Should Northeastern be T20? Or even T10?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I feel that OP is clairvoyant and has struck a raw chord in folks who don't want to believe in NEU. I think change is always hard, and revolutions even harder. NEU is focused on the revolution of future of higher ed which in essence is a capitalistic view where the university needs to be a business in a good way. It has bought other campuses and pushes online education to expand its reach. It need not invest in big-name faculty because it knows many others can do as good a job in the classroom for half the salary. It also does not waste money in a D1 football team or some crazy expensive sports. Who wants to waste money on a football coach costing millions of dollars like Stanford does. That is why it will be toe-to-toe or exceed the Ivies and other old-world elite schools. It is the common sense approach to education.

Are you describing Northeastern or University of Phoenix?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I feel that OP is clairvoyant and has struck a raw chord in folks who don't want to believe in NEU. I think change is always hard, and revolutions even harder. NEU is focused on the revolution of future of higher ed which in essence is a capitalistic view where the university needs to be a business in a good way. It has bought other campuses and pushes online education to expand its reach. It need not invest in big-name faculty because it knows many others can do as good a job in the classroom for half the salary. It also does not waste money in a D1 football team or some crazy expensive sports. Who wants to waste money on a football coach costing millions of dollars like Stanford does. That is why it will be toe-to-toe or exceed the Ivies and other old-world elite schools. It is the common sense approach to education.

Are you describing Northeastern or University of Phoenix?

May be what PP (and OP) are claiming is that NEU combines the best aspects of a traditional university and University of Phoenix.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I feel that OP is clairvoyant and has struck a raw chord in folks who don't want to believe in NEU. I think change is always hard, and revolutions even harder. NEU is focused on the revolution of future of higher ed which in essence is a capitalistic view where the university needs to be a business in a good way. It has bought other campuses and pushes online education to expand its reach. It need not invest in big-name faculty because it knows many others can do as good a job in the classroom for half the salary. It also does not waste money in a D1 football team or some crazy expensive sports. Who wants to waste money on a football coach costing millions of dollars like Stanford does. That is why it will be toe-to-toe or exceed the Ivies and other old-world elite schools. It is the common sense approach to education.

Are you describing Northeastern or University of Phoenix?

May be what PP (and OP) are claiming is that NEU combines the best aspects of a traditional university and University of Phoenix.

Cool. That doesn't warrant it being a "T20 or T10".

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:UCLA, UCSD, UCI and probably even UCSB all get over 100k applications every year, UCLA is barely T50 regardless of public news rankings, the others are around a T100 school which is actually pretty good, think 50 states, T100 is top 2 per state and given states like NY and MA have many elite colleges T100 is actually very good

Northeastern is a solid school but in all seriousness its barely a T100, maybe in a few decades it could be perceived as a T50, but still too early to tell

A telling indicator is endowment, NEU is barely above $1 billion which is not in the T100 in the US

The T10 schools have enormous endowments which provides a real competitive advantage to not only attract students but also their experience + influence among alumni

Harvard has $53 billion, Yale $43 billion, Princeton $38 billion, Penn $38 billion, Columbia $14 billion, Cornell $10 billion, Dartmouth $8 billion, Brown $7 billion - keep in mind to get these endowments alumni + their networks had to donate funds which indicate that the alumni are disproportionately successful + loyal, important factors for consideration among the most talented of college applicants, think top 1% of top 1%, that one kid in a great high school that everybody knows can go anywhere, etc. - these are the kids that largely end up at T10 schools

NEU is around the T125 to T150 at $1 billion, similar to Fordham, Lafayette, or Bucknell

Its a great school but the perception among younger students is that its safety for students that are targeting T30 to T50 schools

UCLA is barely T50 and UCSB, UCSD are T100? What are you smoking?

Endowments relate to the prestige garnered by the school throughout its entire existence more so than its current quality.

