<p>^carleton overrated? Please… and what world do you live in. Most kids don’t even know about carleton college.</p>
<p>I don’t think you understand what the term “overrated” means. It doesn’t mean the school isn’t good, it just means the school is ranked a little high for where it probably should be ranked.</p>
<p>Carleton is ranked too high for a school that most people (outside of the midwest or LAC types) have never heard of. It is ranked #8 by US News for LACs. It is a great school, but not a top 10. (I anticipate a significant number of Carleton supporters coming on here with various stats about how great the school is. I am not saying it is a bad school, but it doesn’t deserve a top 10 ranking by any stretch).</p>
<p>Rice and Washington (St. Louis) fall into the same category. Excellent schools, but probably ranked a little too high for their reputation and prestige (or lack there of).</p>
<p>^ Rankings should not be based on prestige or reputation but on quality. Moreover, I cannot think of any schools which deserve to be ranked higher than rice to be honest. Infact its the other way round.</p>
<p>^ Edited:</p>
<p>I don’t think you understand what the term “overrated” means. It doesn’t mean the school isn’t good, it just means the school is ranked a little high for where it probably should be ranked.</p>
<p>Carleton is ranked too high for a school that most people (outside of the midwest or LAC types) have never heard of. It is ranked #8 by US News for LACs. It is a great school, but not a top 10. (I anticipate a significant number of Carleton supporters coming on here with various stats about how great the school is. I am not saying it is a bad school, but it doesn’t deserve a top 10 ranking by any stretch).</p>
<p>Rice and Washington (St. Louis) fall into the same category. Excellent schools, but probably ranked a little too high for the quality of education they provide compared to other schools in their current peer group.</p>
<p>I am confused though- how can you tell the quality of a school if (1) You never attended the school. Carleton is considered by academics that I have met at ivy league schools to be of superior academic quality. Especially if they taught at one time of their lives at this school. Rice is viewed similarly. </p>
<p>I dont understand still how people can judge schools quality when they have never attended it, and don’t have sufficient quantitative statistics to make claims.</p>
<p>I went to school next to GW so I no for sure that its not underrate and even deserves to be several positions below what it is given.</p>
<p>And just how do you know about the quality of education they provide informative? have you attended all of them?</p>
<p>"I went to school next to GW so I no for sure that its not underrate and even deserves to be several positions below what it is given. "</p>
<p>Lol, but I am sure GW alum have the ability to structure a sentence correctly.</p>
<p>^ brownie points considering the fact that I was typing in a hurry and this is a forum.</p>
<p>
Rubbish. There is not a single LAC that has widespread name recognition; even Williams and Amherst draw blank stares from most people.</p>
<p>Name recognition is strongly regional even for universities. The vast majority of people down here don’t know Dartmouth or Rochester, let alone universities like Northeastern or Drexel. </p>
<p>
This thread has been dead for a year and a half, and pretty much every top school has been described as both overrated and underrated during the course of its 300+ posts.</p>
<p>It’s a pity mods don’t take a firm stance against necromancy, especially for such useless threads.</p>
<p>Underrated-William&Mary, Holy Cross, UMichigan, CAL.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The same could be said about Williams, Amherst, or Middlebury – most people outside of the east coast or LAC types have never heard of those either. But luckily familiarity among the general public really has nothing to do with school quality.</p>
<p>You seem to have this very weird issue in all of your threads, informative. You define the northeast as the “base” and other parts of the country as “other.” If something’s known mainly in the northeast, you consider it well-known - if something’s known mainly in other regions of the country, it’s “regional.” I recognize you’re not well-traveled – but still, break out of your box.</p>
<p>I think the lesson of this thread is: go to a college near where you want to eventually work. The people in that region will be most familiar with a local selective college, and it provides the most value in terms of taking advantage of an alumni network.</p>
<p>From my experience:
USC and Notre Dame are overrated.
William & Mary, University of Washington, University of Arizona are underrated.</p>
<p>Berkeley - supremely overrated</p>
<p>Brown, Chicago, Caltech, Duke, Columbia, UPenn, Dartmouth, and Cornell - underrated</p>
<p>"Berkeley - supremely overrated</p>
<p>Brown, Chicago, Caltech, Duke, Columbia, UPenn, Dartmouth, and Cornell - underrated"</p>
<p>…and yet every underrated school in your list is ranked higher at USNWR than Cal. Interesting.</p>
<p>So in conclusion, the most supremely underrated college is the one I attend.</p>
<p>The most over-rated snot-nose college is that one that rejected me.</p>
<p>Actually, beware of universities with lots of “big name” professors who won’t be seen by undergrads. </p>
<p>Beware of universities where research takes way too much prominence over undergraduate teaching. </p>
<p>Beware of colleges and universities where their pretentiousness and self-importance gets in the way of a real practical education. </p>
<p>Beware of attending a program at a college that is prestigious in many areas but that doesn’t really care about the program that you want to study. I suggest looking at the facilities used by your prospective department - if it is an unrenovated overcrowded shed back by the sewage plant, it might be time to look for another college.</p>
<p>I also suggest looking at professors in the program you want to study. Ideally, it includes plenty of full-time professors, plus some highly experienced part-time adjunct persons. If you see too many young part-time instructors, that is a bad sign. They probably will be too exhausted running from college to college, living out of their briefcase, to spend much time with you.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Here are the top 10 LAC’s per USNWR:
Williams, Amherst, Swarthmore, Middlebury, Wellesley, Bowdoin, Pomona, Carleton, Davidson, Haverford, Claremont McKenna.</p>
<p>Of these, <em>maybe</em> Amherst and Wellesley have the most broad-based knowledge - and much of Wellesley likely due to Hillary Clinton, Madeline Albright. Possibly Williams to some extent.</p>
<p>But the rest? They’re often not known by the general public outside the geographic areas either. Do you think Bowdoin is any more known outside the northeast or Pomona outside California or Davidson outside the south, compared to Carleton and the midwest? </p>
<p>And of course, all of these are fine schools I’d be proud to have my kids attend. It is just supremely odd that you are singling Carleton out, when Bowdoin, Davidson, Pomona, C McK are just as “unknown” outside their core geographies. Really - what put Davidson on the map for most people? Their b-ball success from last year.</p>
<p>Davidson, Holy Cross and Colgate are the best 3 known LAC’s outside of Williams and Amherst. Colgate and Holy Cross received a lot of publicity in USA Today and major newspapers’ sports pages for ranking 1 and 3 respectively among all Div 1 schools graduation success rates!. Every Saturday ESPN and CBS/ABC flash Holy Cross and Colgate football school just like the Ivies. Holy Cross has a storied basketball history 1 NCAA championship and 1 NIT championship and most college hoop fans are well aware of their tradition. Likewise, Davidson’s recent Elite 8 performance elevated their profile. Same can not be said for the Swarthmores, Grinnells, Bowdoins, and Haverfords,</p>
<p>Why do you feel Northeastern is underrated?</p>