<p>NYU is not gonna jump 12 spaces in one year.</p>
<p>besides, it shouldnt be based solely on usnews rankings</p>
<p>Correct, but look at the current top 25 us news. Can you pick out one that should be replaced with a non-top 25 us news college?</p>
<p>Even the lowest (UCLA, Umich, or something) belong on there more than Tufts and Wake Forrest.</p>
<p>Drop Emory, UNC, Vanderbilt, Notre Dame, Michigan and UCLA. Good schools, but not rocket fuel.</p>
<p>to anyone who said Tufts, can you explain, i've been hearing a lot about that school lately, what makes it so great?</p>
<p>
[quote]
Duke is the most overrated, and should be replaced by Tufts.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>
[quote]
Duke should be there, but certainly not Tufts.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Just thought I'd point out the amusing contradiction Mensa :)</p>
<p>
[quote]
Drop Emory, UNC, Vanderbilt, Notre Dame, Michigan and UCLA.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Except for the fact that almost every department at Michigan is top 10 and it has a great student body. UCLA has several top 10 departments as well, and is clearly a research powerhouse. UNC is clearly a top school, as well:</p>
<p>"Carolina has the second largest number of Rhodes Scholars among public universities (39 since 1902) behind the University of Virginia. Additionally, many students have won Truman, Goldwater, Mitchell, Churchill, and Mellon fellowships. Carolina is ranked among the top five of public and private universities for prestigious scholarships, surpassed only by Harvard University, Yale University, Princeton University, and Stanford University."</p>
<p>So no, they're definitely not "rocket fuel." Not that that not-so-clever quip really makes sense anyway.</p>
<p>
[quote]
to anyone who said Tufts, can you explain, i've been hearing a lot about that school lately, what makes it so great?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>It specializes in international relations and the sciences. The international relations program is one of the best in the US as the Fletcher school is nearby and offers resources and access to a world renown faculty. It does not offer the same type of education that the school of foreign service does at Georgetown, which essentially locks you into the profession if you know that's what you're going to do. A lot of our IR graduates go on to do law, international business, or pursue international politics and consultation within or outside the UN.</p>
<p>The premed seems to be the main other selling academic point at Tufts. Our graduates do well and the rigors of our introductory courses prepare students well for the MCATs. Not much to say there, but graduate schools recognize the difficulty that we go through - there is no grade inflation. You work for your grades here.</p>
<p>The engineering program is small but intimate in its education - it often gets a lot of criticisms due to its low ranking, but that is because of its size and its low research output. This is not, however, to be confused with the rest of the university. Research opportunities are very plentiful here but they are widely distributed throughout the disciplines. In terms of the engineering rankings, I think we're around the 70s or so. Something I usually point to as a general point of reference is the Harvard school of engineering. NO ONE knows that the school has an engineering program, but when you look into the peer assessment score, it actually does decently well because it has the name Harvard. It has very few graduates and yet it is ranked #30 (probably changed from the point at which I saw it). Sure our school isn't highly ranked, but that doesn't make it bad.</p>
<p>The engineering education is highly undergraduate focused and there is less to insert into its graduate program with the exception of the biomedical engineering, which seems to be the greatest cash cow nowadays for the department in terms of grants (I did a bit of research there, and it seems to utilize the other departments quite well in order to work on stem cells and other biomaterial that can be used as grafts). Classes are fairly small and there is a lot of professor interaction and the students are of very high caliber. When you have a high caliber student body, you can expect your students to achieve a greater standard. The offerings might be limited in terms of the fields to choose from, but with a stellar student body, a lot is possible that many people don't give it credit for.</p>
<p>In general - why do people pick Tufts? Why would anyone come here? Some don't have a choice. Some do. It's highly personalized. You can't stereotype it as a school that if someone got into school xyz it's a no-brainer; every year you have an interesting class that came here for a lot of personal reasons. It's unique in its feel and what it has to offer - a world class education with a campus close to boston. </p>
<p>The negatives at Tufts:</p>
<p>Our school is poor. There's no point in denying it - our endowment JUST reached 1 billion this year. Our school nearly folded several times throughout its history. It almost shut down during world war II and in the 1970s we almost went bankrupt. We had to start over from scratch in terms of $$. However, within the next 5-10 years we plan to implement a need-blind policy for financial aid. A lot of students get really good financial aid here, but there remains that last barrier that prevents monetary reasons from influencing the admissions officers. We have to pay for private music lessons as they're not included in our tuition.</p>
<p>The dormitories - old old old. There is a new one being built, but a large number of them need fixing. But, alas, I refer to my previous point that we're poor.</p>