Also, public universities tend to have lower endowments despite having a huge number of successful alumni because (a) they don't bother much in getting donations out of alumni and (b) they are backed by the state so (a) is unnecessary.

Is that why University of Texas has a larger endowment than any ivy other than Harvard? Texas A&M has a larger endowment than Darthmouth and Brown...combined. Michigan is larger than Columbia. You assertion of public not having large endowments is just talking out of your rearend without any basis in facts.

So you pick out 3 examples out of 100s of public universities in the country for your comparison?

UT Austin and Texas A&M both have high endowments due to oil money. They literally struck black gold. No other reason.

U. Michigan and UVA are outliers in terms of public endowment and their endowment is still paltry in a per-student basis compared to the privates like Columbia.

The endowment of the remaining top public universities - UC Berkeley, UCLA, UC San Diego, U. Washington, Georgia Tech, etc. etc. - rarely hits above $5 billion.

Pitt’s endowment is close to 5 billion. It’s ranked in the top 20 of all college endowments. And Pitt is public.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:UCLA, UCSD, UCI and probably even UCSB all get over 100k applications every year, UCLA is barely T50 regardless of public news rankings, the others are around a T100 school which is actually pretty good, think 50 states, T100 is top 2 per state and given states like NY and MA have many elite colleges T100 is actually very good

Northeastern is a solid school but in all seriousness its barely a T100, maybe in a few decades it could be perceived as a T50, but still too early to tell

A telling indicator is endowment, NEU is barely above $1 billion which is not in the T100 in the US

The T10 schools have enormous endowments which provides a real competitive advantage to not only attract students but also their experience + influence among alumni

Harvard has $53 billion, Yale $43 billion, Princeton $38 billion, Penn $38 billion, Columbia $14 billion, Cornell $10 billion, Dartmouth $8 billion, Brown $7 billion - keep in mind to get these endowments alumni + their networks had to donate funds which indicate that the alumni are disproportionately successful + loyal, important factors for consideration among the most talented of college applicants, think top 1% of top 1%, that one kid in a great high school that everybody knows can go anywhere, etc. - these are the kids that largely end up at T10 schools

NEU is around the T125 to T150 at $1 billion, similar to Fordham, Lafayette, or Bucknell

Its a great school but the perception among younger students is that its safety for students that are targeting T30 to T50 schools

UCLA is barely T50 and UCSB, UCSD are T100? What are you smoking?

Endowments relate to the prestige garnered by the school throughout its entire existence more so than its current quality.

Also, public universities tend to have lower endowments despite having a huge number of successful alumni because (a) they don't bother much in getting donations out of alumni and (b) they are backed by the state so (a) is unnecessary.

Is that why University of Texas has a larger endowment than any ivy other than Harvard? Texas A&M has a larger endowment than Darthmouth and Brown...combined. Michigan is larger than Columbia. You assertion of public not having large endowments is just talking out of your rearend without any basis in facts.

So you pick out 3 examples out of 100s of public universities in the country for your comparison?

UT Austin and Texas A&M both have high endowments due to oil money. They literally struck black gold. No other reason.

U. Michigan and UVA are outliers in terms of public endowment and their endowment is still paltry in a per-student basis compared to the privates like Columbia.

The endowment of the remaining top public universities - UC Berkeley, UCLA, UC San Diego, U. Washington, Georgia Tech, etc. etc. - rarely hits above $5 billion.

Pitt’s endowment is close to 5 billion. It’s ranked in the top 20 of all college endowments. And Pitt is public.

