<p>whats wrong with communications? You have a problem with the future Walter Cronkites of the world??</p>
<p>Sam Donaldson once said the best courses to study for his job were philosophy, History, religion. Also, Cronkite didnt major in communications at Texas. He dropped out and started just working in newspapers. But, to your point, Sarah Palin did major in Communications at UIdaho. Case rested.</p>
<p>Katie Couric UVirginia English/History
Wolf Blitzer History/Int’l Relations (masters degree) Johns Hopkins
Anderson Cooper Yale Political Science/IR
David Gregory American U IR</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>So you’re an advocate of a liberal arts education, from what it sounds like. I have an opinion closer to rsx in that college exists for most people to make them appear more marketable for a job (the exception being if they’re well-off or content with being poor enough to pursue things for purely academic reasons).</p>
<p>Upon posting #192, my questions were as follows:</p>
<p>MIT>Stanford?
Stanford=Cornell?
Cornell>Caltech?
Northwestern>Chicago?
Georgetown>Chicago?</p>
<p>I thought those “>” sign should be changed into “=” or “<”.</p>
<p>Are they for real? If, yes, sadly to say we cannot argue with data.</p>
<p>Your diploma will help land your first job. Your education will determine what kind of life you will lead.</p>
<p>True, doctorb. Its a life-changing experience. Thats the reason why I miss my Alma meter so much and wish one day my 11 year-old son would have the same blessing as I have to go to same university I went.</p>
<p>I would like to add one more survey to complete the full coverage of the modeling exercise. As always, I value your opinions. The issue we would like to tackle is described as follows:</p>
<p>As mentioned in post #186, I found it is very difficult to separate Brown, Columbia, Cornell, Dartmouth, and Penn (5 ivies), Berkeley, Chicago, Caltech, Duke, JHU, and Northwestern into different tiers, which was evident by observing exchange leads and/or ties among these 11 universities across the board, so Tier2 is larger than the others, based on three independent assessments.</p>
<p>Our next task is to untie them using divide-and-conquer approach which sounds like one of the most commonly used programming tactics. Its not a simple one but believe it or not, it will work. I need your help to carry this out. We focus on the aforementioned 11 universities instead of 25 or more universities in our last efforts. What you need to do this time is to break them down into two groups. Please post your opinions on this with your independent judgment.</p>
<p>How about U Toronto, Mcgill and other Canadian Universities? Good value for the money.</p>
<p>
You could break them into tiers like academics do with PA scores:</p>
<p>Berkeley, Chicago, Caltech, Columbia, Penn, Cornell, Johns Hopkins (PA scores 4.5 and above)
then
Brown, Dartmouth, Duke, Northwestern (PA scores 4.3 and above)</p>
<p>OR, people will argue student SAT scores/student selectivity.</p>
<p>However, Berkeley is probably the only true world-class research university on this list… 
The others are among the great US universities.</p>
<p>Sinclair, I know U Toronto, McGill and U British Columbia are good and theyre all well deserved to be considered between Tier2 and Tier3 in our model. The issue is not all of us are very familiar with these three universities. For a more fair assessment, we better not include them this time. What you need to do this time is to breakdown Berkeley/Brown/Caltech/Chicago/ Columbia/Cornell/Dartmouth/Duke/JHU/Northwestern/Penn into two groups. Please post your opinions on this with your independent judgment.</p>
<p>UCBChemEGrad. Michigan has a 4.4 PA and is a true world class research university. Shouldn’t it be included in this group as well?</p>
<p>Penn Penn Penn</p>
<p>RJK, of course I agree with you. ;-)</p>
<p>However, this thread isn’t my list.</p>
<p>rjk:</p>
<p>In addition to Caltech/Columbia/Berkeley/Brown/Chicago/Cornell/Dartmouth/Duke/JHU/Northwestern/Penn, you can add a couple of universities from you independent assessment. I use the following list as an example.</p>
<p>First group: Berkeley/Brown/Caltech/Chicago/ Columbia/Cornell/Dartmouth/Duke/Penn</p>
<p>Second group: JHU/Northwestern/Michigan/Rice/UVA</p>
<p>Admission Standards (for my school):
Caltech, Columbia, Dartmouth, Rice, Penn
Chicago, Brown
Cornell, Berkeley, Duke, WashU, Northwestern, UVA, JHU, Tufts
Michigan, Vanderbilt
^Hard data taken off naviance. </p>
<p>For academic quality within those tiers, I’d go:
Caltech>Columbia>Dartmouth=Rice=Penn
Chicago>Brown
Berkeley>Duke>Tufts>Cornell>Northwestern>WashU>UVA
Michigan>Vanderbilt
^Take these with a large grain of salt. I don’t know much about the academics at some of these schools, especially UVA, Tufts, Duke, Dartmouth, and Penn.</p>
<p>“Take these with a large grain of salt. I don’t know much about the academics at some of these schools, especially UVA, Tufts, Duke, Dartmouth, and Penn”. I don’t mean to sound like a jerk and I mean no disrespect, but just don’t rank them then.</p>
<p>bjomountsi09, you don’t sound like a jerk to me. You make a legitimate point. Why post a ranking (like the one in #217, paragraph 2) if you cannot justify it? </p>
<h1>217, paragraph 1, is a little more credible. It clearly states that the ranking is based on limited criteria (admissions standards) and supporting data from a specific source (albeit only for one high school).</h1>
<p>
</p>
<p>tk - that’s not necessarily the best way of doing things, since not every school has a program in every dept. ranked by the NRC (and the rankings NRC rankings don’t including many depts. that schools do have).</p>
<p>Berkeley, Chicago, Caltech, Columbia, Penn, Cornell, Johns Hopkins (PA scores 4.5 and above)
then
Brown, Dartmouth, Duke, Northwestern, UMichigan (PA scores 4.3 and above)</p>
<p>I agree with this list :)</p>