Yale vs. Harvard: Biology

<p>I know that Harvard definitely beats Yale in graduate molecular and cellular biology but I was wondering if anyone knew how the biology undergraduate programs of the two universities fare.</p>

<p>bump
10 char</p>

<p>IMO neither is great for undergrads but I would favor Yale. Yale has a strong MB&B major, or if you want to be more broadly trained in biology then MCDB. </p>

<p>BTW, I wouldn't be so sure about graduate studies- it all depends on your interests, the lab you end up in and ultimately on how well you do. The specific university is far less important than who your mentor was and what you did to get your PhD and whether your work made an impact.</p>

<p>Actually, Yale is much stronger for biology at the undergraduate level. </p>

<p>At the graduate level for bio, it's a wash, Yale is a bit stronger in some areas and vice versa -- the overall thing to remember is that both are among the top handful of biomedical research centers in the world, maybe even the top two in terms of overall quality. But for undergrad, Yale wins.</p>

<p>Yale's biology program is definitely NOT a top 2 program. I would not even call it a top 5. Harvard, Stanford, MIT, Berkeley, and UCSF are all better than Yale, although not by a long shot.</p>

<p>According to US NEWS, all of those 5 schools are ranked ahead of Yale. Yale is a top 10, not a top 5.</p>

<p>I would disagree, but obviously all of those are great programs too. I would argue that Harvard, Yale, Stanford, and Caltech are the top biology programs overall, with UCSF, MIT and UCSD the close runners-up. </p>

<p>What you might be confusing is quantity and quality. You have to distinguish between the two when talking about academic programs. Obviously, places like UCSF, Johns Hopkins, Michigan and MIT churn out more papers than Caltech each year, and are very good, but I would argue that the quality of Caltech's biology program (at both the undergraduate as well as the graduate level) and the average faculty quality is higher than that of any of those places. </p>

<p>One way to evaluate this is where undergrads & graduate alumni end up, but that takes some legwork, including talking with a dozen or two of the school's current faculty and students and conducting meticulous research on the web. I've done a lot of that work and have partially based my conclusions on what I have seen. Another way is to evalute quality-based rankings, although they aren't necessarily conclusive. In the individual department rankings of the 2006 Faculty Scholarly Productivity Index published by the Chronicle of Higher Education, however, 4 of Yale's science departments were ranked #1 in the nation (and many others in the top five). For comparison's sake, 4 of Harvard's, 3 of Stanford's, 2 of MIT's, 1 of Princeton's, and none of Northwestern's departments were ranked #1. Another way to look at it is that 13 of Yale's biological science programs were ranked among the top 10, versus just 10 of Harvard's, 10 of UCSF's, 10 of Johns Hopkins's, 10 of Duke's, 8 of Stanford's, 6 of UCSD's, 5 of UPenn's, 4 of Berkeley's, 3 of Caltech's, and 3 of MIT's. According to a totally separate source, ScienceWatch 2006 published by ISI, if you take the average placement of the 100 largest university science programs among 21 different fields, Yale scored the highest average placement with a score of 2.67, followed MIT at 3.00, then Harvard (3.80). </p>

<p>In other words, you could argue that Yale is #1 for biology -- not just #2 or "top five."</p>

<p>More anecdotal evidence includes things such as Yale winning more young researcher (PECASE) awards this year than any other institution in the United States. Also, Yale biology faculty have won four Gairdner Awards just within the past 4 years. The Gairdner is the most prestigious science award in the world after the Nobel Prize, as about 1/4 or more of Gairdner Award winners later go on to receive the Nobel Prize in Medicine-Physiology. Yale's biomedical research program is world-renowned and rapidly expanding, and in terms of research funding per undergraduate science student, Yale beats everyone else (except for Caltech) hands-down. That means plenty of research opportunities.</p>

<p>Anyhow, my suggestion is to throw all of this info out the window and evaluate the program for yourself. Harvard, Yale, MIT, Johns Hopkins, UCSD, UCSF, Stanford, WUSTL, Chicago, Duke and others are all world-renowned for their biological science research, but which school has the best undergraduate program? Talk with current faculty and students and see if they like the biology program, as well as where they go after they graduate. Also it is important to see where you would best fit in as a student. Some people would do better at a place like Wellesley or Pomona -- both of which have incredible undergraduate bio programs -- than they would at a large, impersonal school like Berkeley, Stanford, Michigan, Texas, etc. It doesn't take all that much work to figure out which school is right for you, but don't base your decision on what anyone else says.</p>