Some of the public shcools have large endowment due to the medical school and facilities, and the revenues from it.
It doesn't really effect undergraduate education much. It maybe beneficial to Pre-Med students a little.
Looks like Pitt is the case.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:UCLA, UCSD, UCI and probably even UCSB all get over 100k applications every year, UCLA is barely T50 regardless of public news rankings, the others are around a T100 school which is actually pretty good, think 50 states, T100 is top 2 per state and given states like NY and MA have many elite colleges T100 is actually very good

Northeastern is a solid school but in all seriousness its barely a T100, maybe in a few decades it could be perceived as a T50, but still too early to tell

A telling indicator is endowment, NEU is barely above $1 billion which is not in the T100 in the US

The T10 schools have enormous endowments which provides a real competitive advantage to not only attract students but also their experience + influence among alumni

Harvard has $53 billion, Yale $43 billion, Princeton $38 billion, Penn $38 billion, Columbia $14 billion, Cornell $10 billion, Dartmouth $8 billion, Brown $7 billion - keep in mind to get these endowments alumni + their networks had to donate funds which indicate that the alumni are disproportionately successful + loyal, important factors for consideration among the most talented of college applicants, think top 1% of top 1%, that one kid in a great high school that everybody knows can go anywhere, etc. - these are the kids that largely end up at T10 schools

NEU is around the T125 to T150 at $1 billion, similar to Fordham, Lafayette, or Bucknell

Its a great school but the perception among younger students is that its safety for students that are targeting T30 to T50 schools

UCLA is barely T50 and UCSB, UCSD are T100? What are you smoking?

Endowments relate to the prestige garnered by the school throughout its entire existence more so than its current quality.

Also, public universities tend to have lower endowments despite having a huge number of successful alumni because (a) they don't bother much in getting donations out of alumni and (b) they are backed by the state so (a) is unnecessary.

Is that why University of Texas has a larger endowment than any ivy other than Harvard? Texas A&M has a larger endowment than Darthmouth and Brown...combined. Michigan is larger than Columbia. You assertion of public not having large endowments is just talking out of your rearend without any basis in facts.

So you pick out 3 examples out of 100s of public universities in the country for your comparison?

UT Austin and Texas A&M both have high endowments due to oil money. They literally struck black gold. No other reason.

U. Michigan and UVA are outliers in terms of public endowment and their endowment is still paltry in a per-student basis compared to the privates like Columbia.

The endowment of the remaining top public universities - UC Berkeley, UCLA, UC San Diego, U. Washington, Georgia Tech, etc. etc. - rarely hits above $5 billion.

Pitt’s endowment is close to 5 billion. It’s ranked in the top 20 of all college endowments. And Pitt is public.

Some of the public shcools have large endowment due to the medical school and facilities, and the revenues from it.
It doesn't really effect undergraduate education much. It maybe beneficial to Pre-Med students a little.
Looks like Pitt is the case.

Same may be true of private schools. Large parts of the endowment can belong to graduate programs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:UCLA, UCSD, UCI and probably even UCSB all get over 100k applications every year, UCLA is barely T50 regardless of public news rankings, the others are around a T100 school which is actually pretty good, think 50 states, T100 is top 2 per state and given states like NY and MA have many elite colleges T100 is actually very good

Northeastern is a solid school but in all seriousness its barely a T100, maybe in a few decades it could be perceived as a T50, but still too early to tell

A telling indicator is endowment, NEU is barely above $1 billion which is not in the T100 in the US

The T10 schools have enormous endowments which provides a real competitive advantage to not only attract students but also their experience + influence among alumni

Harvard has $53 billion, Yale $43 billion, Princeton $38 billion, Penn $38 billion, Columbia $14 billion, Cornell $10 billion, Dartmouth $8 billion, Brown $7 billion - keep in mind to get these endowments alumni + their networks had to donate funds which indicate that the alumni are disproportionately successful + loyal, important factors for consideration among the most talented of college applicants, think top 1% of top 1%, that one kid in a great high school that everybody knows can go anywhere, etc. - these are the kids that largely end up at T10 schools

NEU is around the T125 to T150 at $1 billion, similar to Fordham, Lafayette, or Bucknell

Its a great school but the perception among younger students is that its safety for students that are targeting T30 to T50 schools

UCLA is barely T50 and UCSB, UCSD are T100? What are you smoking?

Endowments relate to the prestige garnered by the school throughout its entire existence more so than its current quality.

