Is this the Top 1-30 that everyone is referring to? I'm so confused when people reference T1 or T20 or T30.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^ yeah when think of selectivity I think Test REQUIRED….where test score reports are 100% of the student body and not just the highest scorers with low scores not reported.

I’m sorry, but there shouldn’t be any test optional schools in the “elite” categories. Hopkins and Princeton were huge on DEI in recent years.

Okay but how does Berkeley or UCLA have high intellect with such low test scores?

Berkeley/UCLA academic reputation is more based on grad programs than undergrad programs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Really don't see how people split up Williams, Amherst, Swarthmore, Pomona into separate tiers. Literally the same schools in different locations with no substantial prestige difference.

+1, I'll even say that the typical ordering of Williams<-Amherst<-Swarthmore<-Pomona makes absolutely no sense with current admissions standards, grad school, career outcomes, and fellowship attainment. Anyone who thinks there's a serious higher quality student at Williams than Pomona or Amherst than Swarthmore is seriously delusional.

I don’t rank any of the SLACs in the top 30 since most have such limited offerings and their student population necessarily carves out some of the most competitive applicants as a result. I suppose Harvey Mudd is an exception and agree the WASP schools are all on par with each other though Amherst and Pomona have a leg up with their consortiums.

This is silly school. Top SLACs are tougher admits than anything outside of your top 10, even outside the top 5 (have to take into account greater % of athletes and first gen). You live in a very limited R1 world.

I wouldn't argue they are a tougher admit, I think their model is different and it deflates their admit rates. first, the class sizes are really small. This doesn't mean they are better, it's just there are literally fewer spots on campus. Secondly, 1/3 of the class are athletic recruits. And finally, while RD rates may be low, ED rates are surprisingly high (maybe because of the athletic recruits)

Agree that the admissions model is different. However, the ED rates at some LACs like Swarthmore and Pomona are very low.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^ yeah when think of selectivity I think Test REQUIRED….where test score reports are 100% of the student body and not just the highest scorers with low scores not reported.

I’m sorry, but there shouldn’t be any test optional schools in the “elite” categories. Hopkins and Princeton were huge on DEI in recent years.

Okay but how does Berkeley or UCLA have high intellect with such low test scores?

Berkeley/UCLA academic reputation is more based on grad programs than undergrad programs.

That's great, we're talking about undergrad here though.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^ yeah when think of selectivity I think Test REQUIRED….where test score reports are 100% of the student body and not just the highest scorers with low scores not reported.

I’m sorry, but there shouldn’t be any test optional schools in the “elite” categories. Hopkins and Princeton were huge on DEI in recent years.

Okay but how does Berkeley or UCLA have high intellect with such low test scores?

Berkeley/UCLA academic reputation is more based on grad programs than undergrad programs.

That's great, we're talking about undergrad here though.

Who do you think is actually teaching the undergrads, especially in their first year or two?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Since we're doing lists and I'm bored, here's my ranking for how I perceive the median undergrad intelligence:

1 Caltech
2 MIT
3 Harvard, Stanford
5 Princeton
6 Yale, JHU, UChicago
9 Columbia, UPenn, Northwestern, Rice, Duke
14 Dartmouth, Brown
16 Vanderbilt
17 WashU, CMU, Cornell
20 ND, Emory
22 Berkeley, Georgetown, UCLA
25 NYU
26 USC, Michigan, Georgia Tech, UVA

https://www.collegesimply.com/colleges/rank/colleges/highest-sat-scores/
Going by avg test scores, because when I think of intellect I think of SAT scores.

1. CalTech, Johns Hopkins (1555)
3. MIT, Stanford (1545)
5. Yale, UofC, Harvard, Princeton, Duke (1540)
10. WashU, Dartmouth, CMU,UPenn, Brown, Vanderbilt, Rice (1535)
17. Columbia (1530)
18. Northwestern (1530)
19. NYU (1525)
20. Cornell (1520)
21. Emory, Northeastern, Tufts (1505)
24. USC (1495)
25. Notre Dame (1490)

Agree that you can go by SAT scores but also need to take into account % test optional

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:1. Harvard
2. Stanford
3. MIT
4. Yale
5. Princeton
6. UC Berkeley
7. Caltech
8. Columbia
9. UCLA
10. U Chicago

11. Penn
12. Duke
13. Brown
14. UC San Diego
15. NYU
16. Michigan
17. USC
18. Cornell
19. UT Austin
20. UNC Chapel Hill

21. Johns Hopkins U
22. Dartmouth
23. Rice
24. Pomona
25. Williams
26. Washington U (St. LouisK)
27. UW Madison
28. Swarthmore
29. Vanderbilt
30. UW Seattle
31. Northwestern

Good list. Only missing Amherst.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^ yeah when think of selectivity I think Test REQUIRED….where test score reports are 100% of the student body and not just the highest scorers with low scores not reported.

I’m sorry, but there shouldn’t be any test optional schools in the “elite” categories. Hopkins and Princeton were huge on DEI in recent years.

Okay but how does Berkeley or UCLA have high intellect with such low test scores?

TA's

Berkeley/UCLA academic reputation is more based on grad programs than undergrad programs.

That's great, we're talking about undergrad here though.

Who do you think is actually teaching the undergrads, especially in their first year or two?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Fix it for you

Tier 1: Harvard, Stanford, MIT, Yale, Princeton

Tier 2: Upenn, Johns Hopkins, Columbia, Duke, Northwestern, Brown, CalTech, Williams, Amherst, Swarthmore, Pomona

Tier 3: Dartmouth, Cornell, Chicago, Vanderbilt**, Rice, GTown, Emory, ND, Wellesley, Bowdoin

Tier 4: Berkeley, UCLA, UVA, Umich, USC, NYU, CMC, Carleton, Harvey Mudd, Barnard

LAC bias. Swarthmore and Pomona are Emory/WashU level honestly. Would you honestly put Pomona and Duke in the same sentence? Bowdoin is Gatech/ Tufts level, and the Big4 publics can be moved to 3 as well. But I think if you do that, Dartmouth and maybe Vanderbilt need to move up to 2.

When you describing student outcome, yes you would-Pomona is on par with Penn.

This is completely false and silly.
With the exception of Wharton, I would actually put Pomona above Penn…

A room of one's own.

DP. Penn is unusual because so much of its reputation comes from Wharton. But if you aren't going to Wharton many other schools are as good an option as Penn.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^ yeah when think of selectivity I think Test REQUIRED….where test score reports are 100% of the student body and not just the highest scorers with low scores not reported.

I’m sorry, but there shouldn’t be any test optional schools in the “elite” categories. Hopkins and Princeton were huge on DEI in recent years.

Okay but how does Berkeley or UCLA have high intellect with such low test scores?

Berkeley/UCLA academic reputation is more based on grad programs than undergrad programs.

That's great, we're talking about undergrad here though.

Who do you think is actually teaching the undergrads, especially in their first year or two?

What does that have to do with the intellect of the incoming class of students?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^ yeah when think of selectivity I think Test REQUIRED….where test score reports are 100% of the student body and not just the highest scorers with low scores not reported.

I’m sorry, but there shouldn’t be any test optional schools in the “elite” categories. Hopkins and Princeton were huge on DEI in recent years.

Okay but how does Berkeley or UCLA have high intellect with such low test scores?

Berkeley/UCLA academic reputation is more based on grad programs than undergrad programs.

That's great, we're talking about undergrad here though.

Who do you think is actually teaching the undergrads, especially in their first year or two?

What does that have to do with the intellect of the incoming class of students?

PP's comment was about "academic reputation" and I was speaking to that.