<p>Ever wonder what the best universities in America were a hundred years ago? Long before U.S. News…</p>
<p>1910 American University Rankings</p>
<p>The first attempt to rank universities in America was conducted by J. McKeen Cattell, a psychology professor at Columbia University. He published a 600-page work, American Men of Science. Although mainly a biographical dictionary, Cattell grouped the names by institution, beginning with the 2nd edition in 1910. He calculated both overall rankings and departmental rankings based on the number of eminent men (and women) in science affiliated with American universities and government agencies.</p>
<p>Cattell was the first professor of psychology in the United States, receiving an appointment at the University of Pennsylvania, but he later moved to Columbia. Upon his death, the New York Times saluted him as “the dean of American science.”</p>
<p>In 1925 Raymond Hughes, the president of Iowa State College, conducted “A Study of the Graduate Schools of America” for the Association of American Colleges. He ranked graduate programs in 24 subjects by surveying faculty. Others quickly turned his departmental rankings into overall institutional rankings based on how many top-rated departments a school had.</p>
<p>There are some interesting organizations in the 1910 version - Dept Agriculture, Smithsonian, Bureau of Standards, US Geological Survey. I wonder why those are in there?</p>
<p>Extremely interesting. At what historical point, and for what reasons, did the “BIG THREE” shift from Harvard, Chicago, and Columbia (in some order) in the early part of the twentieth century, to the current presumption (at least popularly) that the “Big Three” can only and will ALWAYS be Harvard, Yale, and Princeton?</p>
<p>Thanks for sharing!!! Yup, by 1916, tOSU was admitted the prestigious AAU. In short, I look forward to Ohio State moving into the Top-10 ranking by 2020. Go Bucks!! :)</p>
<p>P.S. 8 B1G Schools vs 6 Ivies in the Top-20!! ^o^v
Note: U. of Chicago was part of the BIG TEN until the late 1930s. Still part of the ‘Academic Big Ten’ aka CIC today!! :D</p>
<p>These suffer the same fatal flaws as any other attempts to identify the “best” universities. Best for whom? For what? Based on what objective criteria?</p>
<p>I’m going to start telling people that I have attended a “top 10” University. They don’t have to know it was a few night classes at the Dept. of Agriculture Grad School do they?</p>
<p>Well, in fairness, Yale was #4 in both the 1910 and 1925 rankings, and it’s much more common today to talk about the “Big Four” being HYPS. So you could easily say the “Big Four” in the early 20th century were Harvard, Chicago, Columbia, and Yale, and Princeton and Stanford later edged Chicago and Columbia out of that group. Notice, though, that Princeton was already in the #6 spot in the 1925 ranking.</p>
<p>Others may correct me, but I’ve always believed that Princeton really cemented its reputation in the 1930s, when Einstein, von Neumann, and Godel arrived there. Some of this is reflected glory since they were actually at the Institute for Advanced Study, which is independent of Princeton University, but their presence made the little town of Princeton a center of dazzling brainpower, and of course they did lecture at the University from time to time and developed informal ties with faculty there, and IAS was actually housed in a Princeton University building for its first few years, so many people incorrectly associated these intellectual giants with the university.</p>
<p>I think of Stanford’s rising as mostly a post-WWII phenomenon, and I associate it somehow with California’s blossoming into the nation’s most populous and in many ways most economically dominant state, but others would know more.</p>
<p>An obvious follow-up, then, would involve speculation about reasons for the “dethroning” of Chicago and Columbia. Is urban history – specifically, the ethnic/racial/economic turbulence in our major urban centers throughout the twentieth century – implicated in reputational shifts for Chicago and Columbia, as both have always been universities deeply embedded in their home cities of Chicago and New York? Indeed, because these two schools’ identities have been so intertwined with the cities in which they are located, one wonders if the fortunes of the schools have been tied to the fortunes of their cities. Were such larger historical forces of any relevance, or did their reputations shift – while Stanford and Princeton emerged as greater academic forces – for strictly institutional, rather than for larger social, economic, or political, reasons?</p>
<p>Intriguing, now, that both Chicago and Columbia’s public profiles are ascendent, again. Are they reclaiming historical positions of eminence, if so, why? Institutional factors or larger contextual factors?</p>
<p>I think in the case of Chicago, for many years it went its own way, did what it thought was right, and let others play the prestige games. That did cause some slippage among the opinion-makers, especially as the old order passed on and were replaced by a hype-susceptible new generation. Unfortunately, now Chicago has succumbed to the same disease.</p>
<p>For many years, Chicago appealed to a niche market of prospective undergrads. If its public profile is now ascendant, I think that due to different marketing, which is appealing to a larger and different niche of the market. That’s primarily a phenomenon amongst prospective undergrads. I don’t think it ever lost its strictly academic prestige or its international reputation. Social prestige is another matter, however.</p>
<p>It’s interesting that in its early years, Chicago seemed to have a split personality. From its founding, it was a scholar’s university on the model of the German research university. Yet, its undergraduate culture in those early years seemed very much to have strong elements of a Big 10 state university. I guess Hutchins killed that off when he eliminated football.</p>
<p>How about this one? The most prominent building on the campus of Michigan has plenty of college/university seals. Click the link to view the stained glass seals:</p>
<p>WOW! So according to that AAU, every Big 10 university besides Michigan State was considered more prestigious than Brown or Duke until at least the 1930s (and perhaps longer but who knows)? </p>
<p>It’s amazing how the reputations of some schools have skyrocketed while it seems that of others has collapsed. Wisconsin in particular went from being a super-elite American university to an above average state school. It seems Illinois and Michigan, albeit to a smaller extent, have suffered similar declines in prestige. How in the world did Minnesota, Indiana, and Iowa make this list?</p>
<p>Wisconsin faculty and grad programs are still among the best. AAU is a research university club…they don’t care about high scoring 18 year olds.</p>
<p>The Ohio State University Amory (Circa 1897) has about 70 seals, including all the Service Academies (with exception of the Air Force). My all-time favorite building on campus!! However, demolished in 1958… :(</p>
![https://kb.osu.edu/dspace/bitstream/handle/1811/37339/05_0003045.jpg?sequence=1[/url]](https://kb.osu.edu/dspace/bitstream/handle/1811/37339/05_0003045.jpg?sequence=1%5B/url%5D){kind=link}
![https://kb.osu.edu/dspace/bitstream/handle/1811/37330/05_0003034.jpg?sequence=1[/url]](https://kb.osu.edu/dspace/bitstream/handle/1811/37330/05_0003034.jpg?sequence=1%5B/url%5D){kind=link}
![http://cdn.archinect.net/images/1200x/0f/0fp8z4hcekq0jahf.jpg[/url]](http://cdn.archinect.net/images/1200x/0f/0fp8z4hcekq0jahf.jpg%5B/url%5D){kind=link}
