What schools are T-10?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some people think Johns Hopkins and Chicago are above Williams and Amherst (and Pomona). Some of us know better. That’s really what this comes down to…

Cause they are. What a ridiculous post. Is the nation’s most important medical research institution and one of the most rigorous and consequential colleges in the country as good as two random small colleges in Massachusetts and not even the 3rd best college in California? Yes, they’re much better than Williams Amherst and Pomona.

Look I am a big LAC fan and had multiple W and A peers at my T5 med school, in addition to many T10 kids. W and A prepare exceptionally well. But overall considering everything involved in deciding the top TEN universities, there are at least 10 if not 12-15 that outshine W and A. The experience of having the top research/labs available to every undergrad who wants it, as well as the highest level of peers at the top universities, and the smaller classes at the ivy-private types, W and A are not structured to have all of that. Just like UCB cannot have all of it: it is too big and there are too many undergrads competing for labs and even library space. CalTEch is small true but has the research opportunities of the ivy/elite.
The top 10 universities are:
Stanford
Harvard
MIT
Princeton
Yale
Penn
Duke
Columbia
Caltech
Johns Hopkins*

*The debate is really over the 10th spot: Hopkins, Chicago, Northwestern, or maybe Cornell or Brown.

W and A are amazing schools but not T10 universities. Its apples and oranges. W and A are 100% the best Oranges.

Thanks for showing your SLAC ignorance. Your “research” point especially does not hold water and, upon examination, would make the opposite point you are trying to make.

R1s have better research than LACs. That is a fact of life. If r1 institutions shut down their REUs today, most lac grads would have near 0 opportunities in their field of interest. LACs rely on these research institutions for their kids to get into grad school. Open up a bit more.

Are we ranking grad schools? Start a new thread.

Are you now going to combat the claim that one of LAC’s most attractive qualities is getting into grad school? You need research in undergrad to get into a good grad school.

You have already shown your ignorance; no need to double down on it.

What?! You need research to get into grad school. If you can’t agree on that, you’re not only being disingenuous but wrong.

100%

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some people think Johns Hopkins and Chicago are above Williams and Amherst (and Pomona). Some of us know better. That’s really what this comes down to…

Cause they are. What a ridiculous post. Is the nation’s most important medical research institution and one of the most rigorous and consequential colleges in the country as good as two random small colleges in Massachusetts and not even the 3rd best college in California? Yes, they’re much better than Williams Amherst and Pomona.

Look I am a big LAC fan and had multiple W and A peers at my T5 med school, in addition to many T10 kids. W and A prepare exceptionally well. But overall considering everything involved in deciding the top TEN universities, there are at least 10 if not 12-15 that outshine W and A. The experience of having the top research/labs available to every undergrad who wants it, as well as the highest level of peers at the top universities, and the smaller classes at the ivy-private types, W and A are not structured to have all of that. Just like UCB cannot have all of it: it is too big and there are too many undergrads competing for labs and even library space. CalTEch is small true but has the research opportunities of the ivy/elite.
The top 10 universities are:
Stanford
Harvard
MIT
Princeton
Yale
Penn
Duke
Columbia
Caltech
Johns Hopkins*

*The debate is really over the 10th spot: Hopkins, Chicago, Northwestern, or maybe Cornell or Brown.

W and A are amazing schools but not T10 universities. Its apples and oranges. W and A are 100% the best Oranges.

Thanks for showing your SLAC ignorance. Your “research” point especially does not hold water and, upon examination, would make the opposite point you are trying to make.

R1s have better research than LACs. That is a fact of life. If r1 institutions shut down their REUs today, most lac grads would have near 0 opportunities in their field of interest. LACs rely on these research institutions for their kids to get into grad school. Open up a bit more.

Yes indeed. REUs preferentially favor students from Primarily Undergraduate Institutions for a reason(LACs). Unfortunately with funding cuts this year many REUs even top ones at Chicago, ivies, etc were canceled. Many of these same schools allowed their own students to fill the research spots, paid them from other sources and did not cover housing as they would have for official REU program. While LAC students can do research with a LAC professor it is an entirely different experience to be in a lab with a PI (ie head professor), a couple of post docs and grad students, with multiple projects going on, undergrads can get publishable data and experience assisting with the writing of the papers very quickly. That scale of research does not exist at LACs or non-R1s.

+1, and this is if your child even has the ability search interests an lac can do. DD is interested in biostatistics and wants to work in clinical data. At Yale, she works with professors in statistics, medicine, and neuroscience- which just isn’t available at LACs without clinical trials, without medical centers, and without the funding/professionals necessitated for either.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Ivies, Stanford, MIT, Hopkins, Chicago, Rice, Vanderbilt, NW, Amherst, Williams all are contenders for T10.

