<p>Ever notice how in world rankings, or wholly academic rankings like those of the NRC, that schools like Michigan, UCLA, Wisconsin, Illinois, and UT-Austin are ranked much higher than UVA? Most of the academic ranking sources typically only look at faculty quality and departmental strength, and are therefore recognizing these schools for the strength of their graduate programs. By contrast, the USNWR undergrad rankings are not really an academic ranking system - the majority of the criteria are based on the quality of the undergraduate class, than the actual strength of the institution itself. At the undergrad level, these factors ARE perhaps more important - the quality of your peers can indeed have a strong impact on the undergraduate experience. But in reality, how does the average GPA or SAT score of the undergrad, or even student/faculty ration have any relation to the faculty strength or worldwide departmental ranking. Beyond the undergrad level, they don’t, as is clearly seen by the disparity in academic rankings from USNWR rankings. It is therefore misleading to assume that selectivity automatically = academic prestige, when in fact there are actually quite a few stronger publics than UVA. There was a recent press release about UVA hiring a star researcher away from UT-Austin, and how this was an example of the type of faculty UVA is aiming for. To put it in perspective, this professor is an NAE member (National Academy of Engineering), the highest academic honor an engineer can attain. UVA has less than 10 NAE members. UT-Austin still has over 40 (Berkeley being the only public with more). I just thought it was interesting how many people seem surprised to see UVA ranked so much lower than the other publics in academic rankings and somehow discount them, when in fact, like the USNWR rankings, they are clearly just as valid when using the criteria they specify.</p>
<p>The only clear winners in all of the rankings seem to be Berkeley, and to a lesser extent, Michigan. They both seem to score high across the board no matter what criteria is used.</p>
<p>When it comes to perception Berkeley, Mich, and UVA are all generally right there at the top any way you slice it. </p>
<p>UVA is the smallest school you mentioned, so it’s logical for them to have the fewest NAEs (or whatever else) That said, if one school has 40 of them it can’t be all that special anyways…</p>
<p>Where are these rankings where UVA is listed behind Illinois??</p>
<p>Well, typically large schools well funded by their states will have a lot more when it comes to researching and the like. However, if that was a measure of a school’s rank then UT would be better than Rice, when Rice is clearly the best institution in Texas.</p>
<p>On the overall perception, Berkeley and Mich are probably higher, along with Wisconsin and other schools that do heavy grad research. Berkeley is very much designed to do research and their high rankings across the board reflect that. However, what you get out of it as an undergraduate student is very different. I don’t know why someone would care to post about grad rankings on this site, which is almost all about undergrad admissions. In fact, unless the OP is a grad student I don’t even see why they’re talking about it, and if they are, then they are at the wrong website. </p>
<p>A lot of students pride themselves for their grad programs for some reason despite the fact that they could probably never even get into such programs in the first place. Let’s face it, UVA undergrad students are of a higher quality and would be much more likely candidates for Illinois or Texas grad programs than the undergrads of those schools.</p>
<p>That’s like saying that because MIT has like a good dozen or so Nobelists that the Nobel isn’t special…it’s just not true. NAE is an incredible honor.</p>
<p>hey I lived in China for 15 years and NEVER heard of amherst, williams or even brown. Does that mean all three of them are inferior to University of Illinois?</p>
<p>JWT86…hahaha…the rest of the world? Believe me, “the rest of the world” only really knows about Harvard, Yale, and maybe Princeton, Stanford and MIT. Most non-Americans have no idea about US higher education, let alone know anything about Michigan, UCLA, Berkeley, etc. Go to any foreign country, and most people would never have heard of them.</p>
<p>Those rankings are dumb. They are no way a true indicator of how the “rest of the world” perceives American schools. Frankly, there is a trend now for many foreign students to look elsewhere than the US for college.</p>
<p>Are you kidding, Globalist? Berkeley is as big a name in many parts of Asia as HYP (and rightfully so). </p>
<p>UVA won’t get the same recognition as HYPSMBerkeley abroad until we start producing at the level of those schools. Currently, we’re nowhere close.</p>
<p>Whether the general international public is aware or not, you can be certain that even mid-level academics around the world are indeed very aware of the US top publics. Most definitely Berkeley and Michigan… but also UCLA, Wisconsin, Texas, and Illinois. Washington and UNC perhaps to a slightly lesser extent. You have to remember that while the top US publics do not carry quite the same prestige factor as even much weaker privates by many laypeople domestically, they are powerhouse research universities and at the forefront of academic advancement. So it may seem funny to someone that Wisconsin is known to someone in Japan, but in reality, it is probably quite accurate. To scholars, at least.</p>
<p>Of course, because it has an extremely productive set of graduate departments. What’s your point? Most people in the US don’t know about schools like Williams and Amherst, but that doesn’t mean that those aren’t superior institutions of higher learning.</p>
<p>Why? Because it’s near the south, and no one cares about the south except one of its well-know institutions, Duke University. UVa does not even advertise enough nationally, let alone internationally. The student body is not as diverse, when compared to Berkeley, UCLA or Michigan. These are the problems with which UVa faces when it comes to international recognition.</p>
<p>heres my question. who cares about international recognition? like i really care what people in china think about uva? the fact that they can only name a handful of universities in the united states speaks tons about their knowledge of higher education in america.</p>
<p>I know many people Souteast Asia such as the Philippines, malaysia, Indonesia, Thailand, Sinagpore and Vietnam who wouldn’t want to trade a UC Berkeley degree with any of the top 15 in the USNW ranked schools except perhaps Harvard and MIT. UC Berkeley has a very strong appeal in Asia. I believe it’s the same thing in Africa, Middle East and Europe. </p>
<p>I think the top 5 most popular universities in the WORLD are:</p>
<p>Harvard
Oxford
Cambridge
UC Berkeley
Yale</p>
<p>perhaps, in that order. UVa is not very popular in Asia, sad to say, but I know it is an excellent school both for undergrad and grad education. Darden BS is however a different story altogether.</p>
<p>but the point is…what does it matter that uva isn’t well known in asia? i can name only a handful of schools in asia - and thats just because ive run across their names in east asian history classes…and that doesn’t say much for the quality of the schools. i don’t know what the big deal is.</p>