Why top ranked colleges are the only legitimate colleges nowadays..few exceptions

College Search & Lists
61

<p>osprey, the USNWR rankings are not widely accepted. They are certainly popular among uneducated/uninformed parents and among school children, but you will not see highly educated people quote the USNWR rankings, nor will recruiters at top companies or admissions committee members at top graduate schools look at those rankings. </p>

<p>Besides, even the USNWR’s reputational score gives public universities pretty decent ratings. Cal and Michigan are rated as highly as most Ivies and other top private universities. UCLA, UNC and UVa are not far behind. I only bring this up because you said above that those 5 publics lack the reputation of top private universities. That is obviously not the case.</p>

<p>You also say that the top publics lack the resources and funding of top private universities. I am not sure I agree with that statement. For one thing, Michigan and UVa are among the wealthiest universities in the US. Not including HYPSM, which are obviously in a league of their own, Michigan is the wealthiest university in the US and UVa is among the 10 wealthiest. Even on a per capita basis, both are among the 20 or 25 wealthiest universities in the nation. For another, between state funding and tuition revenues, those universities tend to be in pretty solid financial shape. I think Michigan and UVa are two of only 10 or so universities that are given the highest rating by Moody’s and by Standard and Poor. The UCs are indeed struggling, but not Michigan, UNC and UVa.</p>

62

<p>OP- Much better argument, if you’ll forgive me for judging. Now, if one extrapolates and talks about less resourced colleges, lower student accomplishments (and, perhaps, motivation,) a picture emerges of varying potential values in an education at, say, JHU, vs, Nowhere College. </p>

<p>But, you opened with statements that almost all colleges…are out to take your money, that colleges’ number 1 goal is retention, some of your own profs were atrocious- and, etc. </p>

<p>See, I do agree that the rush to educate more kids (more kids with lower accomplishments and less prep in hs) has a diluting effect on the overall level of academics (at the take-nearly-anyone colleges) and the resulting value of a degree, in general, from those schools. [I am not sure if I blame the colleges- I think society and families share in this.] But, using my state as an example, though you can get into the state U with a C gpa, there are three nationally highly-respected (or better) UG programs that are much more competitive and offer undeniably strong educations and professional prep.</p>

<p>As for lesser known LACs, D1 is at a top 25 where the standards are quite high, the program in her major (in her particular sub-field) is superb in breadth and depth, same for classes in her minor. Her contact with professors is frankly amazing and the internship and abroad opps are excellent. If she had not been accepted, her 2nd choice was a school that falls into the USNWR (hate it but let’s use it here) “top 75.” BUT, again, a phenonemenal opportunity in her major, with profs with degrees from absolutely top-ranked UG and G programs. (Oops, some credit to the parents for researching this.)</p>

<p>Her LAC parties hard, smart kids right there alongside the not-so-smart. There’s a segent of kids who cycle into progressively easier and easier majors- and those majors see a lower graduation rate. Nonetheless, the majority of students are highly capable and quite driven- many are the same kids who didn’t get into HYPS and so landed there. It would be a shame to pre-judge this school, her #2, or even the state U without a deeper look.</p>

<p>As for the “clearer perspective” issue- but you see, I work for a top school and DH is a professor at another. So, in addition to shepherding my kids, I have an addl perspective on the insitutional aspects. And, dealing with students, apps and recent grads, as well as observing on CC, I see that, while some “get it,” are driven and quite smart about life’s challenges, many are “stuck in a mode.” For many, there is NO perspective on grad school or early jobs, no sense of what it takes, what it encompasses or what it does - or doesn’t - lead to. You can clearly see this in many of the related questions on CC.</p>

63

<p>

</p>

<p>University and medical school admissions tend to be pretty opaque to the applicants (whether admitted or not), so it is unlikely that current students have any more insight into the admission process than older alumni etc. (unless someone happens to be on an admissions committee).</p>