<p>Posterx's comments are distorted nonsense as a rule, and i say this as a current undergrad. I'm a bio major (although i've only finished a semester), and i'm satisfied with the bio departments. MCDB is a very popular major, EEB (ecology and evolutionary biology) less so mostly bc almost all premeds are MCDB. A couple of the courses in the dept. are a pain, but most of them are very good, challenging, and you come out of them feeling as if you have a good understanding of the topic. Intro EEB isn't so great and the genetics course i took was kind of disappointing, but i've heard a lot of really good things about the intermediate/upper level courses in both departments. It's pretty safe to say that the bio dept. is far more popular than the chem and physics depts, and is probably yale's strongest overall. It's also very easy to get lab experience if that's what you're looking for.</p>

<p>While i can't say much about Harvard, my god, have you been in their science center? It's probably the most hideous building in the world. That shouldn't discourage you from investigating their biology departments (i think they split it into five or six specialized sections), but that building is the most wretched waste of coveted real estate i've ever seen...</p>

<p>I have heard great things about Yale's biology program as well, especially their MB&B major. I'm sure at the undergraduate level, it's really hard to distinguish the bads from the goods.</p>

<p>Datalook's posts really bother me--looking back at some of his posts, he (or she) is strongly anti-Yale, and very pro-Stanford. Posters like these distort people's views of what each institution has to offer. It's really childish IMO.</p>

<p>Poor Stanford (or poor me), I decided not to apply there mainly because of that disgusting supplement...</p>

<p>
[quote]
Datalook's posts really bother me--looking back at some of his posts, he (or she) is strongly anti-Yale, and very pro-Stanford. Posters like these distort people's views of what each institution has to offer. It's really childish IMO.

[/quote]

In reality, Stanford is indeed better than Yale in lots of things. Stanford beats Yale in every single department in science and technology according to US-News: math, physics, chemsitry, biology, geology, computer science, and any field in engineering. This is just a fact.</p>

<p>usnews.com:</a> America's Best Graduate Schools 2008: Complete Guide to Programs in the Sciences</p>

<p>The ranking only lists the top 3 institutions in overall ranking and every subfield ranking.</p>

<p>Harvard and Stanford ranked as top 3 for 8 times.
MIT ranked as top 3 for 4 times.
Berkeley and UCSF ranked as top 3 for 2 times.
JHU and Wisconsin-Madison also ranked as top 3 at least 1 time.</p>

<p>Unfortunately, you can not find Yale. </p>

<p>Again, I'm not saying Yale is not great in biology. I'm just pointing out that Yale is not a top 5 program in biology.</p>

<p>Well since US news apparantly provides the final, and only word, let's not forget that Yale CONSISTENTLY ranks ahead of Stanford as an OVERALL undergraduate institution!</p>

<p>SOMEBODY got rejected from Yale...;)</p>

<p>Notice: OP mentioned UNDERGRADUATE. Your ranking is clearly fo GRADUATE schools. </p>

<p>You can't call USNews as something factual. By that logic, you'd have to admit that in overall undergraduate rankings, Yale is better than Stanford simply because it is ranked #3 and Stanford #4. </p>

<p>Of course, I'm sure you'll run off to google to find some other ranking that states otherwise. But that would debunk your original logic as USNews being the final word. I love how you call all rankings that place Stanford below "stupid," and only cite those that place Stanford ahead as "factual."</p>

<p>I'm guessing you are either:</p>

<ol>
<li><p>A high school students who really has no idea what these colleges are like and think he/she has all the answers thanks to amazingly accurate sources as college rankings-</p></li>
<li><p>A Yale REJECT and a Stanford ADMIT</p></li>
<li><p>A Yale REJECT and a Stanford REJECT who received a kinder rejection letter from Stanford.</p></li>
</ol>

<p>I'm going with #2.</p>

<p>Stanford would be foolish to admit someone as immature and misguided as Datalook, as would any selective university. I wonder if he realizes that his incessant and overly assertive attitude towards Stanford actually weakens the perception of it. </p>

