What would happen if a school left the Ivy League?

College Search & Selection
121

<p>^ Again, bzva, you don’t know what you’re talking about. You’re reading the Wikipedia column on “number of rated programs,” a fairly meaningless stat. The other two columns are better indicators. </p>

<p>The ranking by “average of all scores” is a reflection of the breadth and depth of a university’s programs. By that measure, Cornell comes out #4, Harvard #12. That’s because Cornell has a much broader curriculum, and is strong in almost everything it offers. In my view, the breadth of a university’s programs is relevant to evaluating its overall strength. </p>

<p>But if you don’t like that measure, then use column #3, the ranking by “average of nonzero scores.” That just measures the average strength of the programs a university does have, no matter how narrow the offerings. By that measure, Harvard is #3 (after MIT and UC Berkeley) and Cornell a very strong #9, slightly behind Princeton, Caltech, Stanford, and Yale, but ahead of Columbia, Penn, and Brown (Dartmouth isn’t listed because it’s basically a liberal arts college). I think that’s about right.</p>

<p>And no, there’s no “woodcarving” or “pottery engineering” here. These are for ALL academic disciplines.</p>

<p>Bottom line, as measured by faculty strength, Cornell is actually one of the stronger Ivies, probably #4 after HYP. Its average admission stats are a bit lower than the other Ivies, but that’s due mainly to the “contract colleges”; Cornell CAS and Engineering students are very similar to those at Brown, Penn, or Columbia. Unfortunately, there’s a lot of ignorance about this, much of it spawned by US News and propagated on CC.</p>

122

<p>bclintonk -
I wouldn’t waste your time attempting to educate someone who has no desire to be educated and instead enjoys their ignorance and arrogance. Just ignore him, he’s not worth your time attempting to explain anything to. As a high school junior, he’s still highly uneducated when it comes to college and the real world and is vulnerable to solicited propaganda - which of course may include the 100% accuracy of any college ranking, when in fact no college ranking is actually 100% accurate. He’s also rude and very arrogant. As behappy7 said, classic definition of a ■■■■■.</p>

123

<p>And how can you reference a ranking that has UC Berkley in front of HYP?
You guys can claim I’m ignorant, but you guys are using completely terrible rankings. I mean, UW-Madison is in front of JHU, Duke, NU, etc.</p>

<p>You guys are an ignorant mob, only given confidence by your numbers. NRC is totally ■■■■■■■■.</p>

124

<p>Cornell is excellent in every single field. It’s the BEST ivy for engineering.
Ranked number one in their ILR program, Agriculture program, and human ecology programs.
And excellent premed programs as well. I’d say it’s vastly underrated. Cornell would move up the rankings if they left the Ivy League because of the silly rumor that it’s supposedly the “lesser Ivy”.</p>

125

<p>^So rankings are driven by the rumors of random high schoolers and college students? I sure hope not.</p>

126

<p>UCB is in front of HYP due to how the percentages of criteria are assembled. No one claims NRC is accurate. Absolutely no ranking is accurate. They are simply guides for determining which schools are top and which are not. </p>

<p>“You guys are an ignorant mob, only given confidence by your numbers. NRC is totally ■■■■■■■■.”</p>

<p>Clearly we are all uneducated and a high school junior knows more than the rest of us collectively? I don’t think so. Stop being arrogant and go do research before you come back. Your lack of respect and ignorance are undesired. </p>

<p>You assertion that Cornell is the “lowest Ivy” is only a recent assertion. Fifty some odd years ago, Brown and Dartmouth would have been considered lower than Cornell, hands down. Penn would have been included as well and still is by some. Rankings change rapidly, as do people’s perceptions of schools.</p>

<p>@ $KingsElite$
Oh didn’t you know, the world of academia is solely driven on the opinion of high schoolers?</p>

127

<p>@bzva74,</p>

<p>“I mean, UW-Madison is in front of JHU, Duke, NU, etc.”</p>

<hr>

<p>UW-Madison research expenditures top the $1 billion mark </p>

<p>Thursday, October 7th, 2010 </p>

<p>For the first time, annual research expenditures at the University of Wisconsin-Madison have surpassed the $1 billion milestone.</p>

<p>The latest figures released by the National Science Foundation (NSF) showed UW-Madison fiscal year 2009 research expenditures in science and engineering at $952 million, a jump of $70 million from the previous year. UW-Madison research expenditures outside of engineering and science – including the areas of business, education, arts and humanities – totaled $62 million for fiscal year 2009.</p>

<p>Among 711 universities surveyed, UW-Madison ranks third in science and engineering expenditures, the same ranking as 2008, behind Johns Hopkins and the combined campuses of the University of Michigan System. In the non-sciences area, UW-Madison ranks fifth.</p>

<p>“This amazing achievement is testimony to the strength and competitiveness of our faculty. It is great news for the university and the state of Wisconsin,” says UW-Madison Chancellor Biddy Martin. “Historically, we have done very well at securing outside support for research and that research funding creates jobs and supports innovation. Our aim is to keep Wisconsin’s among the world’s premier research institutions and the state’s best economic engines.”</p>

<p>The NSF accounting includes funding from federal, state and private sources. In fiscal year 2009, an estimated $515 million was obtained through competitive grant applications to the various federal agencies such as the National Institutes of Health, the National Science Foundation, the U.S. Department of Energy, the U.S. Department of Agriculture and NASA.</p>

<p>Not reflected in the newest NSF survey results are all of the funds obtained for research under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. The most recent UW-Madison figures show an additional 354 awards totaling $164 million in stimulus funding.</p>

