<p>"Ummm UF is a much better school than Tulane… "</p>
<p>That is one of the most ridiculous things I’ve seen on this site. You UF people are killing me.</p>
<p>Forever LSU, if you are looking at academics, just look at the peer assessment score. Michigan ranks pretty high on that scale(Top 15). I don’t think USNWR considers graduate schools for its ranking. So I’m not sure why you included law schools in your argument. They probably do for undergraduate engineering and business though. The UT argument is fair though. </p>
<p>Michigan is ranked #18(Behind Stanford) best world university because of its prestigious graduate department. Its rank for undergraduate teaching is ranked # 11 which is really good, but Michigan is severely hindered by its incoming class size, selectivity, and financial resources. The state also gives Michigan a minimal amount of money each year. About 7% of its total endowment. Academically Michigan compares to Cornell, Northwestern, Brown, Duke etc, but in other areas, Michigan lacks.</p>
<p>If Michigan gets more selective over the years and lowers its incoming class size it might creep up in the rankings. Next year its going to look pretty bad for a lot of universities, considering the economic downturn. For one Michigan’s acceptance rate is closer to 50% for this academic cycle and its incoming class size increased by about 200 students. </p>
<p>These rankings don’t tell the full story. So putting much weight on them is another thing.</p>
<p>ghostbuster, everyone has to get a major at Stanford therefore employers know what they are getting. That spirituality class will not get someone a major. All Stanford students have to take three writing courses (PWR 1, PWR 2, Writing in the major) and three quarter Introduction to the humanities. You can’t skimp on those. They are not easy, as I and anyone else who has gone through Stanford will attest to. Would you believe that I got higher grades in multivariable calculus, linear algebra, and differential equations than in these humanities courses? Well, it’s true. That being said, it’s sort of idiotic that you would say that because Stanford does not kowtow to your views the education one is recieving is moot. Now **in addition **to the humanities core that everyone has to take you have breadth requirements in the humanities and there you have much more options, and presumably less rigor.</p>
<p>P.S. Stanford grads make much much much more than the vast majority of graduates from other schools, especially Fordham. Looks like very few employers share your view point!</p>
<p>Oh dear god, WashU at #12…over Brown, JHU, and Rice? Crap, this is only going to encourage them to continue. Expect 50% of all applicants to be waitlisted this year.</p>
<p>Penn as good as MIT and Stanford? Right. </p>
<p>Rock on, CalTech.</p>
<p>What’s happening to Brown? In a few years they’ll be out of the top 20.</p>
<p>Oh and US News, quit being wussies and stop with all the ties. Pick one school at #1. And if you can’t decide, toss a coin.</p>
<p>The reason that SAT and GPA of Stanford admit are lower than HYPM is Stanford looks for a well-rounded applicants. Stanford view the application holistically and choose the applicants not only based on their academic stats but also their personalities. It’s not a number game.
@ ghostbuster: what’s wrong with Hawaiian sprituality? It’s called general education for a reason. Don’t be a hater just because you /your children got rejected by Stanford. Grow up</p>
<p>Brown didn’t drop. It was also number 16 last year.</p>
<p>Not much unlike ghostbusters.</p>
<p>Chicago should not be behind Hopkins and Columbia. Chicago has one of the best undergraduate programs in the country. It’s a very hard school to excel in, but students acquire an amazing intellectual grounding at the school. </p>
<p>Chicago is ranked higher than Princeton, Columbia, Penn, Stanford, and CalTech in the international rankings posted by US News World Report. I’m pretty sure it’s just MIT, Harvard, and Yale that are above it.</p>
<p>Personally, I think Chicago’s undergrad beats Penn or Stanford for undergrad. Stanford is great and so is Penn (Wharton), but mainly for graduate focus.</p>
<p>UF is a great school. The caliber of students getting accepted has increased significantly. </p>
<p>Just this year in my high school only 8 students were accepted to UF (all were top 10 percent Cum Laude students.) And the kids accepted to Tulane were no where even close, and some of them weren’t even accepted to UF.</p>
<p>Anecdotal evidence is awesome. Admissions stats between the two schools aren’t really close. Tulane has been admitting a much higher quality student body then UF. The idea that Florida is “much better” is one of the most absurd things I’ve seen on the interweb lately.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>That was done as a charity case. Tulane students also went to UT, UF, AND U of Houston, Texas A&M Galveston, Texas Tech, etc.</p>
<p>They went where there was room, and they HAD to leave when Tulane reopened.</p>
