Is John Hopkins an Ivy?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I've always felt the "top 3 schools" are actually about 5 schools.
The top 10 are about 15.
The top 25 are probably about 35-40 schools.

There is probably some truth in that in that no one can actually agree on what they are. USNWR is the most referenced, but they have Stanford at #6 and not top 3 for instance.

Here’s a secret that you all probably will think is crazy, but is true: The average student will have about the same average outcome going to any of the top 50 research universities, so long as they work hard and get the most out of what their university has to offer.

That’s not what this appears to show

https://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/info-Salaries_for_Colleges_by_Type-sort.html

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hey dipsh*t, both Michigan and Berkeley are ranked #3 in undergraduate business with much better programs than Penn elsewhere. This isn’t hard analysis unless you’re simply sucking Wharton cock.

Well aren't you a delicate and refined flower. "You obviously have a wonderful economy with words, Gloria. I look forward to your next syllable with great eagerness.”

I stand by the comment that broad brush micro-analysis of elite colleges is a useless and stupid exercise.

Not the PP you’re responding to, but it’s clear you have no real response. Also, the bolded is contradictory and sort of an oxymoron.

No it isn't. It means using a broad brush and saying something like "Amherst is better than Williams" without any metrics to make what it, at best, a nominal distinction.

What "real response" would you want? "What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence." - Hitchens's Razor

You were given evidence, derived from department rankings.

Yes, and the subjective aspects and confirmation bias exhibited by choosing those particular rankings - which differ wildly from other rankings with different criteria -- is exactly the point. The specifics were pointed out above too.

The WSJ rankings have Duke ahead of Princeton, Cornell above JHU and Columbia, will you accept that as proof that they are better? No? Why not? Because you know that this is dumb.

Can you provide rankings—or any evidence—that disprove the notion that Penn has relatively mediocre departments, outside of Wharton, compared to schools like Michigan and Berkeley?

Please pay attention. I am not making any claim that one school is better than the other. I am saying that the exercise of broadly claiming one elite school is "better" than another elite school is ridiculous. I stated that clearly several times in what you quoted. If I attempted to do what you ask I'd be guilty of something I think is stupid and don't believe in.

Can you please understand that?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I've always felt the "top 3 schools" are actually about 5 schools.
The top 10 are about 15.
The top 25 are probably about 35-40 schools.

There is probably some truth in that in that no one can actually agree on what they are. USNWR is the most referenced, but they have Stanford at #6 and not top 3 for instance.

Here’s a secret that you all probably will think is crazy, but is true: The average student will have about the same average outcome going to any of the top 50 research universities, so long as they work hard and get the most out of what their university has to offer.

That’s not what this appears to show

https://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/info-Salaries_for_Colleges_by_Type-sort.html

If you were to control by COLA differences in terms of where the grads are living, most of the salary differences will go away. That’s really what you’re seeing there more than anything else.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I've always felt the "top 3 schools" are actually about 5 schools.
The top 10 are about 15.
The top 25 are probably about 35-40 schools.

There is probably some truth in that in that no one can actually agree on what they are. USNWR is the most referenced, but they have Stanford at #6 and not top 3 for instance.

Here’s a secret that you all probably will think is crazy, but is true: The average student will have about the same average outcome going to any of the top 50 research universities, so long as they work hard and get the most out of what their university has to offer.

That’s not what this appears to show

https://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/info-Salaries_for_Colleges_by_Type-sort.html

If you were to control by COLA differences in terms of where the grads are living, most of the salary differences will go away. That’s really what you’re seeing there more than anything else.

I’ll just give you one example:

The mid-career median salary for Harvard is $124K. For Cal Poly San Luis Obispo it’s $101K. I’d bet a lot of money that that’s because most Harvard grads are living in expensive major metro areas that are much more expensive.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I've always felt the "top 3 schools" are actually about 5 schools.
The top 10 are about 15.
The top 25 are probably about 35-40 schools.

There is probably some truth in that in that no one can actually agree on what they are. USNWR is the most referenced, but they have Stanford at #6 and not top 3 for instance.

Here’s a secret that you all probably will think is crazy, but is true: The average student will have about the same average outcome going to any of the top 50 research universities, so long as they work hard and get the most out of what their university has to offer.

That’s not what this appears to show

https://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/info-Salaries_for_Colleges_by_Type-sort.html

If you were to control by COLA differences in terms of where the grads are living, most of the salary differences will go away. That’s really what you’re seeing there more than anything else.

That’s a cute theory with no actual support.

[Anonymous]

^^^ you are an unbelievable moron.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The 8 most important schools for the United States are Harvard, Princeton, Yale, Annapolis, West Point, Hopkins and Stanford. Hopkins is the number one research institution by a wide margin.

What about Emory? Esp. their engineering program..

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I've always felt the "top 3 schools" are actually about 5 schools.
The top 10 are about 15.
The top 25 are probably about 35-40 schools.

