<p>or if you want to expore the engineering side of chemstry:</p>
<p>like i said, the graduate dept. ranking is the best indicator of overall dept strengths/resources.</p>
<p>Last time I checked, the same A&S professors teach both grads and undergrads.</p>
<p>Careful what you say Slipper. You will be eating your words one day. Since 1986, Michigan's endowment has grown by 2,000%, compared to 500% at Dartmouth. At this rate, Michigan's endowment per student will overtake Dartmouth's in the next 5-10 years. In terms of selectivity, the mean SAT score at Michigan in 2000 used to be roughly 120 points lower than the mean SAT score at the more selective Ivies. Today, it stands at a mere 60 points lower. </p>
<p>At any rate, I have no idea what you mean by 8-15. I know there is 6-17, but 8-15 makes no sense. Are you suggesting there are two universities (6-7) that are not quite as good as the Big 5 but clearly better than the remaining 8? </p>
<p>Tell me which of 2 of those 10 universities (I am leaving Cal and Michigan out for simplicity's sake) you feel are appreciably better than the remaining 8:</p>
<p>Brown University
California Institute of Technology
Columbia University
Cornell University
Dartmouth College
Duke University
Johns Hopkins University
Northwestern University
University of Chicago
University of Pennsylvania</p>
<p>Hey, let’s not get side-tracked, stay the course</p>
<p>The OP asked:
[quote]
if you guys are unable to do the above can you please do the following for me:
rank undergrad chemistry major:
ucb, ucla, ucsd, usc, northwestern, john hopkins</p>
<p>also please rank undergrad biochem major:
ucb, ucla, ucsd, usc, northwestern, john Hopkins
[/quote]
</p>
<p>My answer is Berkeley all the way!!!</p>
<p>Data:</p>
<p>For chem.:
<a href="http://www.usnews.com/usnews/edu/grad/rankings/phdsci/brief/che_brief.php%5B/url%5D">http://www.usnews.com/usnews/edu/grad/rankings/phdsci/brief/che_brief.php</a></p>
<p>For BIOchem:</p>
<p>Like I said many times, the graduate dept ranking is the best indicator out there for assessing the Overall academic strength in your intended major.</p>
<p>Alexandre, I will eat my words when Michigan or Cal catches up to the selectivity of Columbia or Penn. 60 points it substantial, there is only a 20 pt difference between Princeton and Dartmouth for example. I will also eat my worlds when Cal or Michigan's endowment per student catches up to the Ivies. I strongly believe neither will ever happen, and when it does I will happily admit Michigan and Cal are top 10 schools. For now I stand at somewhere between 15-20ish maybe a couple ranks higher than where they are on USNEWS.</p>
<p>(As for 8-15, I meant 7-15, my mistake.)</p>
<p>Alex, with all due respect, as long as UMich accepts nearly 6 out of every 10 people that applies, it's just never going to catch up to the Ivies in terms of selectivity.</p>
<p>Here are the Top 10 most selective schools according to USNWR:</p>
<p>Lowest Acceptance Rates:
National Universities School Acceptance rate
Harvard University (MA) 9%<br>
Yale University (CT) 10%<br>
Princeton University (NJ) 11%<br>
Stanford University (CA) 12%<br>
Columbia University (NY) 13%<br>
Massachusetts Inst. of Technology 14%<br>
Brown University (RI) 15%<br>
Dartmouth College (NH) 17%<br>
Washington University in St. Louis 19%<br>
California Institute of Technology 20% </p>
<p>Also, another critical measure is graduation rate (i.e. how good is the university in helping, guiding, supporting their students and how effective is the university in selecting those students who can handle the courswork)</p>
<p>Graduation Rates
School Graduation rate
Harvard University (MA) 98%<br>
Princeton University (NJ) 97%<br>
Yale University (CT) 96%<br>
Brown University (RI) 95%<br>
University of Notre Dame (IN) 95%<br>
Columbia University (NY) 94%<br>
Massachusetts Inst. of Technology 94%<br>
Stanford University (CA) 94%<br>
University of Pennsylvania 94%<br>
Dartmouth College (NH) 93% </p>
<p>by contrast U Michigan's 2005 predicted graduation rate is 77%</p>
<p>How many students are working their wa through HYP etc.? Many kids at schools like UM work and pay much of their own education expenses so that often means taking a lighter load and another year or two. Some drop out due to $$$ concerns.</p>
<p>"Like I said many times, the graduate dept ranking is the best indicator out there for assessing the Overall academic strength in your intended major."</p>
<p>No, it's outcomes. What BA/BS graduates accomplish later is a far better indicator of the quality of their undergraduate training. This is properly measured statisically, not by conjecture.</p>
<p>Vosson:</p>
<p>Well, then tell me, how will you measure the academic strength in your intended major (in this case Chemistry dept?)</p>
<p>The prestige, % accepted is meaningless. And Michigan's graduation rate ranges between 85% and 90%.</p>
<p>vossron wrote:</p>
<p>
[quote]
not by conjecture
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Conjecture? Hardly. When you look at the methodology used in USNews ranking, you will realize that the grad program rankings, where the quality of the program, faculty, students etc are more at issue - which is less true with undergrad programs (not ranked according to discrete criteria, but only with a simple "peer reputation" list). </p>
<p>Chemistry dept ranking:</p>
<p>
[quote]
% accepted is meaningless.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Yeah, if just about any person who applies to your school gets in, I agree it becomes totally meaningless.</p>
<p>The prestige, the College of the Ozarks accepts just 15% of its applicants. Is it better than Chicago, which accepts 40%-45% of its applicants? I repeat, % accepted is meaningless.</p>
<p>And why did you say Michigan's graduation rate is 77% when you know it is actually 87%?</p>
<p>
[quote]
Well, then tell me, how will you measure the academic strength in your intended major (in this case Chemistry dept?)
