<p>of course, this is pointless</p>
<p>The best combination of the universities is Stanford + Berkeley + UCSF. As a research powerhouse and wellspring of innovation, this combination is hundreds of miles ahead of any other place. Harvard + MIT is #2, probably a distant #2. </p>
<p>My proof of this:
Stanford + Berkeley + UCSF = Silicon Valley
Harvard + MIT = Route 128
and
Silicon Valley >>> Route 128</p>
<p>Harvard
MIT
Stanford</p>
<p>in reverse order.</p>
<p>“The best combination of the universities is Stanford + Berkeley + UCSF. As a research powerhouse and wellspring of innovation, this combination is hundreds of miles ahead of any other place. Harvard + MIT is #2, probably a distant #2.”</p>
<p>Not sure I can agree with the above. HMS is even better than UCSF.</p>
<p>Harvard Medical school is #1. No one can argue about that. But I would say in terms of medical research, UCSF + Stanfod > Harvard, and UCSF + Stanford + Berkeley > Harvard + MIT.</p>
<p>Based on the faculty members selected into the prestigious Institute Of Medicine (IOM),
UCSF (71) + Stanford (59) + Berkeley (18) = 148
Harvard (106) + MIT (29) =135
So UCSF + Stanford + Berkeley > Harvard + MIT in medicine.
See the link [Directory</a> - Institute of Medicine](<a href=“http://www.iom.edu/Global/Directory.aspx?affiliationsearch=massachusetts%20institute]Directory”>http://www.iom.edu/Global/Directory.aspx?affiliationsearch=massachusetts%20institute)</p>
<p>Now for science, based on the faculty
members selected into the prestigious national academy of science (NAS),
Stanford (124+6 SLAC) + Berkeley (134) + UCSF (28) = 292
Harvard (160) + MIT (113) = 273</p>
<p>For engineering, based on the faculty
members selected into the prestigious national academy of engineering (NAE),
Stanford (92) + Berkeley (78) + UCSF (0) = 170
Harvard (20) + MIT (113) = 133</p>
<p>And finally, for innovation and technology advancement, Silicon Valley >> Route 128.</p>
<p>Oy …</p>
<p>Ok, first, yes, SV > 128, but you err in your assumption that this is some kind of proxy for intellectual output of Cambridge, Ma v. the bay area. </p>
<p>Why?</p>
<p>1) Harvard and MIT grads do not work, exclusively or even predominantly, in Massachusetts or, for that matter, in the northeastern United States. In fact, many, many Harvard and MIT grads work in Silicon Valley.</p>
<p>2) You’re comparing what to what, exactly? One city’s educational institutions to another? Or one region’s educational institutions to another? If it’s the former, you’ll need to compare Palo Alto to Cambridge, or Berkeley to Cambridge, or San Francisco to Cambridge. Otherwise, you’ll need to compare the educational offerings of the San Francisco County/Alameda County/Santa Clara Valley (an area encompassing approximately 1800 square miles) with a comparable swath of the Northeast – centered in Cambridge, if you like. Such an area would encompass not only every educational institution in the Greater Boston area (don’t forget Wellesley, Tufts, Brandeis, BU, etc.), but Dartmouth and – oh, I almost forgot – Brown, Yale, and Columbia, too. In fact, seeing as you’ve added SLAC, can I throw in Lincoln Labs and Brookhaven? I’ll even give you Livermore! LOL!</p>
<p>In all seriousness, though, I don’t see how you can make a meaningful comparison here. Harvard and MIT basically live on the same street, about a mile from each other, in one not-very-big town. They serve, perhaps, as the nucleus, but not the circumference, of the region’s education-and-research infrastructure. If you’re trying to make the case that all this takes second chair to the offerings of Alameda/San Francisco/Santa Clara … well, lotsa luck.</p>
<p>Addendum – Someone just pointed out the first part of your post which, somehow, I’d overlooked. You wrote:</p>
<p>“I would say in terms of medical research, UCSF + Stanfod > Harvard, and UCSF + Stanford + Berkeley > Harvard + MIT”</p>