There is probably some truth in that in that no one can actually agree on what they are. USNWR is the most referenced, but they have Stanford at #6 and not top 3 for instance.

Here’s a secret that you all probably will think is crazy, but is true: The average student will have about the same average outcome going to any of the top 50 research universities, so long as they work hard and get the most out of what their university has to offer.

That’s not what this appears to show

https://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/info-Salaries_for_Colleges_by_Type-sort.html

If you were to control by COLA differences in terms of where the grads are living, most of the salary differences will go away. That’s really what you’re seeing there more than anything else.

That’s a cute theory with no actual support.

There’s support from the table itself.

Take the University of North Dakota, which almost certainly has mostly kids who graduate and live in North Dakota. Average mid-career median salary is $80K.

Guess what?

That $80K in North Dakota is worth more, adjusted for cost of living, than the $124K the average MIT grad is making mid-career living in a major metro area.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The 8 most important schools for the United States are Harvard, Princeton, Yale, Annapolis, West Point, Hopkins and Stanford. Hopkins is the number one research institution by a wide margin.

What about Emory? Esp. their engineering program..

Has to be one of the best thread arguments of the year!! Maybe we should start a top 20 of 2020??

[Anonymous]

Michigan is #2 in research expenditure, if we are going down that path.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I've always felt the "top 3 schools" are actually about 5 schools.
The top 10 are about 15.
The top 25 are probably about 35-40 schools.

There is probably some truth in that in that no one can actually agree on what they are. USNWR is the most referenced, but they have Stanford at #6 and not top 3 for instance.

Here’s a secret that you all probably will think is crazy, but is true: The average student will have about the same average outcome going to any of the top 50 research universities, so long as they work hard and get the most out of what their university has to offer.

That’s not what this appears to show

https://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/info-Salaries_for_Colleges_by_Type-sort.html

If you were to control by COLA differences in terms of where the grads are living, most of the salary differences will go away. That’s really what you’re seeing there more than anything else.

That’s a cute theory with no actual support.

There’s support from the table itself.

Take the University of North Dakota, which almost certainly has mostly kids who graduate and live in North Dakota. Average mid-career median salary is $80K.

Guess what?

That $80K in North Dakota is worth more, adjusted for cost of living, than the $124K the average MIT grad is making mid-career living in a major metro area.

How about the UVA grad with median of $104? Is that because they all choose in live in Charlottesville?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I've always felt the "top 3 schools" are actually about 5 schools.
The top 10 are about 15.
The top 25 are probably about 35-40 schools.

There is probably some truth in that in that no one can actually agree on what they are. USNWR is the most referenced, but they have Stanford at #6 and not top 3 for instance.

Here’s a secret that you all probably will think is crazy, but is true: The average student will have about the same average outcome going to any of the top 50 research universities, so long as they work hard and get the most out of what their university has to offer.

That’s not what this appears to show

https://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/info-Salaries_for_Colleges_by_Type-sort.html

If you were to control by COLA differences in terms of where the grads are living, most of the salary differences will go away. That’s really what you’re seeing there more than anything else.

That’s a cute theory with no actual support.

There’s support from the table itself.

Take the University of North Dakota, which almost certainly has mostly kids who graduate and live in North Dakota. Average mid-career median salary is $80K.

Guess what?

That $80K in North Dakota is worth more, adjusted for cost of living, than the $124K the average MIT grad is making mid-career living in a major metro area.

How about the UVA grad with median of $104? Is that because they all choose in live in Charlottesville?

The difference between UVA and the highest median mid-career salary on that table—$124K—really isn’t that much. It’s $20K.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Michigan is #2 in research expenditure, if we are going down that path.

And Hopkins is double in funding.

[Anonymous]

Due to the medical school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I've always felt the "top 3 schools" are actually about 5 schools.
The top 10 are about 15.
The top 25 are probably about 35-40 schools.

There is probably some truth in that in that no one can actually agree on what they are. USNWR is the most referenced, but they have Stanford at #6 and not top 3 for instance.

Here’s a secret that you all probably will think is crazy, but is true: The average student will have about the same average outcome going to any of the top 50 research universities, so long as they work hard and get the most out of what their university has to offer.

That’s not what this appears to show

https://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/info-Salaries_for_Colleges_by_Type-sort.html

If you were to control by COLA differences in terms of where the grads are living, most of the salary differences will go away. That’s really what you’re seeing there more than anything else.

That’s a cute theory with no actual support.

There’s support from the table itself.

Take the University of North Dakota, which almost certainly has mostly kids who graduate and live in North Dakota. Average mid-career median salary is $80K.

Guess what?

That $80K in North Dakota is worth more, adjusted for cost of living, than the $124K the average MIT grad is making mid-career living in a major metro area.

How about the UVA grad with median of $104? Is that because they all choose in live in Charlottesville?

The difference between UVA and the highest median mid-career salary on that table—$124K—really isn’t that much. It’s $20K.

Well the highest is $134. Even at 124 it’s 20%. Would you take twenty percent less for your job?