<p>The balanced formula would be what percentage of the student body qualifies to pursue the award? How many of those actually do? And then how many of those achieve it? If you are pulling from a pond of 14,000 as opposed to, say, a smaller pond of 6,000, and the numbers come up pretty much the same, then, as a fisherman, I've got to think that the smaller pond has a higher concentration of decorated fish. Granted, its probably a somewhat meaningless comparison, but since you brought up the numbers of those who received these awards as a mark of distinction in the first place, I just thought this obvious point needed to be made.</p>
<p>Also, I BC's official brochure for 2009 admissions that I received after a meeting with an admissions officer at my school. I am directly quoting a paragraph in the brochure..."For the Class of 2012, the majority of incoming freshmen ranked in the top 10 percent of their class. The standardized test scores of the middle 50 percent of enrolling freshmen were 1900-2120 on the SAT I.</p>
<p>I get what you are saying Pennypac. You basically want a per capita kind of calculation. Alright:</p>
<p>** Undergrad Pop:**
BC: 9081
Cornell: 13510
JHU:4478
Tufts:5012
Carnegie Mellon: 5892</p>
<p>Fulbright Per students (in the last five years):
1) Tufts: 1 per 173 students
2) JHU: 1 per 179 students
3) BC: 1 per 259 students
4) Cornell: 1 per 422 students
5) Carnegie Mellon: 1 per 982 students</p>
<p>Rhodes Scholar per student (past five years):
1) JHU: 1 per 4478
2) BC: 1 per 4540 students
3) Cornell: 1 per 13510
4) Tufts: 0 per 5012
4) Carnegie Mellon: 0 per 5892</p>
<p>Marshall per student (past five years):
1) JHU: 1 per 1492 students
2) BC: 1 per 3027 students
3) Cornell: 1 per 4383 students
4) Carnegie Mellon:1 per 5892
5) Tufts: 0 per 5012</p>
<p>You are right, Pennypac, JHU does take top cake, but BC easily takes second. It is quite a surprise for me with Cornell. I really did not expect it to be so low. </p>
<p>bosoxnm3 is online now<br>
"For the Class of 2012, the majority of incoming freshmen ranked in the top 10 percent of their class. The standardized test scores of the middle 50 percent of enrolling freshmen were 1900-2120 on the SAT I."
- If that's what the brochure said, then I will go with the brochure. I will ask BC Admissions to see why there's a 100 point discrepancy. Thank you for bringing it to my attention.</p>
<p>I fail to see the point, we all know BC is a great school. Isn't that enough? Does it matter if they are 40 or 35 or 28? U need to be happy with the college, no one else.</p>
<p>just for arguements sake a girl from my shool that has far worse sat and gpa than me and no hooks or extracrurriculars got into cornell. i might go as far as to say it should have been an accident bc she is not nearly ivy material so</p>
<p>BC is certainly not of the same caliber as JHU and Cornell. It cannot compare, but if you like it, it should not matter</p>
<p>Reddune - Thanks for enlightening those still living in the "dark ages" regarding BC. Yours is the kind of clearly presented documentation that BC needs more of. Well Done!</p>
<p>All I can say is that the perception of BC as a regional college of scant resources (as when I was there in the early 1970's) seems to be dying a slow death. People may not be aware that BC's endowment, among other things, has gone from about 5 million in the 70's, and near insolvency, to something approaching 2 billion today. That, in and of itself, has been a vehicle for greatly improving those areas the college finds lacking.</p>
<p>A comparison of BC in the 70's and now would, I am certain, reveal a staggering amount of changes that cannot help but put it in company of the leading colleges of this nation. Whether one is "better" by this or that statistic is quite frankly boring and misses the essential fact that the "best colleges" are all at the accepted threshold of that definition. And, BC is over that threshold.</p>
<p>I mention the endowment because it has been, I believe, the prime liberator in BC's quest to bolster and enhance an academic program that has always been strong, whether it was at 5 million or at 2 billion. Many people do not know that even "in my day" BC was listed with that relatively small number of colleges as "highly selective" and "highly competitive". So, while BC may have found a measure of national prominence of late. it should be clear that her academics were always solid.</p>
<p>Thanks, again, Reddune.</p>
<p>Reddune, the reason for the discrepancy is the SAT scores you cited are for admitted students and the SAT scores bosoxnm3 cited are for students who actually attend BC.</p>
<p>Reddune, I can appreciate your loyalty to BC. However, the reality is that it is a Catholic institution and as such, will never attain the academic status of some non-religiously affiliated universities. As long as its curriculum is bound, even in the slightest way, to the constraints of the Vatican, it will not be able to offer the breadth of curriculum of those universities that offer complete freedom from the limiting boundaries of the religious.</p>
<p>You sound intelligent so please accept the fact that there are, indeed, more superior institutions of higher learning than Boston College. That said, it is a very good school with a plethora of activities, both academic and athletic, to offer its students. As Meadesport previously said, if you love it, great and I'm glad you obviously have had good experiences there. You just shouldn't be so stubborn and blind.</p>
<p>Sorry, but I don't understand your last posting. What do you mean by "constraints of the Vatican" that would limit academics at BC? Could you give a specific example or two?</p>
<p>Any Top 35 National University is an outstanding school academically. Being ranked #34 is an honor when examining the other 33 universities.</p>
<p>Oh, please, myoneandonly,</p>
<p>By your reasoning it,and any other "religious college", should be relegated to a separate list since it must be, by definition, inferior to any and all "secular" colleges.</p>
<p>Who is living in the dark ages here?...</p>
<p>Furthermore, you do know, don't you, that as a Jesuit institution BC is the beneficiary of an educational heritage about 100 years older than Holy Cow Harvard. Some of th finest minds in the world have had Jesuit educations, since circa 1535. Look it up.</p>
<p>bosoxnm3 has 50 friggen chance threads...can you take him seriously? sorry i find it extremely funny</p>
<p>myoneandonly, is your post a joke or are you a troll? Your post is not only condescending but downright ignorant, I might even say anti-Catholic. In what way is BC's curriculum "bound, even in the slightest way, to the constraints of the Vatican." BC is run by an all lay-person Board of Trustees. The curriculum is determined by the Chairman or chairwoman and the professors of each department. Some are Catholics, some are not. I don't think you know very much about BC. You haven't offered a single evidence to prove your claim. If you have gone to college, I don't think your school has done a very good job teaching you how to construct an argument. Circular reasoning and ad hominem are plentiful in your posts. I guess it's people like you that the UsNewsWorld Report is living off.</p>
<p>Yes, there are schools academically better than BC. I can name three of them: St. John's College, Reed, and Deep Spring. I consider them better because of their academic rigors and what kind of thinkers they turn their students into. I don't believe BC is the best university in America, but I am fed up with the baseless claims people are making. If you want to expound conspiracy theories, then fine, just don't expect rational people to believe it.</p>
<p>"You just shouldn't be so stubborn and blind."
