What schools do you predict will gain prestige in the next decades?

College Search & Selection
41

<p>Two things will determine this: money and leadership. </p>

<p>The money issue is fairly easy to evaluate and one can pretty easily identify schools on the financial upswing or downswing. </p>

<p>The leadership issue is harder to judge because institutional missions will differ and factors such as size of student population, historical/current level of facilities, historical/current level of faculty prominence, etc. will significantly impact how much change is possible and how fast it can happen. </p>

<p>For my money, in the national university category, I’d go with schools like REVD (Rice, Emory, Vanderbilt, and Duke) as all have a ton of money and have benefitted from the demographic swell of highly accomplished students and this has brought these schools a much higher national profile over the last decade. These schools definitely have positive momentum at the moment and, in addition, are increasingly coming on the radar screens of top employers. </p>

<p>As for LACs, I would nominate U Richmond. For those who have not visited, it has one of the most beautiful campuses in America, the school is insanely well endowed, and the leadership is young, smart, visionary, and highly motivated. </p>

<p>In public university-land, I would agree with the earlier suggestion of Ohio State. Gordon Gee has that place on the upswing. However, it’s likely to remain a mostly regional story as only 10% of its students are OOS. I also think that U Nebraska will benefit significantly from its new association with the Big Ten. This school will now be visible to a much broader audience and, with the right leadership, could quickly improve its position. </p>

<p>ripemango,
I agree that there is a lot to like about Duke and Rice. Terrific places that IMO give the most balanced undergraduate experience when considering all aspects of academic life, social life, and athletic life. </p>

<p>Similar places would be Stanford, Northwestern, Vanderbilt and Notre Dame. For the aspiring undergraduate student who values this balance, all would be superior choices.</p>

42

<p>

</p>

<p>This is me vomiting at this statement. Apple products are well designed, not technologically-advanced. Further, Steve Wozniak graduated from Berkeley. Nonetheless, point taken, although Stanford has a long history of technological innovation that it has long benefited from its technological prowess going back to the days of PARC and SRI.</p>

43

<br>

<br>

<p>Go Bucks! </p>

<p>P.S. I wish I could say the same for Michigan State!! lol</p>

44

<p>

</p>

<p>Lolz. Joke?</p>

45

<p>

</p>

<p>Here we go again!</p>

46

<p>University of California-Berkeley (UCB) has only 7% OOS & 5% International Student, yet, it’s the best public university in the country and one of the top in the world!! lol</p>

<p>Link: [University</a> of California–Berkeley](<a href=“http://www.princetonreview.com/UniversityofCaliforniaBerkeley.aspx]University”>University of California—Berkeley - The Princeton Review College Rankings & Reviews)</p>

<p>Incidentally, believe or not, based on my '95 USNWR copy (the only copy I’ve got since high school), tOSU tied with Emory and MSU (Michigan State) tied with USC for the PA score!! lol</p>

47

<p>Southern methodist University (SMU)!</p>

48

<p>^^ As an alumnus, I think Chicago is terrific. It has a well conceived, time-tested, rigorous undergraduate program. It has its own special spirit. But it’s just silly to call it “far stronger” than Harvard as a scholarly, intellectual place. </p>

<p>As for the OP’s question … who knows. Maybe we’ll see a trend away from a concentration of prestige in a few big brand names. The Internet spreads awareness of good schools, including small and relatively obscure schools, all over the country. It gives students the tools to choose schools based on subjective fit as well as objective quality factors. So you can depend less on somebody else’s unexamined ideas about what’s prestigious.</p>

49

<p>Stanford and MIT became prestigious because they got lucky with a few good alumni - like Steve Jobs, the Google, and the Intel Guy. Then they received big endowments, getting better facilities and teachers thus attracting better students. That’s all there was to it.</p>

50

<p>^Steve Jobs dropped out after one semester at Reed. He did not attend Stanford or MIT. MIT actually gained prestige from government research contracts in the 40’s and 50’s I believe, and Stanford was prestigious well before any of those people became famous.</p>

<p>In short, it was not really luck. At least not that kind of “luck.”</p>

51

<p>OH finally an answer to one of my original questions :slight_smile: That’s interesting about MIT, how about Stanford’s history?</p>

52

<p>I think Stanford tried to be prestigious from the get-go. It started with what was then a huge endowment, and wanted to be the Harvard of the West. I would also guess that it was helped by government contracts in the Cold War era and Silicon Valley researchers as well. I might be wrong, but that’s what I remember.</p>

53

<p>While Chicago has done very well in reforming its approach to admissions, at best this will only impact its visibility to prospective students and their families. At this point, really, I think the best hope/opportunity for Chicago to gain some serious lay prestige is for President Obama and crew to do well in the years ahead. It’s ridiculous how many Chicago (city and university) people are in his Cabinet and associated government; we can only hope that that will reflect back upon the institutions that enabled them.</p>

54

<p>An Northwestern admissions officer told me in an email today that “Northwestern’s engineering departments are getting stronger, and many in the field expect job offers for McCormick graduates to increase. We are gaining a worldwide presence, an engineering degree from Northwestern will likely get you just as far as degrees from other top schools”. What do you guys think of Northwestern’s prestige?</p>

55

<p>

</p>

<p>To be clear, Berkeley has a 7%/5% OOS/International student population within its undergraduate program. The graduate programs have far more OOS/International students, and indeed, some of the programs, such as the technical PhD programs, are almost certainly majority international, and even the Americans in the program are largely not from California. And it is precisely because of the eminence of the graduate programs that provides Berkeley with its lofty ranking.</p>

56

<p>

</p>

<p>Stanford careened from one financial crisis to another during its starting years, nearly going bankrupt during its first few decades of existence. At one point, Jane Stanford was reduced to pawning her own jewelry to maintain the school’s liquidity. While Stanford may have always wanted to be the Harvard of the West, that claim had little credibility before the 1950’s. </p>

<p>

</p>

<p>True indeed, but more importantly, Stanford fostered the development of Silicon Valley in the first place through the launching of what is now Stanford Research Park as arguably the world’s first technology office park.</p>

57

<p>

</p>

<p>Unfortunately, that was after he had retired from Apple. So it’s rather difficult for Berkeley to make a claim towards any Apple innovation.</p>

<p>On the other hand, Woz did teach at Berkeley (as a lecturer) for a few years and still drops by every so often.</p>

58

<p>^^Bill Gates also “graduated” from Harvard in 2007^^</p>

<p>I don’t think any one person can make or break a college’s reputation, but collective events make the college stand out.</p>

59

<p>Until Duke leaves the deep south, it wont rise.</p>

60

<p>^hahahaha 10char</p>