical oriented schools are getting beaten up in these rankings. I don't think I could have even listed off 25 schools I had been contemplating applying to way back when I was doing my undergrad apps.</p>

<p>I always thought that ranking is impossible. Instead, I like to group universities. Here's how I would group universities according to undergraduate education. I am only going to focus on tier I universities. I am not going to include LACs:</p>

<p>GROUP I:
Havard University
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Princeton University
Stanford University
Yale University</p>

<p>GROUP II:
Brown University
California Institute of Technology
Columbia University
Cornell University
Dartmouth College
Duke University
Johns Hopkins University
Northwestern University
University of California-Berkeley
University of Chicago
University of Michigan-Ann Arbor
University of Pennsylvania</p>

<p>GROUP III:
Carnegie Mellon University
Emory University
Georgetown University
Rice University
University of California-Los Angeles
University of Illinois-Urbana Champaign
University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill
University of Notre Dame
University of Texas-Austin
University of Virginia
University of Wisconsin-Madison
Vanderbilt University
Washington University-St Louis</p>

<p>GROUP IV:
Boston College
College of William & Mary
Georgia Institute of Technology
New York University
Tufts University
University of Califirnia-San Diego
University of Southern Califiornia
University of Washington
Wake Forest University</p>

<p>GROUP V:
Brandeis University
Case Western Reserve University
Indiana University-Bloomington
Lehigh University
Pennsylvania State University-University Park
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute
Syracuse University
Tulane University
University of California-Davis
University of California-Irvine
University of California-Santa Barbara
University of Florida
University of Maryland-College Park
University of Rochester</p>

<p>Please remember, those are ALL Tier I universities. As such, they are all excellent and very little separates one group from the group above it or below it.</p>

<p>

Ha, that wouldn't help move Columbia above Berkeley in Hawkette's rating...Berkeley has a higher PA score than Columbia...;)</p>

<p>xiggi,
Re your question about my ranking that </p>

<p>"places Duke ahead of Princeton or Harvard, and Notre Dame or ... Berkeley ahead of Columbia"</p>

<p>all fair observations as it relates to prestige in the academic and perhaps parts of the business world for these colleges. </p>

<p>Please understand that I may come at this college ranking from a less traditional standpoint as I think that students should be FAR LESS concerned with a college's ranking among academics and FAR MORE interested in the quality and nature of the undergraduate experience that they will actually enjoy once they get on campus. I believe that the academic differences among these institutions are generally much less than the non-academic differences and can be very important in the college search process as a student looks for the right fit.</p>

<p>As I noted earlier, I would weight my ranking factors as follows:</p>

<p>40% USNWR Ranking
30% USNWR Classroom Teaching Ranking
25% Social Life ranking drawn from input on previous CC threads
5% Athletic Life ranking as measured by 2007 Directors Cup standings</p>

<p>Others might choose different weights or other factors, but I think any ranking that any of us post should have some quantifiable elements rather just a straight name recognition or prestige listing. I think that looking at the full UNDERGRADUATE experience is a better way for the student. </p>

<p>jazzymom,
I hope that you would agree that a 5% weight is not that consequential to this ranking and I don't think it moves the needle for many (if any) of these colleges. </p>

<p>I don't think that a college's athletic programs relate to the academic quality of a college, but I do think that there can be a relationship between a school's athletic teams and the impact on the campus's social life. Good teams can breed greater campus excitement and most students will benefit from this. That is partly the reason for the 25% weighting to social life.</p>

<p>Tufts, Wake Forest, W&M, Rice, Georgetown get no respect on this forum. I would place them head and shoulders beyond the State U research schools listed consistently ahead of them. I know this is unpopular but I just have a deep bias that smaller is better. Those schools are too big for LAC but are so different from many of the larger, research focused schools. I believe to the advantage of the individual student.</p>

<p>There should be a separate category for these 'tween schools so they get their proper respect. Oh well, tilting at windmills again.</p>