<p>Yea not sure how you make a top 10 undergrad without Dartmouth, Amherst, or Miami University on it</p>
<p>Those are his top 10 people…he has his own critieria. What schools on his list would you remove for the ones listed?
Lets say for ex: you think Brown should be removed for Pomona. The he replies “i cant think of any top 10 list that doesnt have Brown” and we have this endless discussion going …</p>
<p>Lots of really good schools listed by others, and of course it is just my opinion re the ten. </p>
<p>I tried to look at the following criteria: (1) is a senior thesis required for most students (why Brown topped some of the schools suggested by others despite having no distribution requirements and why Princeton was #1 with its two theses requirement), (2) emphasis on writing (Reed, Swarthmore, Yale, Princeton), (3) core curriculum (Reed, Chicago, Columbia, Wash U), (4) low student teacher ratios (helped UVA [for a public] and LACs, especially Williams with Oxford style classes), (5) accessible faculty (UVA, Wash U, and LACs), and (6) very smart students who are willing and able to take advantage of the teaching (all of them). </p>
<p>Many of the schools others listed could very easily be here too. Indeed, right after I pushed send I thought of Rice (the Princeton of the South). Also, great cases could be made for Macalester, Carleton, Haverford, Cornell, Harvey Mudd, William & Mary, MIT, Cal Tech, Emory, Hopkins, Georgetown, Grinnell, Pomona, Oberlin, Wesleyan, and Davidson, among others.</p>
<p>The real point I was trying to make is that “best” means different things to different people (showing the folly of rankings) and why should Harvard always top the “best” lists largely based on reputation and dollars rather than the actual undergrad product.</p>
<p>the rankings basically switch around the numbers and schools for the top 10 or so every year, can’t argue ‘too’ much over which should or should not be that high</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>While not disagreeing with your attempt to establish the criteria that are important to you, I have to wonder why you are adorning a label of “core curriculum” on Reed. Unless they changed since I looked at it years ago, it seems that the requirement consists taking Humanities 110, an intensive year-long interdisciplinary study of classical culture. </p>
<p>[REED</a> VIRTUAL TOUR](<a href=“http://web.reed.edu/apply/tour/index.html?humanities/index.html~mainFrame]REED”>http://web.reed.edu/apply/tour/index.html?humanities/index.html~mainFrame)</p>
<p>Inasmuch as it is easy to identify schools without distribution requirements a la Brown or Smith, it seems that the differences between a core and distribution requirements are mostly a matter of semantics. </p>
<p>As far as the requirement of a thesis, I am afraid that the effort (as well as the related instruction) required might range from minuscule to gargantuan. I’ve known students who slaved a full year on their thesis while others wrapped it up in ONE weekend when relying on a STEM subject. For many it is a very interesting exercise, albeit one that is incredibly EASY to satisfy. As everything in education, the four leading letters are YMMV!</p>