Forbes 20 'New Ivies'

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The only publics that are worthy of this list are UCB, UCLA, UVA, UMich, and honorable mentions to UNC and Gatech. For privates replace BC with WashU and give NYU an honorable mention.

that's your opinion. Forbes looked at statistics and surveyed hiring managers.

Stats that include a 50% acceptance rate barrier? Public schools really do ruin rankings, nothing elite or prestigious about UIUC.

There are two categories: "public ivy" and "private ivy"... two categories. Did I mention two categories?

That is the point the standard for "good public" colleges is so low. When many private schools meet or exceed the public criteria. For instance, Howard has a 30% acceptance rate and 1250 SAT score.

are you seriously considering an expensive tiny private college to a large state university that serves the majority of in state students?

This is like comparing an expensive private HS student body performance with that of a large public school that serves the public.

You understand that is not a fair comparison, right? No, clearly you don't.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Stop calling other good schools “Ivies.” There have always been selective schools, some more selective than Ivies, which just aren’t part of the 8-school athletic conference from the days of yore. This is just dumb.

It's just a label. Stop being so triggered.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Stop calling other good schools “Ivies.” There have always been selective schools, some more selective than Ivies, which just aren’t part of the 8-school athletic conference from the days of yore. This is just dumb.

It's just a label. Stop being so triggered.

I’m not so triggered. The label is dumb, wouldn’t you agree? I went to an ivy, as did my spouse, and we have 2 in HS now who probably won’t go into our schools (not applying yet and I’m being realistic).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The only publics that are worthy of this list are UCB, UCLA, UVA, UMich, and honorable mentions to UNC and Gatech. For privates replace BC with WashU and give NYU an honorable mention.

that's your opinion. Forbes looked at statistics and surveyed hiring managers.

Stats that include a 50% acceptance rate barrier? Public schools really do ruin rankings, nothing elite or prestigious about UIUC.

There are two categories: "public ivy" and "private ivy"... two categories. Did I mention two categories?

That is the point the standard for "good public" colleges is so low. When many private schools meet or exceed the public criteria. For instance, Howard has a 30% acceptance rate and 1250 SAT score.

are you seriously considering an expensive tiny private college to a large state university that serves the majority of in state students?

This is like comparing an expensive private HS student body performance with that of a large public school that serves the public.

You understand that is not a fair comparison, right? No, clearly you don't.

What does price have anything to do with it. Ivys are expensive.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The only publics that are worthy of this list are UCB, UCLA, UVA, UMich, and honorable mentions to UNC and Gatech. For privates replace BC with WashU and give NYU an honorable mention.

that's your opinion. Forbes looked at statistics and surveyed hiring managers.

Stats that include a 50% acceptance rate barrier? Public schools really do ruin rankings, nothing elite or prestigious about UIUC.

There are two categories: "public ivy" and "private ivy"... two categories. Did I mention two categories?

That is the point the standard for "good public" colleges is so low. When many private schools meet or exceed the public criteria. For instance, Howard has a 30% acceptance rate and 1250 SAT score.

are you seriously considering an expensive tiny private college to a large state university that serves the majority of in state students?

This is like comparing an expensive private HS student body performance with that of a large public school that serves the public.

You understand that is not a fair comparison, right? No, clearly you don't.

That's kind of the point, public schools are not meant to be elite, yet too many are trying to make them so.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The only publics that are worthy of this list are UCB, UCLA, UVA, UMich, and honorable mentions to UNC and Gatech. For privates replace BC with WashU and give NYU an honorable mention.

that's your opinion. Forbes looked at statistics and surveyed hiring managers.

Stats that include a 50% acceptance rate barrier? Public schools really do ruin rankings, nothing elite or prestigious about UIUC.

There are two categories: "public ivy" and "private ivy"... two categories. Did I mention two categories?

That is the point the standard for "good public" colleges is so low. When many private schools meet or exceed the public criteria. For instance, Howard has a 30% acceptance rate and 1250 SAT score.

are you seriously considering an expensive tiny private college to a large state university that serves the majority of in state students?

This is like comparing an expensive private HS student body performance with that of a large public school that serves the public.

You understand that is not a fair comparison, right? No, clearly you don't.

What does price have anything to do with it. Ivys are expensive.

good gracious.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The only publics that are worthy of this list are UCB, UCLA, UVA, UMich, and honorable mentions to UNC and Gatech. For privates replace BC with WashU and give NYU an honorable mention.

that's your opinion. Forbes looked at statistics and surveyed hiring managers.

Stats that include a 50% acceptance rate barrier? Public schools really do ruin rankings, nothing elite or prestigious about UIUC.

There are two categories: "public ivy" and "private ivy"... two categories. Did I mention two categories?

That is the point the standard for "good public" colleges is so low. When many private schools meet or exceed the public criteria. For instance, Howard has a 30% acceptance rate and 1250 SAT score.

are you seriously considering an expensive tiny private college to a large state university that serves the majority of in state students?

This is like comparing an expensive private HS student body performance with that of a large public school that serves the public.

You understand that is not a fair comparison, right? No, clearly you don't.

That's kind of the point, public schools are not meant to be elite, yet too many are trying to make them so.

All you are saying is that only expensive schools can be elite because of the price tag. Quality of the student body and grads isn't always about money.