<p>FYI, MIT doesn’t have a medical school. So, if you’re comparing medical schools, you’d probably want to say, “in terms of medical research” the medical schools of UCSF + Stanford + Berkeley > Harvard.</p>
<p>As a practical matter, I’m not quite sure just what that would imply but, um, ok.</p>
<p>If you’re looking for a broader comparison, I suppose you’d add all the medical schools and research institutes in each of the two regions, match 'em up, and see who came out ahead.</p>
<p>Of course, that would beg the question, who the f%$k cares?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Why do they have to travel so far to Silicon Valley? Can’t they find equally good opportunities in Boston, or even in East Coast?</p>
<p>Here is my thought. In terms of the contributions which lead to inventions, technology advancement, and job opportunities, Stanford + Berkerley + UCSF are simply unmatched. That is why SV has become the mega in high tech, and even many Harvard and MIT graduates are willing to relocate to the other side of the country to pursue their career in SV.</p>
<p>Evidently, you did not read my responses. Or you cannot read. </p>
<p>Or you’re on drugs.</p>
<p>prestige? No one can convince me otherwise. </p>
<ol>
<li>Oxford</li>
<li>Cambridge</li>
<li>Harvard</li>
</ol>
<p>
Bay Area would include LBNL, in addition to LLNL. ;)</p>
<p>What do Silicon Valley and Route 128 have to do with the prowess of those aforementioned universities in medical/biological research?</p>
<p>And what does comparing the Bay Area schools versus the Boston schools achieve? I was just choosing between those five institutions for where to pursue graduate studies in biological research, and they are all completely disparate. I chose my school based on how well it alone addressed what I wanted in a research environment, not at all on which cluster of schools had a larger representation in various academic organizations. The West Coast and East Coast (and each of the individual schools) have strengths in different areas.</p>
<p>Also, in the case of Boston, there is a plethora of highly regarded research hospitals that greatly improves the intellectual output of this area in the biomedical sciences.</p>
<p>Prestige (general opinion in every country with the exception of the UK):
- Harvard
- Stanford/Yale/MIT
- Oxford/Cambridge</p>
<p>For undergrad, Oxbridge graduates more students each year than HYP combined.</p>
<p>Undergrad: Harvard>>Oxbridge (based on observation of UWC students)
MA and PhD: Harvard=Oxbridge
Business: Harvard>>>Oxbridge
Medicine: Harvard>>Oxbridge
Law: Harvard>Oxford>Cambridge</p>
<ol>
<li>Harvard/Cambridge University</li>
<li>Oxford University</li>
</ol>
<p>Big gap</p>
<ol>
<li>Any number of wonderful top schools in the U.S.</li>
</ol>
<p>"Prestige (general opinion in every country with the exception of the UK):
- Harvard
- Stanford/Yale/MIT
- Oxford/Cambridge"</p>
<p>Yeah, rite. You should be happy if more than 30% of the people in Asia know what Yale and MIT are. I think Oxford and Cambridge can easily trump Yale and MIT in term of prestige. In addition, there are a large number of countries which were colonies of the great Britain. So, they respect Oxford and Cambridge more than Yale and MIT.</p>
<p>Pick Three Universities!!!</p>
<ol>
<li>Harvard</li>
<li>Cambridge</li>
<li>Stanford</li>
</ol>
<ol>
<li>Harvard</li>
<li>Stanford </li>
<li>Cambridge</li>
</ol>
<p>Are people overestimating the prestige of Cambridge/Oxford? I know people like to be more globally centered by including them, but is there any evidence to suggest they are definitely among the top 3?</p>
<p>I think we may be forgetting the degree to which American Universities are both uniquely versatile and the envy of the world in higher education. I would guess that the top 3 universities in the world would all be American. </p>
<ol>
<li>Harvard</li>
<li>Stanford</li>
<li>Debatable (MIT, Yale, Chicago, possibly Cal)</li>
</ol>
<p>I think Cambridge and Oxford belong up there with the likes of Princeton and Yale.</p>