<p>Huh? HYPSM?</p>
<p>Where did Columbia show up? Stanford is already included?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Are you that insecure to start a thread like this? Shouldn’t you be happy enough (or perhaps studying) since you are at MIT? </p>
<p>Anyway, people get a little too worked up over this stuff. First, there is only one school that gets the oooohhs and ahhhhs, and that is Harvard. There is a big drop after that…</p>
<p>There are about a handful of schools that are roundly accepted for being great and MIT is one of them. This thread is nonsense…</p>
<p>HOW is Rice not on here?!</p>
<p>I know someone who chose Rice over Harvard. It’s basically dubbed Harvard of the South.</p>
<p>Brown, Dartmouth, and Cornell as well.</p>
<p>^lol, and is that a good thing to be dubbed Harvard of the South? ;P</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>This kind of thread makes up a majority of the discussion on this website. Welcome to CC. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I’m pretty sure Harvard of the South is typically used to refer to Duke. Texas isn’t even considered part of the South in many cases. And Rice, Brown, Dmouth and Cornell are all good schools, but they are not on par with HYPSM when it comes to prestige, selectivity, etc.</p>
<p>
Alex, a truly world-class university would never throw its undergrads to the dogs like UC Berkeley does. Lecture halls often are overcrowded, students can’t always get into the classes they NEED TO GRADUATE if they don’t register fast enough, undergraduate advising is non-existent with regards to fellowships/professional schools, career services is lacking, the impersonal nature of the place makes it hard to access valuable grants/research opportunities, school spirit is lacking, placement into top programs is poor, etc. etc. etc.</p>
<p>I could go on and on and on but all these criticisms of Berkeley have been hashed out hundreds of time here on CC only to fall on deaf ears.</p>
<p>Who cares how good Berkeley is at the graduate level? GSIs will be leading lectures when your professor is out at some research conference. Also, most of these NAS, NAE, Nobel Laureates are foreigners who can’t speak proper English and are only at Berkeley to do research. Top undergraduate colleges like Princeton, Dartmouth and Duke would never permit these sort of individuals to teach their undergrads because they realize that quality of teaching/education is more important than boosting their research citing numbers to improve their international rankings.</p>
<p>Lesdiablesbleus, I am not going to go over your points, most of which are ignorantly innacurate and which have, as you pointed out, been hashed out hundreds of times. There is no evidence to support either side (those who claim that Cal is one of the top 10 universities or those who claim it isn’t). </p>
<p>However, you took my quote out above of context. I was referring to informative’s comment that Cal only has a few top 5 PhD programs. That is not the case as virtually all of Cal’s PhD programs are ranked among the top 3 in the nation. Harvard and Stanford are the only two universities that can match Cal in terms of the quality of graduate programs.</p>
<p><a href=“https://career.berkeley.edu/MedStats/top20.stm[/url]”>https://career.berkeley.edu/MedStats/top20.stm</a>
[UM</a> :: The Career Center :: Students :: Pre-Medicine :: Medical School Application :: UM Application Statistics](<a href=“http://www.careercenter.umich.edu/students/med/medappstats2009.html]UM”>http://www.careercenter.umich.edu/students/med/medappstats2009.html)
Look at those ATROCIOUS pre-med placement statistics.</p>
<p>Let’s look at Duke and Wash U now.</p>
<p><a href=“http://prehealth.duke.edu/wp-content/uploads/Table-1-Acceptance-patterns-20092.pdf[/url]”>http://prehealth.duke.edu/wp-content/uploads/Table-1-Acceptance-patterns-20092.pdf</a>
<a href=“http://prehealth.wustl.edu/Documents/Handbook2010.pdf[/url]”>http://prehealth.wustl.edu/Documents/Handbook2010.pdf</a></p>
<p>MEDICAL SCHOOL PLACEMENT RATE (ALL APPLICANTS)
Duke: 71%
Wash U: 71%
UMich: 42%
UCB: 47%</p>
<p>I also believe UCLA has like a 50% med school placement rate. If someone has the data for UVA, UNC and UCLA, feel free to share.</p>
<p>The top 15 private schools > the top 5 public schools for undergraduate quality</p>
<p>
Emma Watson turned down Yale to go to Brown. Are you saying she stepped down in her education? Dartmouth, Brown, and Cornell for sure are very close to HYPSM.</p>
<p>Wow medical school acceptance is just ridiculous</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>That’s a terrible example to use to say Brown is on par with HYPSM. Most celebrities are wealthy enough that if they were to choose to attend university, it’s not for employment or career prospects like the overwhelming rest of the college population. Not to mention that Brown is known to cater to celebs because of its reputation as being less of a pressure cooker environment due to grade inflation and their open curriculum while still delivering Ivy League prestige. </p>
<p>And yes, I’m standing by my comment that Brown, Cornell, and Dmouth are not on the level of HYPSM. By no means did I say that they are not very close to HYPSM or not extremely prestigious and selective, but they are overall a step below HYPSM when it comes to looking at those factors.</p>
<p>Actually LDB, Michigan’s placement into Medical school is 52%, not 42%. And whether a university places 50% or 70% of students into Medical school is not a bragging point. Either way, the rate is low.</p>
<p>But looking at placement figures without looking at the quality of the applicant pool is not very telling. You should compare applicants with similar stats. Michigan will not discourage any student from applying to Medical school. The results are clear; far more students with low MCAT scores apply to Medical school from Michigan than from Duke or WUSTL. Only 25% of students applying to medical school from Duke and WUSTL have MCAT scores lower than 30, compared to a 45% from Michigan. That alone makes probably explains the difference in admission rates. Either way, 70% is not something I would brag about LDB.</p>