<p>In employment matters, those with working experience, particularly those called upon to recruit or interview employment candidates, have much more inside knowledge on employment in their field than current students do. For example, “how much advantage does going to an elite school give in employment in ____?”. For investment banking or lawyer jobs, probably a lot. For engineering or CS, much less, especially after the first job. But that does not stop a lot of posters from making blanket statements about all kinds of employment.</p>

64

<p>

</p>

<p>Unless you’re prepared to argue that the average CC poster in not highly educated, I would dispute that. Post after post after post uses the USNWR ranking to try to close down discussions on what college is better than what other college.</p>

<p>For the record, I agree - USNWR rankings are total nonsense. Does that make me highly educated?</p>

65

<p>annasdad, most posters on CC are high school kids or college students. They are not uneducated, but they are certainly not informed or highly educated yet.</p>

66

<p>phantasmajoric: I’m saying that we all suck and are great in our various ways. Also, Berkeley students are doing well for a public school (whose grades are usually “much” lower than privates’ average of B+). The average GPA awarded across all years is like a 3.2 and it’s far larger and is less homogenous than us. Our senior GPA is like 3.38 and since frosh do poorly, our GPA comes out to like 3.26 across all years (this is not that much higher than Berkeley and falls in line w/privates grading on the lower end). Neither of us are scary IMHO. If you want to see real “scary”, go to Georgia Tech, MIT, Purdue, or Caltech, now that’s scary. </p>

<p>Also, I wasn’t referring to institutional size (Many elite privates have multitudes of HUGE class sections despite being far smaller than UVa, UNC, or Berkeley), I was referring to class section sizes. I know a lot of people would prefer Berkeley over a place like Emory or Vandy, or some other elite privates for its prestige and yes, its wider array of programs, but I wouldn’t (and clearly there are many others who wouldn’t as well) considering things like the class size and the size of the campus. And these places clearly aren’t educating worse than a place like Berkeley (nor can it be proved the other way). I looked at the work, and I don’t see how either could be advantageous objectively (for everyone). Again, I have to seriously wonder why most people actually believe Berkeley is significantly better than places like us or those holding it down at the bottom of the top 20 from an educational standpoint. How do they know? The two are so different in this arena (other than educating relatively effectively), I don’t see how one can easily be judged as better than the other unless you take prestige into account. Ideally, one should choose educational environment though, where, again, the two differ a lot.<br>
As for class size. It is my experience that a lot more can be done w/smaller classes. Not to say that all of them take the opportunity to enhance the course content or pedagogy, but it is more likely. Though I have seen profs. do amazing things w/larger lectures, however, experimentation and more interesting things seem far more prevalent in teaching methodology used for smaller courses.</p>

<p>As for traditional methods, I looked for course contents and syllabi through the Berkeley website and MANY sections were presented (like well over 10 for each course peaking my curiousity) and they did essentially the same thing. The only exception I observed was organic chemistry where there was one professor who was clearly tougher than the others but still not as hard as our toughest professors and would compare favorably w/moderate profs. Given these comparisons, I will only conclude that, with exception of engineering and perhaps CS and maybe math, the idea of this “scary” rigor is just as unjustified and overblown at Berkeley as it is the rest of us. Engineering is tough everywhere (in fact GT actually has lower grades than Berkeley). If you are qualified for admission, you should not be scared of Berkeley nor about 15-20 other elite institutions. </p>

<p>At best I see them as academic equals w/one having a “halo” effect Meaning since it has long standing prestige, when it does something right, everyone will know about it. Also, since it has a ridiculous amount of school pride/pride associated w/its prestige, students are likely to rate it higher in particular areas as opposed to students who, say, already come here with bitterness that they don’t go to…well Harvard. If we had a “halo” effect too and longstanding prestige/reputation, I’m willing to bet it’ll get higher ratings whether or not the education is particularly better than others. </p>

<p>Oh, and opsprey: I do not make lists about the top schools. I just argue that some are better than people think and many (if not most) are over-rated. I don’t know how to rank these things. The only “list” I would make is one comparing schools by course content and syllabi. I think that’s much better if you truly value education.</p>

