<p>Devil May Cry, you are entitled to your pinion. I turned down most of the schools you listed above to attend Michigan because I felt Michigan had a better college atmosphere. Academically and reputationally, Michigan is as good as the others, but as you point out, we each have out preferences and we will chose based on that. </p>
<p>As for Law schools, I am not sure how you figured that all those schools have better faculties than Michigan. The Law School Peer Assessment score on the USNWR (which is made up of the collective opinions of Law School Deans and top Law faculty) gives Michigan a 4.5/5.0 rating. That's equal to Cal and NYU and Slightly lower than Chicago's.</p>
<p>Again you provide subjective things like peer/judge assessment. I still can't believe you are arguing this. Theres a huge difference between 167/172 and 164/169. on michigan site it says 167 is the median. Obviously students go a long ways to making a school, since better students go to better schools and are attracted to better schools. But do please tell me about what some 80 year old judge thinks about the schools. I went through the law process years ago, and I would say 95% of applicants would choose NYU over Michigan. Being in AA hurts the school for sure, but NYU is just better, based on objective facts,.</p>
<p>Please don't bring Berkeley into this-that school is a joke. it's median is like 3 points below NYU's 25th.</p>
<p>King Alexandre, almost every T14 law school graduate will get a $120-130 thousand starting bonus attached to a large firm.</p>
<p>Edit: Look at individual teachers or go to the UT Educational rankings. Usnews is pretty bunk in terms of some of its ranks. If it were me, Chicago would be first.</p>
<p>Edit: Actually, a 164-169 and a 172 is a VERY big difference. At Duke, they tell us the ABSOLUTE lowest we can get to stay competitive is a 168. Of course, most Duke grads go to Harvard Law so my information might be skewed.</p>
<p>I agree with you there. To me, Chicago is #1 at Law. I love its Law school. On everything else, I am affraid we are just going to have to disagree. </p>
<p>A2Wolves, yeah, nyusernman just called Cal a joke. LOL</p>
<p>"At Duke, they tell us the ABSOLUTE lowest we can get to stay competitive is a 168"</p>
<p>That depends on where you want to go. For Harvard, yeah. for any top 14 school a 165+ is competitive, with a 168 pretty much ensuring acceptance to one of them. of course 3-5 years ago it was a lot easier</p>
<p>Slipper1234, actually the NRC Report is the only respected source of ranking in academia. "The Chronicles of Higher Education" as well as other reputable academic publications consider it to be the only reliable source of academic ranking. Commercial polls like USN&WR & the Gourman Report have questionable validity, as the criteria & methodologies used by both sources are biased & flawed. The USN&WR appears to favor the small, private undergraduate program, while the Gourman Report favors the larger undergrad programs of the top research institutions. Yes, the NRC Report is a ranking of graduate programs & faculty. Yet the departments with the most highly regarded graduate programs are considered to be the top departments as well. Love it or hate it, the quality of the graduate program largely determines the quality of a particular department. </p>
<p>To my knowledge, the only source that ranks the individual undergraduate departments is the Gourman Report. According to this commercial source, the schools with the top graduate programs are largely the schools with the the top undergraduate programs. Ie. Harvard is ranked 2nd for undergrad & 1st for grad. Michigan is ranked 3rd for undergrad and 3rd for grad. Berkeley is ranked 7th for undergrad and 2nd for grad. Apparently the USN&WR disagrees that the top grad programs = the top undergrad programs. </p>
<p>Polls are polls. Everyone is free to reject or acknowledge any poll they like. Yet the NRC Report is the only respected source of ranking in academia, as it's non-commercial and sponsored by the National Academy of Sciences. Also the NRC Report only comes out every 10 years as opposed to these annual commercial polls like USN&WR & Gourman. We need to be aware of the motivation behind these commercial polls...$$$$$$. Academic ranking shouldn't change on an annual basis. Actually both Berkeley & Michigan were ranked among the top 10 undergraduate programs by the USN&WR up until the late 80's. Then the publication decided to dramatically change its criteria & methodology. You can only imagine how the top public institutions cried foul. </p>
<p>So who has the best undergraduate programs in the nation? The smaller, more selective private schools or the larger, research-oriented schools with the top graduate programs? It's anyone's call. Obviously I favor the research-oriented schools with the top departments & programs across the board as well as the top library systems. You may prefer the smaller, high quality undergrad program or something inbetween. It all boils down to a matter of personal preference. No one is right or wrong.</p>
<p>Nyusternman, Cal's mid 50% SAT range is 1200-1450 and the mean is 1330. NYU's mid 50% SAT range is 1220-1410 and the mean is 1330. I do not see how NYU has an edge over Cal in that department.</p>
<p>dude sternman, berkeley kids are just as good as NYU...NYU really isn't up there with the top ten some undergrad schools, but it definetely is up there </p>
<p>however, collegeboard confirms that NYU students aren't stronger than Berkeley kids based on SAT scores</p>
<p>
[quote]
Ronald Dworkin is one of the most cited professors in existence.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA...</p>
<p>Sorry, I needed the laugh.</p>
<p>
[quote]
One reason, then, Dworkin's jurisprudential views are moribund is the exasperation so many of us feel at his inability to engage honestly with his opponents. At least in the case of his famous misrepresentations of Hart, the criticisms forced legal positivists to refine their views in constructive ways. But "thirty years on," these misrepresentations of Raz are just a pointless embarrassment.