<p>And ah yes, and the "bitter ivy rejects" connotation that our school has developed over the years. I'll admit that there are a lot of ivy rejects, and a lot are bitter, but you will find that over the course of four years people really do become a lot happier. There are plenty of students who claim "Tufts syndrome" - the 1400 SAT top 5% that feel they deserve to get in as it's not a top tier school - but the fact is that the selectivity is changing. Within the past couple years the average test scores have risen from the low 1300s to a 1430 this year, disappointing qutie a few applicants that were denied admission. A lot of the bitterness comes from the idea that Tufts is a second tier institution that's not worth going to, surrounded by the expectations and entitlement of acceptance. People don't want to accept that they weren't good enough for a supposedly sub-par school. However, a lot of people end up shifting their perceptions from their initial jaded attitudes (those that matriculate of course, not necessarily those that didn't come here). Many of my friends initially came here hating it and hoping to transfer, but once they took off the blinds of negativity they was able to see that life's actually pretty good here. We're not cut-throat, we work hard, and we have fun. Most of us are happy. It's as simple as that.</p>
<p>Edit: Oh I completely forgot about the topic of whether or not Tufts deserves to be in the CC top schools. Of course I think it should, but really, it doesn't matter. Students who research our school or who have been affiliated with it should know what we're capable of. Regardless of one particular site's validation, I think that the reputation should be able to stand on it sown.</p>
<p>^^ I totally agree 100%.</p>
<p>But you are once again evaluating Tufts as an individual which is very easy to do. Do you really believe it deserves a spot over the other #25's (Umich,UCLA?)</p>
<p>
[quote]
But you are once again evaluating Tufts as an individual which is very easy to do. Do you really believe it deserves a spot over the other #25's (Umich,UCLA?)
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I think that a personal anecdote is as valuable as the global scale of prestige would categorize. Ultimately a top university education consists of satisfaction of students that actually attend. I have my own ideas as to which universities belong in the top 25 for US News, but they are highly subjective. The notion of top is silly to begin with. Besides, the Top Universities of CC are independent of US News and doesn't have a set number. Who said anything about removing a school in order to augment another?</p>
<p>USNews is a joke. Look at where they put Wash U. </p>
<p>Tufts has no name recognition.</p>
<p>^since when did name recognition determine which schools were good or bad?</p>
<p>Everyone knows the general population has no idea which schools are good except HYPS and the schools with good football teams.</p>
<p>Brandeis!!</p>
<p>
[quote]
So no, they're definitely not "rocket fuel." Not that that not-so-clever quip really makes sense anyway.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Obviously, it's exploding! (If you've ever seen the Shaolin Soccer English subtitles...)</p>
<p>
[quote]
One, I doubt the Nobel laureats are doing a whole lot of teaching at all, let alone to undergrads, so the prize winning profs are providing no tangible benefit to the undergrad students.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Actually, a few of them are. And if they aren't teaching, are hiring undergrads to work in their labs.</p>
<p>I'm biased, but UCSD really should be on there. Yes, it's heavily biased towards being a research university, but that doesn't necessarily translate into a poorer undergraduate experience. I'm an Aerospace Engineer (MAE), so I can't speak for the other departments...but every single professor that I've had has been extremely good, and made himself/herself available outside office hours. The vast majority of professors have over 80% of students recommending him/her...a few even have numbers consistently above 95%.</p>
<p>We have a physics professor who comes to UCSD one quarter per year - he holds a fulltime post at CERN...and comes here only to teach. He's had 100% approvals for 4 or the 5 classes he's taught here.</p>
<p>Yes, there are always those professors who value their research above their classes, but this will be the case at any school except a teaching-centered LAC.</p>
<p>:)</p>
<p>I would drop CMU first before I drop Emory, AccetedAlready :) (I know I am completely biased since im going to emory, but to me Emory is #1...lol)</p>
<p>if NYU is added, BC must be added too. Personally, i think neither should be. Also, if UNC is there, Wake and Tufts have to be there.</p>
<p>Tufts. This school definitely needs to get the respect it deserves, especially when schools such as CMU and Emory are put up there - schools that are significantly easier to get into than Tufts, which is one of the hardest to get into in the US.</p>
<p>Worldband Dx has a good point</p>
<p>NYU is already overrated like crazy by the general public; now you want to extend that adoration to people who should know better?! Be happy with what you don't deserve but already have.</p>
<p>WorldbandDX... It's cute how much you love Tufts. However, it is not "significantly [harder]" than either of those schools (Emory/CMU). True it has a slightly lower aceptance rate (Ivy Back-up = large applicant pool), but the student body is no better. Tufts should be added to the list, though not at the expense of similar, arguably better, depending on department, schools.</p>