Rank the Big 10 academically

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DP, but the average caliber of undergraduates and the job options available to Northwestern grads is greater than those from UCLA or Michigan. If we're talking about the top 10% of undergrad populations from all three schools, however, they'd be quite equally matched.

The difference is that the top 60-75% at NU can compete with the Top 10% at UCLA or Michigan

Oh come on. The OOS kids at UCLA and Michigan are all the tippy top kids from their classes, largely valedictorian or close to it, 1500+ SATs, etc. Just stop it.

Very likely those kids applied to NU and got rejected. Seen it happen each year. UCLA and UMich are great schools, but there is a reason they are not T10 ranked, and NU has been for years (and in T20 for decades).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DP, but the average caliber of undergraduates and the job options available to Northwestern grads is greater than those from UCLA or Michigan. If we're talking about the top 10% of undergrad populations from all three schools, however, they'd be quite equally matched.

The difference is that the top 60-75% at NU can compete with the Top 10% at UCLA or Michigan

NP. Out of curiosity just looked up NUs most recent CDS. Out of 2,111 first time freshmen, only 1,008 were deemed eligible for financial. HALF the class can afford $90k per year?! Certified rich kids school. Jeepers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Northwestern
UCLA
Michigan/USC
Washington/Rutgers/Wisconsin/Illinois
Purdue/OSU/Maryland
MSU/Minnesota/Indiana/Penn State
Oregon/Iowa
Nebraska

lol UCLA booster is coping hard

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DP, but the average caliber of undergraduates and the job options available to Northwestern grads is greater than those from UCLA or Michigan. If we're talking about the top 10% of undergrad populations from all three schools, however, they'd be quite equally matched.

The difference is that the top 60-75% at NU can compete with the Top 10% at UCLA or Michigan

Oh come on. The OOS kids at UCLA and Michigan are all the tippy top kids from their classes, largely valedictorian or close to it, 1500+ SATs, etc. Just stop it.

When you attend UCLA you are not just attending with all the other "OOS students". Only 14% of UCLA are OOS students. So you are really attending with mostly in state students.
Hence why a much smaller school like NU is overall better. The caliber of students is higher---it's easier to do that with only 6-7K undergrads. Yes UCLA and Mich will have similar students attending, but it's not 75-80%+ of the students who are that caliber.

And yes, NU has many better programs as previous posters have listed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Music and Theater at NU are great, but they're not better than (or even as good as) at UCLA.

BS


NU Theater has been Top in the country for decades, yes it's not "Hollywood" but just look at the list of NU grads in Hollywood and broadway and other venues. Chicago 2nd City is a starting point for so many.

Music there is simply no comparison. The two schools are not on the same level (I know, I graduated from NU Music as one of my degrees) NU Music is conservatory level (Top 5 in country) with a normal university setting, where students are actually allowed and encouraged to double major (and many students do). I Did---have several friends in major orchestras around the country and world. Attended NU with people who are Hollywood stars.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Music and Theater at NU are great, but they're not better than (or even as good as) at UCLA.

BS


NU Theater has been Top in the country for decades, yes it's not "Hollywood" but just look at the list of NU grads in Hollywood and broadway and other venues. Chicago 2nd City is a starting point for so many.

Music there is simply no comparison. The two schools are not on the same level (I know, I graduated from NU Music as one of my degrees) NU Music is conservatory level (Top 5 in country) with a normal university setting, where students are actually allowed and encouraged to double major (and many students do). I Did---have several friends in major orchestras around the country and world. Attended NU with people who are Hollywood stars.

NU and UMich are both great for Music. But NU wins out with the opportunities in Chicago area vs Ann Arbor while in college and beyond. Also, UMich does not encourage double majors and decades ago actually discouraged it and made it difficult for students if not impossible.

[Anonymous]

NU

UCLA

USC Michigan

Illinois, UMD, Washington, Rutgers, Wisconsin Purdue

Ohio State, Minnesota, Penn State, Indiana, Iowa

Michigan State

Nebraska, Oregon.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DP, but the average caliber of undergraduates and the job options available to Northwestern grads is greater than those from UCLA or Michigan. If we're talking about the top 10% of undergrad populations from all three schools, however, they'd be quite equally matched.

The difference is that the top 60-75% at NU can compete with the Top 10% at UCLA or Michigan

Oh come on. The OOS kids at UCLA and Michigan are all the tippy top kids from their classes, largely valedictorian or close to it, 1500+ SATs, etc. Just stop it.

Very likely those kids applied to NU and got rejected. Seen it happen each year. UCLA and UMich are great schools, but there is a reason they are not T10 ranked, and NU has been for years (and in T20 for decades).

Oh my. Kids choose schools for reasons other than the USNWR ranking. My DC could have applied to NU, but didn't feel it was the right vibe. They did apply to several other B10 schools and would choose them over NU even if they had applied and gotten into them. It's ridiculous to say high stat students at Michigan and UCLA are only there b/c they were rejected from NU. Come on!