Public schools can be elite because of the caliber of students and the quality of grads they are churning out, per the hiring managers.

Your snobiness is showing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Stop calling other good schools “Ivies.” There have always been selective schools, some more selective than Ivies, which just aren’t part of the 8-school athletic conference from the days of yore. This is just dumb.

It's just a label. Stop being so triggered.

I’m not so triggered. The label is dumb, wouldn’t you agree? I went to an ivy, as did my spouse, and we have 2 in HS now who probably won’t go into our schools (not applying yet and I’m being realistic).

Ivies is just a label to indicate selectivity of the student body and quality of the grads. It's just expanding on the current label.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Stop calling other good schools “Ivies.” There have always been selective schools, some more selective than Ivies, which just aren’t part of the 8-school athletic conference from the days of yore. This is just dumb.

It's just a label. Stop being so triggered.

I’m not so triggered. The label is dumb, wouldn’t you agree? I went to an ivy, as did my spouse, and we have 2 in HS now who probably won’t go into our schools (not applying yet and I’m being realistic).

Ivies is just a label to indicate selectivity of the student body and quality of the grads. It's just expanding on the current label.

It is also a label for a type of undergraduate education similar to Ivy league schools, with smaller classes, high standards, good teaching, typically residential, with institutional traditions. This part of it is getting lost.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Stop calling other good schools “Ivies.” There have always been selective schools, some more selective than Ivies, which just aren’t part of the 8-school athletic conference from the days of yore. This is just dumb.

It's just a label. Stop being so triggered.

I’m not so triggered. The label is dumb, wouldn’t you agree? I went to an ivy, as did my spouse, and we have 2 in HS now who probably won’t go into our schools (not applying yet and I’m being realistic).

Ivies is just a label to indicate selectivity of the student body and quality of the grads. It's just expanding on the current label.

It is also a label for a type of undergraduate education similar to Ivy league schools, with smaller classes, high standards, good teaching, typically residential, with institutional traditions. This part of it is getting lost.

I don't think the Ivy designation was specific to "smaller class sizes". In general, it's a label used to indicate selectivity, quality of the education and graduates.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The only publics that are worthy of this list are UCB, UCLA, UVA, UMich, and honorable mentions to UNC and Gatech. For privates replace BC with WashU and give NYU an honorable mention.

UW Madison is historically only second to Berkeley in terms of academics and alumni. Unless Michigan and UCLA can make a vast amount of discoveries in the next 20 years, the only prominence they are achieving now is simply “catch up.”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The only publics that are worthy of this list are UCB, UCLA, UVA, UMich, and honorable mentions to UNC and Gatech. For privates replace BC with WashU and give NYU an honorable mention.

UW Madison is historically only second to Berkeley in terms of academics and alumni. Unless Michigan and UCLA can make a vast amount of discoveries in the next 20 years, the only prominence they are achieving now is simply “catch up.”

No one cares about these alumni from 50+ years ago- it's about RIGHT NOW. No one chose Wisconsin over Michigan or UT and some chose other schools over it as well. It's a good school but a regular state flagship for.. Wisconsin.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Stop calling other good schools “Ivies.” There have always been selective schools, some more selective than Ivies, which just aren’t part of the 8-school athletic conference from the days of yore. This is just dumb.

It's just a label. Stop being so triggered.

I’m not so triggered. The label is dumb, wouldn’t you agree? I went to an ivy, as did my spouse, and we have 2 in HS now who probably won’t go into our schools (not applying yet and I’m being realistic).

Ivies is just a label to indicate selectivity of the student body and quality of the grads. It's just expanding on the current label.

It is also a label for a type of undergraduate education similar to Ivy league schools, with smaller classes, high standards, good teaching, typically residential, with institutional traditions. This part of it is getting lost.

I don't think the Ivy designation was specific to "smaller class sizes". In general, it's a label used to indicate selectivity, quality of the education and graduates.

Quality of education has some dependency on quality teaching, high standards, and things like professor access and class size.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Stop calling other good schools “Ivies.” There have always been selective schools, some more selective than Ivies, which just aren’t part of the 8-school athletic conference from the days of yore. This is just dumb.

It's just a label. Stop being so triggered.

I’m not so triggered. The label is dumb, wouldn’t you agree? I went to an ivy, as did my spouse, and we have 2 in HS now who probably won’t go into our schools (not applying yet and I’m being realistic).

Ivies is just a label to indicate selectivity of the student body and quality of the grads. It's just expanding on the current label.

It is also a label for a type of undergraduate education similar to Ivy league schools, with smaller classes, high standards, good teaching, typically residential, with institutional traditions. This part of it is getting lost.

I don't think the Ivy designation was specific to "smaller class sizes". In general, it's a label used to indicate selectivity, quality of the education and graduates.

Selectivity and with quality of education are being conflated these days.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The only publics that are worthy of this list are UCB, UCLA, UVA, UMich, and honorable mentions to UNC and Gatech. For privates replace BC with WashU and give NYU an honorable mention.

That is silly. Why do some DCUM people keep trying to anoint those schools. And they are nothing like Ivy League schools for undergraduate study.

If those 4 schools don't belong then no public school belongs there.

They are still nothing like Ivy League schools for undergraduate study on average. They are much larger, much less residential, and don't have the same commitment to teaching undergraduates. On that count, those 4 don't differ from other public universities.