Top Tier, 2nd Tier, 3rd Tier

College Search & Selection
101

<p>^Well, yes actually (isn’t it top 22? Actually its top 25. I’m missing a few schools. UC Berkeley should be in tier 2 or 3 and UVA and UCLA should be in tier 3). And I don’t think that’s a bad thing. I’m not going to think of a person from University of Florida any less than a person from Princeton.

  1. That’s just wrong and superficial. Terrible and arrogant.
  2. The guy from UoF could go to an Ivy League for grad school or maybe he chose UoF due to scholarship. Lizzardfire, a fellow Caltech CCer, personally knew a girl who turned down Harvard and Princeton for UoF full ride. I know some friends who have done similarly myself.</p>

<p>My aunt went to Yale and she did very horribly. She did drugs,etc. She ended up rejected from all the grad/med schools she applied to (Harvard, Columbia, Duke, Stanford, etc). She came back home and enrolled in UC Riverside–not that UC Riverside is bad, but she could have done a lot better.</p>

<p>Anyways my point is, judging solely based on a school’s reputation and what it has produced, I believe my “tier-list” is accurate. Accurate enough for my own use at least. And there is NOTHING wrong in attending a tier 4 university as opposed to a tier 1.
NEVER use this “tier-list” to judge a person. It simply exists…actually I don’t know why it exists. I don’t know what purpose it serves. It just exists I guess…</p>

102

<p>from post 15-- from aboutr 2 yrs ago :

[quote[The tier rankings are typically those of the USNWR. For eg, for the National Universities, the 2008 edition has the top 50 as 1st tier, second tier is 52-124 (there was a tie for #50 and a 7 way tie for #124), third and fourth tiers are listed alphabetically, not numerically. The LACs have the top 2 tiers to # 122, then the go to third, fourth and unranked. etc., etc, etc.
[/quote]
</p>

103

<p>John117,
you may not think so yourself, but your attitude is very elitist and condescending despite your efforts to sound like you’re not. Are you really saying that anything under these colleges you selected yourself is a “fourth tier” school? That is inaccurate and hugely biased by your opinion. Nowhere does any source say that tiers are organized in that way. Are you saying from 25-200+, all of these schools will be of the same quality? That there is no spectrum in quality? You might as well have just put:</p>

<p>Top tier- Harvard
2nd tier- Princeton
3rd tier- Yale</p>

<p>and it would’ve been far more useful information.</p>

104

<p>Many people have responded and some responses seem to be made jokingly. Nonetheless, this is what top companies use. My friends at several top management consultant companies have confirmed it.</p>

<p>Top - Ivies minus Cornell, Stanford, MIT, Caltech
Tier 1.5 - Top Liberal Arts, Vandy, Duke, Northwestern, WUSTL, Cornell, Chicago
Tier 2 - Notre Dame, Emory, Cal, UCLA, UVa, U of M, NYU, UNCCH, Rice, JHU
Lower tiers (usually not considered) - all others</p>

105

<br>

<br>

<p>So what are “top companies”?<br>
Is that the same as “Tier 1” companies?
Are there more than 10 of them?</p>

106

<p>Actually, no one will deny that the top management consulting company is McKinsey.
Rank 2 and 3 are Boston Consulting Group and Bain & Co.</p>

<p>There is less disagreement about the ranks of top companies of certain industries than universities.</p>

107

<p>This thread is 2 1/2 years old.</p>

108

<p>Oh elitism, how cute you are.
Top 25/50 = Top tier
Top 50-100 = Second Tier
and then we’re into the great unknown.
LAC = does it really matter? It’s what you make of your education. They’re all incredibly unique.</p>

<p>But can’t we all just agree that the rankings are incredibly flawed, and being so, we shouldn’t enforce tiers on the list? Heck, some great institutions won’t even participate in ranking.</p>

109

<p>

Duke has more undergraduate alums working at MBB than every school besides HYPS and Penn. Northwestern also does better than Brown at least. You can do a search on LinkedIn if you don’t believe me.</p>

110

<p>“Ivies minus Cornell”</p>

<p>“Vandy”</p>

<p>lolwut?</p>

111

<p>Top: 1-50 National U 1-30 LACs
2nd: 51-100 National U 30-50 LACs any top 3 Regional school
3rd: Everything else</p>

112

<p>What tier is GW? What tier is University of Denver??</p>

113

<p>

</p>

<p>it seems like every school from Georgetown to NYU claims that is the case for their school.</p>

114

<p>As someone posted on page one (2-1/2 years ago)</p>

<p>“I would consider all the schools regularly discussed on this message board to be “top tier”.” </p>

<p>So where do the rest of us look? Is anyone aware of any other websites like College Confidential that are geared more toward, according to the posts I’ve seen on here, third level schools? </p>

<p>Thanks.</p>

115

<p>Top tier: Ivies+Stanford+MIT+Caltech+UChicago+Duke
2nd tier: other schools that ranks between 10 and 30
3rd tier (aka TTT): all other schools</p>

116

<p>If this place called Harvard is so great, how come they can’t recruit any good football players?</p>

117

<p>They don’t give out athletic scholarships, and they have academic standards.</p>

118

<p>Fixed it for you:</p>

<p>Top tier: HYP+Stanford+MIT+Caltech
2nd tier: other schools that rank between 5 and 30
3rd tier (aka TTT): all other schools</p>

119

<p>Top Tier: HYPSM + Columbia + Duke + Penn + Chicago (recent development) + Caltech</p>

120

<p>Caltech is top tier for what exactly (outside of engineering and sciences)? Certainly not when it comes to admissions desirability or quality of life. There’s also a lot of bad info in this thread regarding management consulting. An example is WUSTL and Caltech (again) being a top tier school for management consulting as we (Mckinsey) along with BCG and Bain don’t recruit there, at all.</p>