<p>Datalook, Stanford doesn't need nor does it deserve someone like you to fend for it. Go get a life.</p>

<p>Haha... don't harp on datalook or any other trolls for that matter</p>

<p>Every Ivy on here has its share of trolls:</p>

<p>For Yale, it's PosterX. </p>

<p>But anyway, back to the point. You can't really rank undergraduate biology programs because by and large they're pretty much the same everywhere. But reputation-wise, Harvard has Yale beat (just like Harvard beats everyone in just about everything ::cough 36,000,000,000 cough::</p>

<p>rd31,</p>

<p>By reading a meassage from you, I feel some Yale people are just so so. In the past, I have met several Yale co-workers. To be honest, they are just average people. I can easily find several people from average universities that are more capable than them. </p>

<p>If you are proud of being at Yale, the "US-News #3 school". , enjoy your time there. I didn't go to Stanford. And I have never applied for Yale because Yale is not so great in the areas I'm interested in.</p>

<p>For any major in science and engineering, Stanford is better than Yale. That is just a fact.</p>

<p>Try to retort my arguments without any personal attack.</p>

<p>datalook,</p>

<p>If you are indeed an adult, I question whether you have been acting like one, tearing down other universities and being so eager to point out to high school students the flaws of these institutions. </p>

<p>It is not just a fact. Not. How do you justify your "fact?" By college rankings? What exactly makes those rankings "factual?" Just because some university invented some company, or has some amount of money, or has some professor, doesn't make it "factually" better than another school. In fact, how exactly is Stanford better? It depends on the student's preference--and if you chose where you applied for your bachelor's based on the graduate ranking<a href="which%20seems%20to%20be%20the%20resource%20you%20countelessly%20have%20turned%20to">/u</a> of that school, I believe that to be a true flaw, and something that should NOT BE ADVOCATED for High school students. Rankings are an opinion, of which factors of a college is important. Just an opinion.</p>

<p>I'm glad to see that you believe Stanford is an awesome university, because it IS. But so is Yale. "X is better than Y" can never be a fact when it comes to these levels of colleges.</p>

<p>I'm sure people are happy to be at Yale and "enjoying their time there" without you having to tell them to do so, thank you.</p>

<p>If you are truly an adult as you say you are, you have a lot of learning to do from some of the other adult posters on the board, who give sage advice on personal fit, and advocate students to disregard rankings. If USNews is so factual, Stanford, the "US-News #4 school" is a ranking hardly mentioned by yourself ;). Also, don't be so naive and judge an entire university as a whole based on one poster, please. That's just beyond childish.</p>

<p>
[quote]
By reading a meassage from you, I feel some Yale people are just so so.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I definitely feel that there are schools (I'm thinking MIT in particular, and I think that there are quite a few more in engineering, math, and computer science) better than Yale for science, but the above statement is absolutely ridiculous. Yale graduates are only "so-so"?? What planet do you come from?</p>

<p>
[quote]
I can easily find several people from average universities that are more capable than them.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>This statement is absolutely meaningless. Will Hunting was a janitor and probably smarter than the average Harvard graduate. Does that mean janitors are smarter than Harvard graduates or that Harvard is only "so-so"? Clearly not! What's important is not that you can find "several" or even a busload of people from state universities who are smarter than Yale students. What matters is the OVERALL level of intelligence and academic curiosity in each school! It is hardly believable to me that you are an adult, because you surely do not reason like an adult.</p>

<p>amb3r,</p>

<p>I said some Yale people are so-so. I didn't say All Yale people are so-so. </p>

<p>I said the co-workers around me from Yale are avaerage. I didn't say all Yale graduates are average. </p>

<p>I hope you are smart enough to understand that.</p>

<p>Then your whole statement about "some" people from Yale being so-so is really meaningless isn't it?
There are "some" Harvard people that are so-so aren't there?
There are "some" Stanford people that are so-so aren't there?</p>

<p>THANK YOU CAPTAIN OBVIOUS. </p>

<p>What was your reason for even making that statement if you weren't trying to imply something about the institution? Don't try to cover your tracks, I can see right through that. </p>

<p>Your reasoning and retorts are all pretty laughable, not to mention pathetic.</p>