<p>Let’s assume for the sake of discussion that everyone knows what the top ten universities are in all of their favorite subjects. Let’s also assume that many other things being equal, it’s pretty hard to get into a “top ten” university but might be somewhat easier to get into a “second ten” university. What the “second ten” universities that students should consider adding to their college application lists? </p>
<p>For mathematics, I suppose MIT and a few other colleges are indisputably in the top ten. What colleges would be quite good, perhaps better than any in-state college for students from most states, but not as awesomely hard to get into as MIT is? </p>
<p>Same question for computer science. </p>
<p>Same question for physics. </p>
<p>Same question for economics. </p>
<p>Thanks for all of your suggestions. See </p>
<p><a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/college-search-selection/437362-looking-good-college.html[/url]”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/college-search-selection/437362-looking-good-college.html</a> </p>
<p>for a broader list of colleges that may help bring to mind what the “second ten” colleges are in various fields.</p>
<p>I’m still looking for suggestions. Your help is much appreciated.</p>
<p>Generally, I look to the USNWR edition about US Graduate School rankings in various subjects and departments as an indication of the strength of a program for undergraduates. If its in the top 10 or so for a Phd, M.A, or Law/Medicine degree, then its likely a very strong undergraduate program. (Though I know that is a generalization and may overlook schools that dont offer graduate degrees in that field or others).</p>
<p>Thanks for the reply. Yes, I think the strength of graduate program criterion, although not the only relevant characteristic of any university, is a good basis for distinguishing programs in those fields.</p>
<p>Any other suggestions?</p>
<p>Look at the good graduate schools in the subject you are interested in. Then look at their list of grad students in that subject. See where they went to undergrad. You can get some clues that way.</p>
<p>I would say the University of Minnesota-Twin Cities. They are one of the best public universities in the country, and one of the top research schools in the country (in top five) and they are bent on becoming the second best research school in the world (am I not kidding). If something wasn’t invented here, then it was definitely researched and/or perfected. </p>
<p>It is also Big Ten.</p>
<p>Thanks for the suggestions.</p>
<p>Math – UCLA, NYU, Wisconsin were in the second ten of one MIT-produced study I saw.</p>
<p>CS – UMD, consistently ranked 12th-13th.
Physics – UMD, [UM</a> Physics Rankings](<a href=“http://www.physics.umd.edu/aboutus/rankings.html]UM”>UM Physics Rankings)</p>
<p>I assume Chicago is on your list for all of those categories, though CS is the (relatively) weakest of the four subject areas – it’s ranked #22. On the other hand, if it’s theoretical CS you want, it’s outstanding. Most of the theoretical CS stuff is cross-listed with the math dept.</p>
<p>Yes, CountingDown, that’s the nature of the kind of suggestions I was looking for. Thanks.</p>
<p>a great place for finding somewhat overlooked programs at research universities is the nrc polling data for faculty effectiveness. the data was collected via the same survey that served as the source for the typical nrc ‘faculty research quality’ ratings we often see, but sought to determine which programs actually did a good job training phds.</p>
<p>given the subjective nature of the survey in addition to outside variables that cloud the picture, the correlation between the two faculty ratings is quite high across the board. however, it is still very interesting to see which programs faculty feel are relatively better/worse in graduate instruction and support relative to research productivity. </p>
<p>for example, wisconsin and minnesota are rated very similarly (4.10 and 4.08, respectively) by nrc respondents for faculty research quality in mathematics. no complaints here, as minnesota produces a lot of scholarship. however, wisconsin rates 0.17 points higher (3.82 to 3.65) in faculty effectiveness. no complaints here, either, as minnesotas mathematics faculty is somewhat notorious for providing limited support to its graduate students.</p>
<p>the obvious question then becomes how well one can reasonably expect minnesota to support its undergraduate mathematics students. my guess: not so well.</p>
<p>note: in preparation for the release of the new nrc rankings, the 1995 data tables seem to be have taken down. however, they are still accessible via the latest archive on archive.org.</p>