<p>@torveaux No merit aid? I believe that Caltech, jhu, duke, vanderbilt, chicago, and several other top 20 schools provide merit aid. Are those not considered elite?</p>
<p>I am using elite more as a pejorative than as a compliment. While those you mentioned have very little merit aid, there is at least an opportunity for a select few high-middle income kids to attend. </p>
<p>In terms of ‘top 20’ it all really depends upon one’s criteria. Using our system of combined rankings from multiple sources, Duke is 37th. That is not a bad thing. Only Cal-tech on your list made our top 20. The others were in or around Duke. There are hundreds of awesome schools in the US. The ‘elite’ ones fall even farther when you compare the academics to the cost. Think of it a unit cost. Part of what makes them ‘elite’ is the high cost… </p>
<p>@hidall1:</p>
<p>Hmm, making assumptions, are we? In any case, I actually don’t have a dog in the fight, as I didn’t go to UChicago for undergrad (though I do respect its education). In any case, I dislike shoddy research methodology, however.</p>
<p>What is this drivel about Duke and Chicago being ranked 37th in the US? Please provide links to the relevant resources!</p>
<p>@prezbucky So you went there for grad school but you don’t have a dog in the fight? Bravissimo! </p>
<p>@torveaux what sort of rankings are you speaking of?</p>
<p><<so what=“” was=“” the=“” reaction=“” of=“” older=“” folks=“” in=“” mn=“” to=“” acceptances=“” northwestern=“” and=“” chicago=“” (and=“” umich)?=“”>></so></p>
<p>@keepittoyourself:</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>So the reason why asked about the older generation is because, and I’m not sure if you know this, but in the US, until a generation or two ago, college reputations were very regionalized. Maybe Harvard (and maaaaybe Yale) would have been seen as at the top in the country (and MIT in engineering; maybe–in the South, folks would have considered GTech just as good), but the vast majority of the top students would have gone to the top school in their region of the country and they would have done so because they truly believed that that school was at worst equal to Harvard. BTW, Stanford would have been one of those regionally-respected schools, like Chicago, Northwestern or Rice. In fact, if William Shockley had moved to Chicago and brought all those scientists with him, Silicon Valley would have sprouted there and Northwestern would have become Stanford instead. Silicon Valley money really made Stanford in to what it is today.</p>
<p>It’s not like England where Oxbridge has been seen as the best since forever and maybe kids would pick Imperial for engineering or LSE for economics, but there was no reason to go below those 4 if you got in everywhere.</p>
<p>In fact, even now, it’s not as if applicants consider there to be a clear dividing line between Chicago and Princeton:
<a href=“Compare Colleges: Side-by-side college comparisons | Parchment - College admissions predictions.”>Compare Colleges: Side-by-side college comparisons | Parchment - College admissions predictions.;
<p>Among cross-admits, 58% choose Princeton and 42% choose the U of C.</p>
<p>BTW, I consider Oxbridge (and Keio and Waseda) to be akin to the top public flagships in the US (like Cal/UMich/UVa): great value if you’re UK/EU and can get the discount, but, unless you want a career in the City, for the quality of education received, if it’s full-pay for you everywhere, I’d pick a school like CMU/Northwestern (or actually, Williams/Amherst/Swarthmore/Mudd) instead.</p>
<p>The great thing about Keio and Waseda is that even at full-price, they charge about the same as in-state tuition in the US (and I wouldn’t recommend UofTokyo or any of the former Imperials to someone who did not grow up in Japan).</p>
<p><a href=“http://cwur.org/2014/”>http://cwur.org/2014/</a></p>
<p>according to these rankings, the top 10 universities in the world are: </p>
<ol>
<li>Harvard University</li>
<li>Stanford University</li>
<li>Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT)</li>
<li>University of Cambridge</li>
<li>University of Oxford</li>
<li>Columbia University</li>
<li>University of California, Berkeley</li>
<li>University of Chicago</li>
<li>Princeton University</li>
<li>Yale University. </li>
</ol>
<p>There’s your list. </p>
<p>As I pointed out, this is our own ranking based which is a weighted average of a number of publically available ranking systems, Forbes, US News, World Rankings. This is specifically targeted to STEM as my son is going for ChemE. </p>
<p>For instance Duke is ranked in a group of 101-150 in the Shanghai rankings for Chemistry. (we entered those results as 101 in our personal ranking system)</p>
<p>Physics, Duke is 76-100.</p>
<p>Overall Duke is 31 in the Shanghai rankings. Most of those above are US Universities, but many are not those some would consider elite. (Wisconsin, Northwestern, Illinois, Michigan, Washington, etc.)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I don’t know what the instruction is like at Keio or Waseda; certainly our impression was that they spent all their time drinking and slacking. I’d rank Oxbridge above any of the US schools you name in terms of quality of education, simply because of the tutorial system: 1 on 1 or (more realistically) 1 on 2 meetings with faculty every week versus (at best) about 1 on 8 at the most intensive US SLACs.</p>
<p>@keepittoyourself;</p>
<p>Yes, one-on-one in the tutorial system, but only once a week. However, if you want such one-on-one attention in the US, simply show up for office hours. Most students don’t go, so the faculty usually have a lot of time for individualized attention. Also, the American research universities have a lot more research resources while the American privates offer a lot more student support (writing centers, pre-professional advising, etc.) than Oxbridge.</p>