Not Vanderbilt. Overrated.

[Anonymous]

Sigh. Amherst students, for instance, get all the science research they need if they want to go to grad school. They have no problems at all getting into such programs or to med school, for that matter. Not that “going to grad school for a science Ph.D.” is the end all be all, but per capita science Ph.Ds from top SLACs is very high.

Here’s Ph.Ds in say, biology, adjusted for class size (right column).

https://www.collegetransitions.com/dataverse/top-feeders-phd-programs#biological-sciences

What a surprise! SLACs dominate the list! This anti-SLAC argument is a canard. Moving on…

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Sigh. Amherst students, for instance, get all the science research they need if they want to go to grad school. They have no problems at all getting into such programs or to med school, for that matter. Not that “going to grad school for a science Ph.D.” is the end all be all, but per capita science Ph.Ds from top SLACs is very high.

Here’s Ph.Ds in say, biology, adjusted for class size (right column).

https://www.collegetransitions.com/dataverse/top-feeders-phd-programs#biological-sciences

What a surprise! SLACs dominate the list! This anti-SLAC argument is a canard. Moving on…

Actually, SLACS are being dominated. Sure, some by percentage are doing well but what the list shows me is that there are a lot more Ph.D. quality students at the larger schools. With such limited degree offerings many need to go to graduate school LACs. Cal Ph.Ds are everywhere, Amherst not so much.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sigh. Amherst students, for instance, get all the science research they need if they want to go to grad school. They have no problems at all getting into such programs or to med school, for that matter. Not that “going to grad school for a science Ph.D.” is the end all be all, but per capita science Ph.Ds from top SLACs is very high.

Here’s Ph.Ds in say, biology, adjusted for class size (right column).

https://www.collegetransitions.com/dataverse/top-feeders-phd-programs#biological-sciences

What a surprise! SLACs dominate the list! This anti-SLAC argument is a canard. Moving on…

Actually, SLACS are being dominated. Sure, some by percentage are doing well but what the list shows me is that there are a lot more Ph.D. quality students at the larger schools. With such limited degree offerings many need to go to graduate school LACs. Cal Ph.Ds are everywhere, Amherst not so much.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Sigh. Amherst students, for instance, get all the science research they need if they want to go to grad school. They have no problems at all getting into such programs or to med school, for that matter. Not that “going to grad school for a science Ph.D.” is the end all be all, but per capita science Ph.Ds from top SLACs is very high.

Here’s Ph.Ds in say, biology, adjusted for class size (right column).

https://www.collegetransitions.com/dataverse/top-feeders-phd-programs#biological-sciences

What a surprise! SLACs dominate the list! This anti-SLAC argument is a canard. Moving on…

Not at Amherst though. Much of that research is done at other research universities, which is why I find it dumb when lac parents rag on research institutions. If you’re getting published or are doing serious undergraduate research netting you admission into top programs from a lac, you typically did an REU or worked with professors at other institutions. I say this as an lac parent that people need to let down the defenses and stop acting as if research doesn’t matter.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ivies, Stanford, MIT, Hopkins, Chicago, Rice, Vanderbilt, NW, Amherst, Williams all are contenders for T10.

You forgot Hopkins and Georgetown which are solidly in the top 10.

And UVA.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some people think Johns Hopkins and Chicago are above Williams and Amherst (and Pomona). Some of us know better. That’s really what this comes down to…

Cause they are. What a ridiculous post. Is the nation’s most important medical research institution and one of the most rigorous and consequential colleges in the country as good as two random small colleges in Massachusetts and not even the 3rd best college in California? Yes, they’re much better than Williams Amherst and Pomona.

Look I am a big LAC fan and had multiple W and A peers at my T5 med school, in addition to many T10 kids. W and A prepare exceptionally well. But overall considering everything involved in deciding the top TEN universities, there are at least 10 if not 12-15 that outshine W and A. The experience of having the top research/labs available to every undergrad who wants it, as well as the highest level of peers at the top universities, and the smaller classes at the ivy-private types, W and A are not structured to have all of that. Just like UCB cannot have all of it: it is too big and there are too many undergrads competing for labs and even library space. CalTEch is small true but has the research opportunities of the ivy/elite.
The top 10 universities are:
Stanford
Harvard
MIT
Princeton
Yale
Penn
Duke
Columbia
Caltech
Johns Hopkins*

*The debate is really over the 10th spot: Hopkins, Chicago, Northwestern, or maybe Cornell or Brown.

W and A are amazing schools but not T10 universities. Its apples and oranges. W and A are 100% the best Oranges.