<p>To somehow suggest that the Tulane kids were “super kids” because some were placed at high ranking schools is disingenuous at best, and ludicrous at worst.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Ummm that’s because UF is a state school, takes some athletes with less than appealing academic credentials, and well, not everyone accepted is going to be a scholar. I believe UF has the most IB students of any school, but I could be wrong. I know it’s up there. Add in high achieving students who stay home for the bargain that is Bright Futures. Tulane? Psh. I know plenty of people there. Sure, there are some really top students, but Tulane is full of East Coast rich kids who just wanted to get away and party. It’s like a better Miami.</p>
<p>ilovepeople, get off your Uchicago high-horse.</p>
<p>I cheerlead for Hopkins too, but not in a way where I put down other schools who are equal to mine, and try to distort facts to throw better schools under the bus.</p>
<p>The fact is:</p>
<h1>1: HYPSM (maybe Caltech)</h1>
<h1>2: Cornell, Columbia, Penn, Brown, Dartmouth, Chicago, Hopkins, Northwestern, Duke, WashU, Berkeley, Mich, UVA, UNC, UCLA</h1>
<h1>3: Emory, Georgetown, NYU, Vanderbilt, Tufts, etc.</h1>
<p>CHICAGO is ON THE SAME LEVEL as the rest of the schools on the #2 level. There may be be CERTAIN areas where it excels, but there are also CERTAIN areas where it fails. No school in the #2 list is vastly greater than any of the others in any major ways.</p>
<p>“I believe UF has the most IB students of any school, but I could be wrong.”</p>
<p>That is horribly wrong.</p>
<p>"Sure, there are some really top students, but Tulane is full of East Coast rich kids who just wanted to get away and party. It’s like a better Miami. "</p>
<p>The ignorance in this thread is appalling.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Prove me wrong then.</p>
<p>I should get off my high-horse? Look at you…</p>
<p>How can you generalize schools those schools so easily into three groups? And then proceed to utter all the schools in one tier are at the same par. </p>
<p>I am agreeing to disagree with your rankings. </p>
<p>Hopkins is a great school, I never denied that. Maybe you should re-read my post. I do however think the quality of academics at Chicago is slightly better than quite a few of the number two ranked schools. I may have my bias, and who really cares. </p>
<p>I applied to Berkeley, Hopkins, Duke, Columbia, Wash U, and Michigan and received acceptance to all of them. I chose, however, Chicago in the end. With that said, all these schools are phenomenal…so please, calm down.</p>
<p>ilovepeople712:</p>
<p>First of all, you have never taken a single class in Hopkins, nor Columbia, nor Berkeley from my understanding. If you have, then perhaps I am wrong.
Thus, it is very vapid and self-righteous to assume that the academics at one are arguably better than another without any clear basis for comparison.
Secondly, I based my words on Chicago on the truth. Chicago has wonderful programs in Economics, humanities, and a great core-curriculum. However, compared to Columbia, it has a weaker political science offering, and other weaker humanities areas. Compared to Hopkins, it is weaker in Biology, BME, International Relations, and Chicago has no opportunities for engineering (ok, maybe a few, but limited). Compared to Northwestern, it cannot begin to compare to Journalism placements for undergrad, as well as many other areas.</p>
<p>This is why I say they are all comparable because they all have strengths that one or the other doesn’t.</p>
<p>I applied to Chicago too, as well as Columbia, Hopkins, Duke, and a whole host of other schools that were ranked much higher than Chicago was at the time and I got a lot of acceptances and money offers. I chose Hopkins because it was right for me, just as you chose Chicago because it was right for you. However, just because you chose it and know about it, doesn’t make it better, especially when you are talking about schools of this caliber. I am happy with JHU and personally think it’s the best school in the world. but for ME. There’s a difference between personalized rankings and REAL rankings. You TRIED to state that the real rankings should reflect Chicago as better than schools like columbia, princeton, stanford, etc, but that is just YOUR personal OPINION.</p>
<p>I really don’t see how you could even continue arguing with my logic unless you have none.</p>
<p>Hope, don’t exactly understand how you put together those 3 tiers on the last page lol.</p>
<p>soccer: a mixture of academics, prestige, general desireability, strength of alumni and faculty.</p>
<p>I don’t understand how my tiers are wrong, and I don’t feel like dividing it any more because the differences within each tier are as minimal as to be nonexistent.</p>
<p>Don’t kid yourself Hope2getrice! Duke and Chicago are better than Hopkins. I loved how you tried to lump JHU with Chicago and Duke, which have much better student bodies.</p>