67

<p>wish there was a way to link the conversation in this thread with the one in this thread <a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/parents-forum/1197513-lacs-worth-200k.html[/url]”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/parents-forum/1197513-lacs-worth-200k.html&lt;/a&gt; Interesting parallel opposite discussion</p>

68

<p>

</p>

<p>I read that statement, and it just seems utterly ridiculous. Great schools open up doors (sometimes) that might not have been available otherwise - I think that, objectively, that’s a fair statement to say. They may aid job prospects and graduate school admission to a certain sense, but it is primarily on the individual whether success find them. I don’t understand where people get this hogwash notion that if you go to a great school (however you uselessly define “great”), then the road is automatically paved with gold and riches - from there on out your life is virtually a given. While I think my school is fabulous and gives me the opportunity to grow and enlighten and experience in my own unique way, I place the full load on my shoulders. Do you really think that truly intelligent people have their fates written in stone because they choose to go to a public university or a school that isn’t the creme de la creme as you see it? Success is individuality, and colleges may foster said success, but they are incapable of doling it out.</p>

69

<p>

</p>

<p>Then they are wasting their breath (or typing fingers) since there are less than a handful of med students who post on cc… :)</p>

70

<p>

</p>

<p>Med school students are the ones who got in to med school… no one else… College students from a specific college are the ones who got into that specific college… no one else. Assuming there are no college adcoms/med school adcoms on these forums, which there may be, the average parent poster on these forums are the ones who lack the insight. Med school students know the application process. Heck, they’ve just been through it. College students know the application process for the same reason. Parents, however, have not RECENTLY gone through the application process and back when they did, the terms do not apply to the current situation.</p>

71

<p>

</p>

<p>If you really believe what you are saying above, then why are you going to Northwestern? Seems like you can end up with the same results if you go to a state U according to your opinion that it’s totally up to the individual.</p>

72

<p>

</p>

<p>Then they are asking specifically those < handful of med school students on CC.</p>

73

<p>Just the NSF. Note on JHU which operates non-competitive awarded defense research related institute. Without that JHU would be at #7 with $878,319,000. You really don’t know much, do you. These are very well known and widely cited.</p>

<p><a href=“http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/nsf11313/pdf/nsf11313.pdf[/url]”>http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/nsf11313/pdf/nsf11313.pdf&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p>TABLE 27.<strong>R&D expenditures at universities and colleges, ranked by FY 2009 R&D expenditures: FY 2002–09<br>
(Dollars in thousands)<br>
Rank Institution 2008 2009<br>
**</strong><br>
All institutions 51,934,133 54,935,457<br>
****<br>
*** 1 *<em>**Johns Hopkins U., Thea 1,680,927 1,856,270<br>
</em> 2 *<em>**U. MI all campuses 876,390 1,007,198<br>
</em> 3 *<em>**U. WI Madison 881,777 952,119
</em> 4 *<em>**U. CA, San Francisco 885,182 947,697
</em> 5 *<em>**U. CA, Los Angelesb 871,478 889,995
</em> 6 *<em>**U. CA, San Diego 842,027 879,357
</em> 7 *<em>**Duke U. 766,906 805,021
</em> 8 *<em>**U. WA 765,135 778,046
</em> 9 *<strong><em>PA State U. all campuses 701,130 753,358

  • 10 *</em></strong>U. MN all campuses 682,662 740,980
  • 11 *<strong><em>MA Institute of Technology 659,626 736,102
  • 12 *</em></strong>U. PA 708,244 726,768
  • 13 *<strong><em>OH State U. all campuses 702,592 716,461
  • 14 *</em></strong>Stanford U. 688,225 704,183
  • 15 ****U. CA, Davis 642,519 681,618</p>

<p><a href=“404 Page Not Found | NCSES | NSF”>404 Page Not Found | NCSES | NSF;

74

<p>

</p>

<p>If they are certainly popular among the uneducated/uninformed parents and among school children, combined which make up the majority of people involved in the college process, then the rankings are widely accepted.</p>

