<p>It's because UVa isn't as well known. But generally, in various world/national rankings, Berkeley's usually ranked ahead of the other two.</p>
<p>They're all underrated, IMO. As I think are certain LACs, perhaps paradoxically since they seem to be the diametric opposite in some ways. </p>
<p>For undergrad, it boils down to personal fit. You couldn't pay me to go to UVA -- too Southern, even with its share of Northerners -- but I don't doubt it provides a top-flight educational experience. I think UVA goes third wheel in some persons minds because in terms of research productivity, B and M get thought of more often as top-flight research universities (and they have professional schools that consistently rate high). That's perhaps a mixed bag: more Nobel prizes, but perhaps a greater chance to encounter professors who care about research nearly exclusively.... But then again, that's the achilles heel of most of the top national universities (top 50).</p>
<p>Some idea of the impact of the inclusion of Peer Assessment scores in the USNWR rankings:</p>
<p>University of Virginia (USNWR ranking of 23rd without PA, 24th with PA)
University of California-Berkeley (28th, 21st)
University of Michigan-Ann Arbor (34th, 24th)</p>
<p>Clearly, academics favor UCB and UM over UVA as their PA scores are higher and this greatly improves their relative ranking (Michigan by 10 spots, UC Berkeley by 7 spots).</p>
<p>I think the question of overrated and underrated is interesting. Most top 25 universities (Cal, Michigan and UVa included) are overrated. That's just the way things are. People are always going to naturally segragate (it is human nature) and the top 25 universities seem to have an disproporionately large reputation. At the same time, among those top 25 universities, relatively speaking of course and purely on this forum, the 3 great publics mentioned in this thread are all underrated, UVa most of all.</p>
<p>alexandre,
Re your comment on the three top publics being underrated, I'm not sure what you mean. Can you elaborate? How are they underrated and by whom? And if you were going to create your own ranking system that would create a result that would show them as properly ranked, what would your system look like?</p>
<p>i dont think he means under ranked hawkette. in any sort of tangible survey of numbers, they just can't compete with top privates because they dont have the same type of financial wherewithall and admission policies. However, I think he means that people think even the best ones are just barely top 25 schools, whereas you can get just as good an education at them as you would as the top top top schools.</p>
<p>bearcats,</p>
<p>The UMich stats link you posted is for "admitted" students. It's not really stats of the actual freshmen class enrolled. This is a typical marketing ploy employed by many colleges as admitted stats can be as many as 60-70 points higher than enrolled stats. Try to be consistent and cite stats for different schools from one source like hawkette did (US News) if possible.</p>
<p>I think he means all the publics are underrated because people think once you get out of the Ivy league and standford/MIT everything else is second tier. Some people don't realize how good UMich is when I tell them. Others do. Whereas if I said Brown everyone would know.</p>
<p>I find that publics are generally underrated -- many people turn their noses up at Berkeley or UMich, simply because they're state schools. In reality, they're comparable to the top privates.</p>
<p>Hawkette, I was only referring to those three state universities being underrated on this forum, and only relative to their peers. In absolute terms, all top universities, including Cal, Michigan and UVa are probably overrated.</p>
<p>Luckily, in my experience, which is considerable both in terms of industry type and geographic diversity, those three schools are valued fairly relative to their peers. And as far as academe goes, as peer assessment scores clearly indicate, those three publics are properly valued and respected in the academic world. </p>
<p>Finally, I would not attempt to create another ranking system. I think we have enough of them and they are all flawed. I have always favored a rating system rather than a ranking system.</p>
<p>
[quote]
The obvious answer is "whichever one is in your state." if you're not from michigan, cali, or virginia, you most like arn't applying to all 3 - as they're all completely different.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I dunno, I think you'd be surprised. If someone is willing to pay out-of-state prices at one of these public institutions (and think they have a shot at admission), it wouldn't be a stretch for the other two schools to be on the list. Michigan gets a lot of cross-admits with UCB and with UVa.</p>
<p>In other words, this thread has salience for more people than you might expect. Although... I think it's primarily hair-splitting.</p>
<p>
[quote]
It's not really stats of the actual freshmen class enrolled. This is a typical marketing ploy employed by many colleges as admitted stats can be as many as 60-70 points higher than enrolled stats.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Well....it's not only a marketing ploy. The admitted profile may be useful information for people who want to know what kind of student typically gets admitted (which is what all these "chances" threads get at). </p>
<p>You are correct that this information should not be used to compare student bodies.</p>
<p>I just want to point out that when an institution provides that information, it is not necessarily some ruse to boost one's impressions of the class stats. Many schools (Michigan being on of them) also make available the stats for the enrolled class--and, better yet, it's more up-to-date than US News. More laborious, of course, to look up info at each school's site.</p>