Thanks for showing your SLAC ignorance. Your “research” point especially does not hold water and, upon examination, would make the opposite point you are trying to make.

R1s have better research than LACs. That is a fact of life. If r1 institutions shut down their REUs today, most lac grads would have near 0 opportunities in their field of interest. LACs rely on these research institutions for their kids to get into grad school. Open up a bit more.

Are we ranking grad schools? Start a new thread.

Are you now going to combat the claim that one of LAC’s most attractive qualities is getting into grad school? You need research in undergrad to get into a good grad school.

You have already shown your ignorance; no need to double down on it.

What?! You need research to get into grad school. If you can’t agree on that, you’re not only being disingenuous but wrong.

Harvard’s last president had a ridiculously minuscule number of only 7 published papers.

Worse still, she plagiarized most of the work and did not write about serious or worthwhile topics.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ivies, Stanford, MIT, Hopkins, Chicago, Rice, Vanderbilt, NW, Amherst, Williams all are contenders for T10.

You forgot Hopkins and Georgetown which are solidly in the top 10.

And UVA.

Not academically challenging

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some people think Johns Hopkins and Chicago are above Williams and Amherst (and Pomona). Some of us know better. That’s really what this comes down to…

Cause they are. What a ridiculous post. Is the nation’s most important medical research institution and one of the most rigorous and consequential colleges in the country as good as two random small colleges in Massachusetts and not even the 3rd best college in California? Yes, they’re much better than Williams Amherst and Pomona.

Look I am a big LAC fan and had multiple W and A peers at my T5 med school, in addition to many T10 kids. W and A prepare exceptionally well. But overall considering everything involved in deciding the top TEN universities, there are at least 10 if not 12-15 that outshine W and A. The experience of having the top research/labs available to every undergrad who wants it, as well as the highest level of peers at the top universities, and the smaller classes at the ivy-private types, W and A are not structured to have all of that. Just like UCB cannot have all of it: it is too big and there are too many undergrads competing for labs and even library space. CalTEch is small true but has the research opportunities of the ivy/elite.
The top 10 universities are:
Stanford
Harvard
MIT
Princeton
Yale
Penn
Duke
Columbia
Caltech
Johns Hopkins*

*The debate is really over the 10th spot: Hopkins, Chicago, Northwestern, or maybe Cornell or Brown.

W and A are amazing schools but not T10 universities. Its apples and oranges. W and A are 100% the best Oranges.

Thanks for showing your SLAC ignorance. Your “research” point especially does not hold water and, upon examination, would make the opposite point you are trying to make.

R1s have better research than LACs. That is a fact of life. If r1 institutions shut down their REUs today, most lac grads would have near 0 opportunities in their field of interest. LACs rely on these research institutions for their kids to get into grad school. Open up a bit more.

Are we ranking grad schools? Start a new thread.

Are you now going to combat the claim that one of LAC’s most attractive qualities is getting into grad school? You need research in undergrad to get into a good grad school.

You have already shown your ignorance; no need to double down on it.

What?! You need research to get into grad school. If you can’t agree on that, you’re not only being disingenuous but wrong.

Harvard’s last president had a ridiculously minuscule number of only 7 published papers.

Worse still, she plagiarized most of the work and did not write about serious or worthwhile topics.

I get your culture war point, but research != publication. For some fields, the length of a study makes it very difficult for an undergrad to get published, but it’s still possible to contribute to research.

[Anonymous]

I know Harvard and Yale are in everyone's T10, but aren't particularly known for undergraduate business, engineering or CS. Thats a good chunk of students.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I know Harvard and Yale are in everyone's T10, but aren't particularly known for undergraduate business, engineering or CS. Thats a good chunk of students.

This is exactly why Cornell should be rated higher. The school offers nearly every major imaginable while maintaining rigorous academics across all programs.

On a side note, I was just at Yale, and aside from some cool architecture, the campus, surrounding area, and New Haven itself aren't great.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know Harvard and Yale are in everyone's T10, but aren't particularly known for undergraduate business, engineering or CS. Thats a good chunk of students.

This is exactly why Cornell should be rated higher. The school offers nearly every major imaginable while maintaining rigorous academics across all programs.

On a side note, I was just at Yale, and aside from some cool architecture, the campus, surrounding area, and New Haven itself aren't great.

Yale became too woke and hasn't been able to attract STEM talent.

[Anonymous]

I like the Niche rankings of top 10 for undergrad

MIT
Yale
Stanford
Harvard
Dartmouth
Columbia
Brown
Rice
Vanderbilt
Princeton

I question Columbia a bit in light of events in recent years, but otherwise I think this is pretty solid for best undergrad schools. It's a different list if you include graduate and professional schools, but for undergrad, I think this is pretty realistic.