<p>If recruiters from graduate schools and employers don’t care about prestige of UG, then you will notice that the student enrollment at the top 20 colleges will be cut by half. In reality, this is not the case. So grad schools and employers do care about prestige.</p>

75

<p>Maybe they care, maybe not but it has no real life impact when it comes to life earnings.</p>

76

<p>

</p>

<p>Sorry, but the board is full of parent posters from elite institutions constantly citing USNWR to promote their alma maters (or their kids’).</p>

77

<p>annasdad: Agreed, even though I don’t know if it’s necessary for them to do so. If anything, I would just cite my experience and how wonderful it was. That should be enough if the child is actually interested in the parents’ alma mater. It would be odd if a school was a complete misfit before finding out (or having that it rubbed in over and over) ranks number 1-15 in USNWR. I hope that doesn’t happen frequently. Just shows that even the informed default to doing that. Honestly, I wish some people here, for example, had went to UVa, UNC, or elsewhere b/c they don’t belong nor ever wanted to be here. They came b/c it was private and number 20, not because it was a fit. I wonder where they got these ideas from. Seriously, I’ve heard students here say things like: “It’s impossible for math and physics and Georgia Tech to be harder because that’s a public school!”…the shocking things you hear from those in the uppermiddle class at a private institution. They were certainly right because we all know that physics and math at an institution w/no engineering presence is going to be better, more rigorous, and more useful than at a well-renowned engineering school (wait, but most here don’t even know it’s at the very top of engineering schools. It ranks 35 overall, and is in Georgia so they’ve never heard of it)</p>

78

<p>

</p>

<p>You’re god damn right I’d end up with the same result if I attended a state school. Do you know why? Because I’m confident enough in my own abilities that I know my future wouldn’t be hindered by making one decision based off a school’s name. Perhaps some doors wouldn’t be open, but I’d just have to work a little harder to find the key. I don’t expect Northwestern to automatically bring me success - I said it may “foster it” with its resources and opportunities. I’m sorry, but you’re a tad naive if you think that going to great schools ensures a prosperous future - one that you wouldn’t get if you didn’t attend that more reputable name school. I trust myself to make my own way, and after I graduate I’ll owe a massive thanks to my school. But I wouldn’t cut off half of my intangible success (if I’m so lucky), and allow them to lay claim to it. I’ll forever be in debt (well, not quite forever on a literal sense) to great professors and my opportunities at NU, but I place the onus on myself.</p>

79

<p>annasdad, I have been a poster here for many years and parents do not often bring up rankings. There are obviously many who do, but most do not.</p>

80

<p>Your numbers are not the most up-to-date:</p>

<ol>
<li>Johns Hopkins University: $1,856,270,000</li>
<li>University of Michigan: $1,007,198,000</li>
<li>University of Wisconsin-Madison: $952,119,000</li>
<li>University of California-San Francisco: $947,697,000</li>
<li>University of California-Los Angeles: $889,995,000</li>
<li>University of California-San Diego: $879,357,000</li>
<li>Duke University: $805,021,000</li>
<li>University of Washington: $778,046,000</li>
<li>Pennsylvania State University: $753,358,000</li>
<li>University of Minnesota: $740,980,000</li>
<li>Massachusetts Institute of Technology: $736,102,000</li>
<li>University of Pennsylvania: $726,768,000</li>
<li>Ohio State University: $716,461,000</li>
<li>Stanford University: $704,183,000</li>
<li>University of California-Davis: $681,618,000</li>
<li>Cornell University: $671,406,000</li>
<li>University of California-Berkeley: $652,474,000</li>
<li>University of Colorado: $648,417,000</li>
<li>University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill: $646,011,000</li>
<li>Texas A&M University: $630,655,000</li>
<li>Washington University-St Louis: $628,328,000</li>
<li>University of Pittsburgh: $623,347,000</li>
<li>University of Florida: $592,082,000</li>
<li>Columbia University: $589,575,000</li>
<li>University of Texas Medical Center: $578,788,000</li>
</ol>