<p>Research expenditures pay for research, including salaries and supplies and expenses. It is estimated that more than half of all UW-Madison employees are paid from funds other than state tax dollars or tuition and research funding is a significant component.</p>

<p>Since the inception of the NSF survey more than two decades ago, UW-Madison has consistently ranked among the top five of all research universities participating.</p>

<p>“Despite difficult economic times and fierce competition, we continue to do very well as a university in securing support for our programs of research,” notes Vice Chancellor for Research and Dean of the Graduate School Martin Cadwallader. “The fact that we now bring to Wisconsin more than $1 billion a year in research funding is a testament to the creativity and hard work of our faculty, staff and students.”</p>

<p>Source: [eCALS</a> - News for Faculty & Staff](<a href=“http://ecals.cals.wisc.edu/highlights/2010/10/07/uw-madison-research-expenditures-top-the-1-billion-mark/]eCALS”>UW-Madison research expenditures top the $1 billion mark – eCALS)</p>

128

<p>“Gourman is better. And puts Dartmouth and Brown higher than CornHELL.”</p>

<p>bzva, you maybe want to take it down a notch…or maybe two. </p>

<p>Like you, I also like Gourman better, he loves Michigan aferall! ;). But I am not sure that he ranks Brown and Dartmouth better than Cornell. And the NRC rankings are now much newer than Gourman. I think Gourman’s last rankings came out in 1998. The NRC just released their 2010 rankings 2 months ago. </p>

<p>Below are the top undergraduate schools in the US according to the Gourman Report:</p>

<ol>
<li>Princeton University</li>
<li>Harvard University</li>
<li>University of Michigan-Ann Arbor</li>
<li>Yale University</li>
<li>Stanford University</li>
<li>Cornell University</li>
<li>University of California-Berkeley </li>
<li>University of Chicago</li>
<li>University of Wisconsin-Madison</li>
<li>University of California-Los Angeles</li>
<li>Massachusetts Institute of Technology</li>
<li>California Institute of Technology</li>
<li>Columbia University</li>
<li>Northwestern University</li>
<li>University of Pennsylvania</li>
<li>University of Notre Dame</li>
<li>Duke University</li>
<li>Brown University</li>
<li>Johns Hopkins University</li>
<li>Dartmouth College</li>
<li>University of Illinois-Urbana Champaign</li>
<li>University of Minnesota-Twin Cities</li>
<li>Rice University</li>
<li>Carnegie Mellon University</li>
<li>University of California-San Diego</li>
</ol>

<p>It should be noted that Gourman’s rankings are not popular among CCers. Ironically, if he dropped public universities from his rankings, Gourman’s rankings would be seen as the best thing since sliced bread!</p>

129

<p>It doesn’t matter how much you guys argue, Princeton is the best xD</p>

130

<p>why do people bother ranking top schools</p>

<p>it’s pretty much seperated into two tiers. insanely good HPYSM etc. and really good uchic JHU umich NU etc.</p>

131

<p>immediately alexandre posted the gourman report, I did a quick scan for michgan </p>

<p>seems I was correct</p>

132

<p>university of wisconsin?? uMinnesota??</p>

<p>i’m sorry but those just make me doubt the credibility of the rankings…
when it says top undergrad schools, do you mean by teaching or what?</p>

<p>and i go to cornell, so i would love to believe those rankings btw =]</p>

133

<p>^ I would want to say at this point that Wisconsin-Madison and Minnesota are extremely strong universities. NO need hate</p>

134

<p>sefago, I did not bring up Gourman. I never do. Someone posted that he prferred Gourman because it was more recent than the NRC and because it ranked Brown and Dartmouth higher than Cornell. I was responding to that post.</p>

135

<p>ipoppills, you are quite right. People on CC try hard to segregate. There is very little difference among the best universities.</p>

136

<p>sefago, i promise i was not trying to hate lol. i was just surprised, because i don’t think i’ve ever heard of uMinnesota.</p>

137

<p>Minnesota’s Economics department is (always has been) a stellar (top 10). It is also excellent in many other fields such as Chemical Engineering and Psychology.</p>

<p>As for Wisconsin, it is arguably one of the top 5 public universities in the nation and one of the most well rounded academic institutions in the World.</p>

138

<p>I know this probably won’t mean anything to anybody, but my grandpa is a former university professor and dean at a number of universities and also attended quite a few as well. He even had a building at one of the universities he worked at dedicated in his name (just adding to his credibility). Anyway, he said (and take it for what it’s worth) that he never noticed any large differences in teaching or available opportunities for students at any of the universities he was at. Just for reference, he attended Wisconsin, Kansas State, Minnesota, Indiana, Purdue, and Princeton.</p>

139

<p>

Wisconsin isn’t even close to being a top 5 public in the nation. Berkeley, UVA, Michigan, UCLA, UNC, William & Mary and Georgia Tech are the top 7 public universities and there is a great separation in prestige between these schools and other schools like Washington, Illinois and Wisconsin that exists in the social consciousness of America.</p>

140

<p>okay i just basically skimmed this whole thread… </p>

<p>first thought: cornell had better not leave! i like how ivy league schools only grant aid based on need; i think that’s only fair. leaving to try to improve yourself athletically will make me wonder why i applied ED to this college. i like pretty much everything about cornell from what i’ve seen and read, but that will change drastically if the above happens. </p>

<p>also, at alexandre and sefago, sorry for being ignorant.</p>

<p>@lesdiables: you forgot UCSD =) ucsd is rising fast in rankings and such from what i’ve heard, and it’s currently not even ranked below georgia tech</p>