<p>“The top 15 private schools > the top 5 public schools for undergraduate quality”</p>
<p>The top 5 are obviously better. Whether the next 10 are better is debatable. It would seem that some posters on CC believe it to be so. Most decision-making educated adults in a position of influence would disagree though. Either way, that does not address the OP’s question now does it? The OP asked if there were any universities that came close to being similar to HYPSM.</p>
<p>I think everything discussed here goes back to the original “how would you define prestigious?” It’s based on everyone’s own definition.</p>
<p>It’s too qualitative to assign numbers to. There are just too many ways to look at a school apart from it’s numbers.</p>
<p>If the OP is asking which schools are most selective,that’s easy. Just look up the admit rates. Admit rates alone don’t tell the whole story, but we can factor in grades and scores to provide what is still a fairly straightforward, objective answer (<a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/college-search-selection/687793-selectivity-ranking-national-us-lacs-combined-usnews-method.html[/url]”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/college-search-selection/687793-selectivity-ranking-national-us-lacs-combined-usnews-method.html</a>)</p>
<p>If you want to bring in a broader range of relevant factors, look at the US News or some other major ranking. The premise of threads like this seems to be that there is some mysterious Mojo that the data can’t capture. Of course there are unmeasurable issues of “fit” involving personal preferences for all sorts of things (architecture, size, climate, campus politics, etc.) By all means gather observations about any of these that matter to you. Choosing a college is a good opportunity to develop self-knowledge about these personal preferences.</p>
<p>
Your ability to misinterpret data to suit your agenda is astounding Alex. First off, unlike what you like to believe, Duke does very little screening of its medical school applicants as you can see by the chart. 58 applicants from Duke had Science GPAs <3.2 and MCAT scores <30, which would indicate that they had a snowball’s chance of getting in with those abysmal statistics (although 22 somehow managed). Duke’s Pre-health Serviced DID NOT STOP these subpar students from applying and even included them in these statistics.</p>
<p>If you consider applicants from Duke whose GPAs (3.2+) and MCAT scores (30+) are at least in the right ballpark that warrants serious consideration from medical schools, the acceptance rate jumps to approximately 89% (152 acceptances out of 172 candidates to at least one medical school).</p>
<p>Is 89% “high” enough for you Alex? For Michigan medical school applicants with a similar profile (3.2+ GPA and 30+ MCAT), the acceptance rate only jumps to about 68% (234 acceptances out of 342 candidates to at least one medical school).</p>
<p>COMPETITIVE students are the ones we should be measuring the success of here and clearly medical schools prefer someone from Dartmouth or Duke over Berkeley or Michigan when their grades/scores reach a certain equivalent threshold.</p>
<p>
I don’t know about WUSTL but VERY VERY FEW Duke students score below a 30 on the MCAT and those that do are included on the chart for the most part. This is a top 10 school we are talking about here Alexandre. Students from schools like Duke and Stanford who are serious medical school students are too smart to perform so poorly on the MCAT.</p>
<p>
Aha, but is 89% a figure worth touting in your esteemed opinion Alex? That is Duke’s medical school acceptance rate for its undergrads, for all intents and purposes, if we remove all of the “Hail Mary” applicants who Duke doesn’t screen out.</p>
<p>Brown was 6th in revealed preference ranking, 6th in number of Marshall scholars, and tied for 7th in Rhoes Scholars.</p>
<p>“And yes, I’m standing by my comment that Brown, Cornell, and Dmouth are not on the level of HYPSM. By no means did I say that they are not very close to HYPSM or not extremely prestigious and selective, but they are overall a step below HYPSM when it comes to looking at those factors.”</p>
<p>Way to state the obvious. The OP asked for schools close to HYPSM; obviously no school is on the same level as HYPSM, which are on a level of their own.</p>
<p>UPenn often seems disregarded, more so than the other Ivies. Is there a reason for this? Would UPenn be considered a weaker Ivy (without considering Wharton)?</p>
<p>lesdiablesbleus, I did not misinterpret anything. Do 45% of Michigan students who apply to Medical school get lower than 30 on the MCAT or not? Do 25% of Duke and WUSTL students who apply to medical school get lower than 30 on the ACT? </p>
<p>And where did I say that Duke and WUSTL discourage students from applying to Medical school. I said Michigan will not advise students not to apply, even when their chances are slim to none. That’s not a good thing mind you. </p>
<p>At any rate, we digress. The point of this thread is to discuss universities that come close to HYPSM. I think Cal, Caltech, Chicago and Columbia do. Those schools have a reputation that come closest (though still not close enough) to matching them thanks to their high powered academics.</p>
<p>
Hmmm…this is a common misperception about Berkeley. NLs do teach undergrads and have a command of the English language. Here’s a list of Berkeley’s recent NLs:
Steven Chu - 1997 (currently Energy Secretary)
Dan McFadden - 2000
George Akerlof - 2001
George Smoot - 2006
Oliver Williamson - 2009</p>
<p>All are American…I think they can speak English. And, yes, they do teach undergrads:
[url=<a href=“http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/2006/smoot-photo.html]George”>http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/laureates/2006/smoot-photo.html]George</a> F. Smoot - Photo Gallery<a href=“last%20picture”>/url</a></p>
<p>You can pull up the data for Berkeley’s 78 members of the NAE and 135 members of the NAS on the respective websites…a strong majority will not be foreign.</p>
<p>But, like you said, this has been “hashed out hundreds of time here on CC only to fall on deaf ears”.</p>