UVA or Cornell

Colleges and Universities A-Z University of Virginia
21

<p>Student-wise, that is probably correct that people coming out of both schools are of equal caliber. However, in terms of its academics Chicago does indeed beat out Dartmouth- almost all of Chicago's programs are consistently regarded as among the best of its kind in the nation, something that the vast, vast majority of schools cannot say. This is how it gets grouped with Harvard, MIT, etc in this particular respect. I wouldn't say the difference is 'negligible'. It's not like UVA dominating VT academically but it's still there.</p>

<p>Whatever you name, Econ, Poli Sci, Sciences, etc, UChic programs (particularly graduate level) consistently rank with Harvard, Princeton, MIT, Cal Tech, whatever else is up there in those fields. Dartmouth does not do this. Honestly, I do not think it's fair to make that '99.99%' statement. Cav and I do indeed have some knowledge and read information on these kinds of things.</p>

<p>It also depends on what you mean by "Overall Rankings". If you're talking about that garbage that overly relies on peer assessment scores, acceptance rates, and other non-academic factors then yeah in that respect Dartmouth is 'better'. Keep in mind that these 'overall rankings' also put UPenn at 4, Duke at 5, and WUSL at 11 LOL</p>

22

<p>Tucker Max went to U of C, too.</p>

23

<p>I think all the schools here have been classified correctly. Chicago's departments are world-renowned (especially econ and physics) - I live in Brazil, and people here seemed very impressed when I said I was heading there for college, especially when I mentioned my major. </p>

<p>I think a lot of people - especially in the undergrad level - mistake "prestige" or "quality" with "fit," and I think "fit" is a much more important thing to consider. True, I began considering doing econ at Chicago because of the department's clout, but it certainly wasn't the reason I chose to attend. The important thing for me was the fact that I would actually have those top-notch professors in my classroom (chicago makes all graduate professors teach classes in the college), that my classes would be small (4:1 student/faculty ration), and that I'd have plenty of research opportunities (there are more open research opportunities on campus than there are undergrads available to take them). When considering which school to apply ED, I think the OP should consider this sort of thing.</p>

<p>Cornell, for example, is a major research university like Chicago, yet its undergraduate population is a lot larger. Chicago's undegrad population is the smallest of all major research universities, and I think that some kids would love that. Others would not. At Princeton, for example, the under./grad ratio is 2:1, the opposite of Chicago. A benefit might be that faculty members devote more attention to their college students; A disadvantage might be that research opportunities aren't so readily available. Still, different strokes for different folks.</p>

<p>Things like the dorms, location of the school, weather, type of student it attracts, etc... ought to be taken into account. The New Yorker claimed that I will be going to school with "academics and bench scientists," people who have chosen to be "socially irrelevant." It contrasted that with people at another school, who were specially selected for being society's future superstars. I think the author's tone was a bit condescending towards the latter instituion, but I respectfully disagree. Both of these schools do attract different students, I would think, and thus, again, I think things like the student population ought to be taken into account.</p>

<p>I'll post the link to the article here 'cause I think its a great piece.</p>

<p><a href="http://www.newyorker.com/critics/atlarge/articles/051010crat_atlarge%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.newyorker.com/critics/atlarge/articles/051010crat_atlarge&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

24

<p>
[quote]
If you're talking about that garbage that overly relies on peer assessment scores, acceptance rates, and other non-academic factors then yeah in that respect Dartmouth is 'better'. Keep in mind that these 'overall rankings' also put UPenn at 4, Duke at 5, and WUSL at 11 LOL

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Chicagos peer assessment is higher than dartmouth. But you are right its garbage</p>

<p>Acceptance rate isn't though. A lower acceptance rate obviously means a student body with greater caliber. I dont see how you could argue otherwise ....unless you use tired arguments like 'Uchicago's applicant pool is self selective' or 'The uncommon application isn't for everyone'. I filled it out. I just copy pasted my common app essay. It took me about ten minutes to fill the whole thing up. I dont know whats so hard about that :-/</p>

<p>Non academic factors make up the quality of a university. You dont go to college just to study, you go there to grow as a person and be happy. Chicago was the only school whose students were DISUADING people from going there because they felt miserable. In contrast, the students i've talked to at dartmouth ADORE it. And no, they're not greek or hard drinkers or frat boys. They're very academically driven.</p>

<p>I dont see why duke being at number 5 on usnews, or penn being number 4 warranted a lol. They're excellent universities.</p>

25

<p>Huh? The students at Chicago were dissuading people from going there because they were miserable? My kid was really sold on Chicago by a very enthusiastic tour guide - and loves being there. Maybe you met the wrong people. Have fun in Hanover.</p>

26

<p>I don't know if anyone brought this up to the OP, but you can't apply to UVA early decision anymore. So, if you're dead set on applying early, it would have to be between Dartmouth and Cornell.</p>

27

<p>kenone~ if you're still listening for input to your original question, we have a new UVA grad and there are very few places like it! she/we are OOS and on that level it's ivy league, and is written up as a "public ivy". it is one of the most beautiful campuses in the country with one of the best libraries in the country(actually 14 or more on grounds.) Charlottesville has something for everyone and has been voted one of the best US towns in which to live. academiaclly it's tops, socially is varied and great fun, tho everyone (mostly) studies hard. weather is lovely and the mountains are great. steeped in major history and of course, Thomas Jefferson! after visiting Dartmouth and saw its isolation(tho beautiful) it was a definite no. i've heard the cold, gray remoteness of Cornell makes it a hard place in the long run. just an opinion as you think it through. best of luck!</p>

28

<p>Kenone, UVa is considered a pulbic ivy, but unless your someone who studies these things (like the posters on cc) you don't know that. Likewise most Americans don't understand the rigor of Chicago. OTOH, everyone understands Ivy League. If that matters to you, go Ivy. The only word of caution I have is be ready to be cold. Cornell, and Dartmouth are very very chilly places. </p>

<p>The only person from our school who got into chicago this year had 4.0 and 35 Act. Everyone else was denied. Cornell - 9 apps the only one accepted was a 3.658 with a 1970 sat. Lots of better kids like a 4.183 with a 2360 SAT and a 4.065 with 2250 SAT got WL. So it looks like legacy or hook was at work at Cornell. </p>

<p>Dartmouth did not take any of the 9 applicants but to be honest I didnt see any killer stats on the list of applicants so I can understand why.</p>

29

<p>can this thread die? reviving 1 year old threads is a little ridonk...</p>

30

<p>LOL, thanks for pointing that out. This kid is probably attending orientation at NYU by now.</p>

31

<p>^ lol...(10)</p>