Yes, I'm stubborn and blind because I haven't made one baseless claim yet. I have never said BC is better than Cornell, CMU, JHU, or Tufts. I don't pretend that it's better. But to say that BC is inferior requires evidence. Something you might consider using myoneandonly.</p>
<p>Honestly, I didn't have to read all of the recent posts, so not sure if anyone has covered this, but I saw a lot of references to Naviance and similar stat-records. While these are really helpful, they can be misleading. For example, at my school, Naviance said the average for ND was over 100, which was only the case because last year's valedictorian applied/went there (I got in EA with less than a 99). With programs like these, a single person can stretch the stat one way or the other. While the graphs can be helpful, I would in no way use them to compare schools, only yourself to others who applied. For example, if coincidentally only one person with perfect grades applied to some small, not really prestigious school and got in. So, Naviance will say the average for this school is a 4 point whatever or 104. Then you look at Harvard, where a dozen people from the top 10% of the class got in, it might say the average is a 3.9 or a 101. Does this make the first school better than Harvard? No. </p>
<p>I hope that makes sense, kinda rambled.</p>
<p>Well, of course there are many discrepancies with Naviance. However, I am talking about around 50+ applicants for each school I named over the past 5 years. Our school has a MUCH lower gpa than most schools (average UW gpa for low Ivies/equivalents is about 3.6). This always makes me think that some schools do not recognize how low our school's gpa is compared to most schools, not to mention that we are one of the most competitive in the country. Unfortunately, I believe that BC is one of them, due to their unexplained very high accepted gpa. This just goes to show how influencing Naviance is though. People look at the accepted gpa/sats for a school and automatically convert them into prestige levels (that is why Carnegie Mellon is considered so much less prestigious than BC, they have a 4.05 gpa compared to BC's 4.31 gpa). Honestly, I think colleges all look at high schools differently, skewing the results.</p>
<p>I don't think Carnegie Mellon is less prestigious. For engineering and music they kick BC's but in terms of reputation. Idk i wouldn't come out an say that though, if i were you i mean.</p>
<p>I think BC is ranked correctly if not a little high. I currently go there and I don't really think much of it, huge core that you cannot modify and get few choices for each core class, and education is highly variable and feels like there is an upper limit. The graduate school seems quite sub-par, which means your upper limit is basically the upper undergraduate courses, even then you get a lot of professors who are not good at the profession of teaching. The core courses are also pretty much all jokes, most kids just find whichever ones require the least work and give the best grades. Then there are a huge amount of students that do not go to their courses pretty much at all, many of which are atheletes where the education might not have been decision number one. (Quick statistic I've been told: 50% of the campus is either an athlete or in honors, don't know if I believe it but there is a very large number of both).</p>
<p>It's a great school for partying I guess (although no greek life by school policy, although that's probably a plus), but the faculty and staff are a pot-shot, some are absolutely great, some are absolutely terrible and have no place in teaching or administration. I've never been challenged in any of my core or minor courses, and that's in a core and minor that supposedly is one of the toughest in the university (in terms of average grades given). So, again, it seems there is a pretty low upper limit to what education you can receive here.</p>
<p>The student services are pretty darn great though, so outside of classes it's a pretty good place to be. Good residential life staff, great dining hall, great gym, good free clinic, etc. Although the police are too proactive and should be more reactive, especially since for some reason they are allowed to use lethal force (they carry guns), but when something goes wrong and you need help, it's nice to have a good network of residential life staff and police.</p>
<p>Another good thing is the reputation is good and generally thought to be good people from BC, and the campus looks nice (although it doesn't look so nice when you have to walk through 10 minutes of snow to get to class).</p>
<p>Overall I'm not that positive of BC, and my friends at BC are a bit mixed but most of them, if not all of them, think positively of it, so I'm probably in the minority.</p>
<p>afi, hate to break it to you but people are basing school prestige on music programs. Sorry.</p>