[Anonymous]

College Transitions does a pretty good job, IMO, of ranking programs within colleges and universities. Not perfect, not gospel, but pretty good. Here are those rankings for NU, UCLA, and UMich for the performing arts disciplines covered by College Transitions:

Music: NU, #7; UMich, #13; UCLA, #16 -- https://www.collegetransitions.com/blog/best-colleges-for-music/

Film: UCLA, #7; UMich, #23; NU, not in top-30 -- https://www.collegetransitions.com/blog/best-colleges-for-film/

Musical Theatre: UMich, #4; NU, #5; UCLA, not in top-20 -- https://www.collegetransitions.com/blog/best-colleges-for-musical-theater/

Drama/Acting: NU, #2; UCLA, #3; UMich, #15 -- https://www.collegetransitions.com/blog/best-drama-colleges/

Dance: UCLA, #3; UMich, #19; NU, #38 -- https://www.collegetransitions.com/blog/best-dance-colleges/

[Anonymous]

This thread is ridiculous and all of us (myself included) should feel ridiculous for participating in it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DP, but the average caliber of undergraduates and the job options available to Northwestern grads is greater than those from UCLA or Michigan. If we're talking about the top 10% of undergrad populations from all three schools, however, they'd be quite equally matched.

The difference is that the top 60-75% at NU can compete with the Top 10% at UCLA or Michigan

NP. Out of curiosity just looked up NUs most recent CDS. Out of 2,111 first time freshmen, only 1,008 were deemed eligible for financial. HALF the class can afford $90k per year?! Certified rich kids school. Jeepers.

It's been that way for years. 35+ years ago it was 60%+ that were full pay. Yes a lot of rich kids. And then you had me and a lot of my friends, those of us on work-study, working every break we got, and having to manage expenses/spending money very carefully.

Frankly, it's like that at most of the T50 schools. 50-60%+ are full pay. Why is that shocking? If you make 200K+ (and have for at least 10 years as a family) you should be able to save if you value education. Just saving $1K/month for 18 years would net you $216K without any market returns. That can easily be $300K+ if put in the SP500 index over that time, if not more.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:College Transitions does a pretty good job, IMO, of ranking programs within colleges and universities. Not perfect, not gospel, but pretty good. Here are those rankings for NU, UCLA, and UMich for the performing arts disciplines covered by College Transitions:

Music: NU, #7; UMich, #13; UCLA, #16 -- https://www.collegetransitions.com/blog/best-colleges-for-music/

Film: UCLA, #7; UMich, #23; NU, not in top-30 -- https://www.collegetransitions.com/blog/best-colleges-for-film/

Musical Theatre: UMich, #4; NU, #5; UCLA, not in top-20 -- https://www.collegetransitions.com/blog/best-colleges-for-musical-theater/

Drama/Acting: NU, #2; UCLA, #3; UMich, #15 -- https://www.collegetransitions.com/blog/best-drama-colleges/

Dance: UCLA, #3; UMich, #19; NU, #38 -- https://www.collegetransitions.com/blog/best-dance-colleges/

You have to compile the results from many rankings to really compare. College factual puts NU first for music. Yes they are all Good, but I'd consider the opportunities in Chicago leaps and bounds ahead of Ann Arbor.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:DP, but the average caliber of undergraduates and the job options available to Northwestern grads is greater than those from UCLA or Michigan. If we're talking about the top 10% of undergrad populations from all three schools, however, they'd be quite equally matched.

+10000 Northwestern is >>> than UCLA which is very similar to Michigan

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DP, but the average caliber of undergraduates and the job options available to Northwestern grads is greater than those from UCLA or Michigan. If we're talking about the top 10% of undergrad populations from all three schools, however, they'd be quite equally matched.

The difference is that the top 60-75% at NU can compete with the Top 10% at UCLA or Michigan

NP. Out of curiosity just looked up NUs most recent CDS. Out of 2,111 first time freshmen, only 1,008 were deemed eligible for financial. HALF the class can afford $90k per year?! Certified rich kids school. Jeepers.

It's been that way for years. 35+ years ago it was 60%+ that were full pay. Yes a lot of rich kids. And then you had me and a lot of my friends, those of us on work-study, working every break we got, and having to manage expenses/spending money very carefully.

Frankly, it's like that at most of the T50 schools. 50-60%+ are full pay. Why is that shocking? If you make 200K+ (and have for at least 10 years as a family) you should be able to save if you value education. Just saving $1K/month for 18 years would net you $216K without any market returns. That can easily be $300K+ if put in the SP500 index over that time, if not more.

Agree. Its not that hard to afford 90k per year on 220k+ HHI if one has saved some, and at some of the best schools (ivies), they offer need based aid to households in the low 200s or so! In fact the ivies have shifted to have 55% on at least some need-based aid, only 45% full pay. Full pay used to be 55% at these schools a few years ago. These schools are using quotas to keep the full pay % less than half on purpose. They won't go back; ranking counts SES factors and need-based aid. Ivies and the like are LESS rich than many schools a few steps down.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NW
UCLA
Michigan
USC
Wisconsin/UIUC
Washington/Rutgers/UMD
Ohio State/Penn State/Purdue/Minn
Indiana/MSU/Iowa
Nebraska

You forgot Oregon

Oregon is in the Big 10?