<p>I don’t really call HARVARD IS BETTER THAN YALE AT EVERYTHING or CORNELL IS THE WORST IVY or EVERYBODY AT SCHOOL X IS A#()*$#$ (or any of the many, many, abhorrently unquantifiable things that people say on these boards) discussion. They’re not informative, they’re offensive, and sometimes they are blatantly untrue. And, to me, this would be the epitome of the shadows on the wall, no?</p>
<p>I see a place for other kinds of discussion-- discussion of rankings and methodologies, discussion of schools and fit (information culled from a variety of sources, including but not limited to impressions of the school), discussion of admissions, programs, and practical things. I have almost 1,700 posts (ouch?) for a reason, the vast majority of it coming from hs students looking for information on Chicago. To me, there is so much VALID discussion going on here (whether I agree with it or not is another issue entirely) that we don’t need a lot of junk.</p>
<p>As I mentioned, I do agree with you that one should not overlook the value of an in-state school, both financially and otherwise, and one should consider the comparable financial burden of a private, but I think it’s unfair to point to a certain school or a certain ranked tier of school as “overrated.”</p>
<p>Every year, the London Times ranks the best colleges in the world. In the 2006 edition of the Times Higher Education Supplement, UCLA was ranked number 31 in the world. UCal Berkeley was ranked number 8 in the world. UCAL San Diego was ranked 44. Stanford was ranked number 6. The University of Chicago, by the way, was ranked 11. </p>
<p>Where do you think USC was ranked in the world? USC was ranked number 101 in the world by the London Times. </p>
<p>Lest you think my opinions are simply pulled out of thin air, they are not. They have a strong basis in fact.</p>
<p>I think the validity of those particular rankings and their usefulness to a college-bound high school student is a separate discussion in itself. Am I jumping for joy that Chicago’s ranked 11th? Not particularly. I think there are a lot of reasons to like Chicago as a school, and that a lot of professors are doing cool research there (or are otherwise in on a conspiracy with the THES) is a tiny part of it.</p>
<p>The London Times? Pulleese! That ranks Universities according to their GRADUATE programs. What we are discussing is the quality of undergraduate programs. Or would you like to compare Dartmouth’s ranking [#71] with those of Boston university[# 47 ][one of the universities you posted as being “overpriced”] in the latest 2007 London times ranking? In that case, based on this data, Boston U. is better than Dartmouth, right?
Obviously, very few in the US who know about undergraduate education would agree with that statement, but there is the “proof”, right?
Anyone can pull stats out of a hat after the fact, to try to support a premise or argument they have already stated.
I suggest you get off your college soap box, making pronouncements about places you know nothing of, until you a have actually BEEN in college for a while.
I’m done arguing with a know-it-all 17 year old.</p>
<p>Everybody knows 41.8% of all statistics are made up.</p>
<p>Changes in prestige have incredible lag time from actual qualitative and even quantitative changes at schools.
quite frustrating for anybody who is at a school just as good as HYP but has yet to be recognized as such…</p>
<p>BG, for someone who favors logical discussion so much, you have a way of making the same kiddish jabs that people have come to expect from the cheeky high school bunch – our fault, right?</p>
<p>In the same vein, Princess Logic, rankings are hardly FACT – extracted from numbers, yes, but opinion drives the methodology applied in the derivation of meaning from these statistics.</p>
<p>Nobody, unless they have attended both UCLA and USC, is in a spot to affirm where they felt THEIR money was being spent more effectively. The same goes for all such state/private dichotomies.</p>
<p>FWIW, I have attended both (top public for undergrad and top private for grad/professional school). In my opinion, while the resources and faculty quality at the private were slightly better than the public, I’m not so sure my paying the roughly 4x tuition costs were justified.
(As an aside, yes, the career opportunities at the private trumped those of the public… but I attribute the majority of that to the material differences between professional school/undergraduate recruiting)</p>
<p>Funny post #35 about Johns Hopkins.
Someone once told me that MIT is a better place to be from than at. The MIT grads I have quoted this to over the years regretfully agreed.</p>
<p>I know I am reiterating that I hate this debate. I do. But I must comment on the Urban dictionary site linked by Ballet Girl. The numerous USC comments are hilarious in that they are obviously posted by UCLA students and other USC-haters. It is quite telling that USC’s reputation congers so much envy and rivalry. That alone tells you something (most likely positive) about the school. On the other hand, most of the posts about UCLA reference how it is sooo much better than USC! Lol. Talk about an inferiority complex! Also, entries about Dartmouth are nearly non-existent. Only three, I think. Apparently few people even care about it enough to comment. One calls Dartmouth the “doormat” of the Ivies, and another says its grads end up either rich or crazy. Whatever.</p>
<p>Bay, it’s funny you should mention the rich/crazy definition on UD – I’m from Dover, NH myself, and in the town over, Barrington, lives a Dartmouth grad who owns and operates a castle and dresses the part in public. I met him at a country store Christmas soiree and he gave me a flier advertising student tours at his castle, also noting that he’s an experienced rock climber and instructor in knife to knife combat.</p>
<p>Twenty years ago I applies to five schools (names don’t matter) because of the prestige of the two most important factors in my decision: Reputation of the Russian department (my intended and actual major) and reuptation of the marching band (resulted in my being on TV for a few pro football games at halftime). Only 2 of these 5 schools TODAY would qualify and there would be new ones added to replace 3 that have decliined in one of these areas.</p>
<p>I am proud to mention my alma mater to those who know of the Russian department reputation but do not mention my alma mater today in terms of the marching band.</p>