[/quote]
[ul][<em>]Is the department accredited by a professional association pertaining to the subject?
[</em>]How well funded is the department, and has there been (or will there be) significant changes to the funding?
[<em>]Does the department have specific resources (specialized equipment, library, undergrad labs, etc.)?
[</em>]Faculty-to-majors ratio
[<em>]Where do department graduates go to grad school or for employment?
[</em>]How many professors are tenured, non-tenured, adjunct, or visiting?
[<em>]What is the overall goal or philosophy of the department? Two chemistry departments can be geared toward very different things.
[</em>]Where did the faculty earn their doctorates?
[<em>]How many students participate in research?
[</em>]What courses are offered on a regular basis? Is it difficult to get in them? It does you little good if the great classes get full quickly or if they're limited to seniors. [/ul]</p>
<p>Kemet: That’s a list of good metrics. However, I would put far much value on USNEWS ranking, especially the grad program rankings, where the quality of the program, faculty, students etc etc are more at issue - which is less true with undergrad programs (not ranked according to discrete criteria, but only with a simple "peer reputation"). </p>
<p>Chemistry dept ranking:</p>
<p>Slipper, you say : "I will also eat my worlds when Cal or Michigan's endowment per student catches up to the Ivies. I strongly believe neither will ever happen."</p>
<p>Endowment per student in 1986:
Brown: $120,000
Columbia: $75,000
Cornell: $40,000
Penn: $30,000
Michigan: $7,000</p>
<p>Endowment per student in 2005:
Brown: $270,000 (225% increase)
Columbia: $260,000 (310% increase)
Cornell: $190,000 (460% increase)
Penn: $220,000 (700% increase)
Michigan: $130,000 (1,900% increase)</p>
<p>Like I said Slipper, in the next 5-10 years, Michigan's endowment per student will exceed those of half the ivies.</p>
<p>
[quote]
And why did you say Michigan's graduation rate is 77% when you know it is actually 87%?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Alex, please read what I wrote at the tail end of post #126:</p>
<p>
[quote]
by contrast U Michigan's 2005 predicted graduation rate is 77%
[/quote]
</p>
<p>That is straight out of this year's USNEWS. Why do you think I am making numbers up?</p>
<p>The prestige, Michigan's predicted graduation rate has been 75% for the last decade and yet, Michigan actual graduation rate has exceeded 85% for the last decade. Who cares about predicted graduation rates? All that matters is actual graduation rates.</p>
<p>Alex, </p>
<p>You jump to conclusions and accused me of erroneous information (not only on this thread but on the other thread about SATs).</p>
<p>Perhaps, you shouldn't jump to such knee-jerk conclusions (almost in an accusatory way) - and do so rather quickly my friend, that is what I was taking exceptions to.</p>
<p>As for "predicted rate" vs. "actual rate" well, those will vary from year to year - it really begs the question as to why UMichigan's predicted rates and actual rates would have so much variance when, by contrast, other elites have relatively lower variance... I can't answer that question because I don't know the answer, but it does raise some questions - perhaps you can enlighten us.</p>
<p>Michigan has an extensive spring/summer semesters, where 50%+ of the students participate. Of course, since those are optional, Michigan cannot take those 2 semesters as a given, and as such, will predict the graduation rate assuming students will only take the Fall and winter terms.</p>