Also, public universities tend to have lower endowments despite having a huge number of successful alumni because (a) they don't bother much in getting donations out of alumni and (b) they are backed by the state so (a) is unnecessary.

Is that why University of Texas has a larger endowment than any ivy other than Harvard? Texas A&M has a larger endowment than Darthmouth and Brown...combined. Michigan is larger than Columbia. You assertion of public not having large endowments is just talking out of your rearend without any basis in facts.

So you pick out 3 examples out of 100s of public universities in the country for your comparison?

UT Austin and Texas A&M both have high endowments due to oil money. They literally struck black gold. No other reason.

U. Michigan and UVA are outliers in terms of public endowment and their endowment is still paltry in a per-student basis compared to the privates like Columbia.

The endowment of the remaining top public universities - UC Berkeley, UCLA, UC San Diego, U. Washington, Georgia Tech, etc. etc. - rarely hits above $5 billion.

Pitt’s endowment is close to 5 billion. It’s ranked in the top 20 of all college endowments. And Pitt is public.

Some of the public shcools have large endowment due to the medical school and facilities, and the revenues from it.
It doesn't really effect undergraduate education much. It maybe beneficial to Pre-Med students a little.
Looks like Pitt is the case.

Same may be true of private schools. Large parts of the endowment can belong to graduate programs.

Agreed. So more important metrics would be endowment per undergraduate capita.

Schools like Notre Dame are really great at that.
7th largest on endowment and full size university yet big emphasis on undergraduate.

However relatively low ranked on some of the 'international ranking' because those have a big emphasis on graduate programs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:UCLA, UCSD, UCI and probably even UCSB all get over 100k applications every year, UCLA is barely T50 regardless of public news rankings, the others are around a T100 school which is actually pretty good, think 50 states, T100 is top 2 per state and given states like NY and MA have many elite colleges T100 is actually very good

Northeastern is a solid school but in all seriousness its barely a T100, maybe in a few decades it could be perceived as a T50, but still too early to tell

A telling indicator is endowment, NEU is barely above $1 billion which is not in the T100 in the US

The T10 schools have enormous endowments which provides a real competitive advantage to not only attract students but also their experience + influence among alumni

Harvard has $53 billion, Yale $43 billion, Princeton $38 billion, Penn $38 billion, Columbia $14 billion, Cornell $10 billion, Dartmouth $8 billion, Brown $7 billion - keep in mind to get these endowments alumni + their networks had to donate funds which indicate that the alumni are disproportionately successful + loyal, important factors for consideration among the most talented of college applicants, think top 1% of top 1%, that one kid in a great high school that everybody knows can go anywhere, etc. - these are the kids that largely end up at T10 schools

NEU is around the T125 to T150 at $1 billion, similar to Fordham, Lafayette, or Bucknell

Its a great school but the perception among younger students is that its safety for students that are targeting T30 to T50 schools

UCLA is barely T50 and UCSB, UCSD are T100? What are you smoking?

Endowments relate to the prestige garnered by the school throughout its entire existence more so than its current quality.

Also, public universities tend to have lower endowments despite having a huge number of successful alumni because (a) they don't bother much in getting donations out of alumni and (b) they are backed by the state so (a) is unnecessary.

Is that why University of Texas has a larger endowment than any ivy other than Harvard? Texas A&M has a larger endowment than Darthmouth and Brown...combined. Michigan is larger than Columbia. You assertion of public not having large endowments is just talking out of your rearend without any basis in facts.

So you pick out 3 examples out of 100s of public universities in the country for your comparison?

UT Austin and Texas A&M both have high endowments due to oil money. They literally struck black gold. No other reason.

U. Michigan and UVA are outliers in terms of public endowment and their endowment is still paltry in a per-student basis compared to the privates like Columbia.

The endowment of the remaining top public universities - UC Berkeley, UCLA, UC San Diego, U. Washington, Georgia Tech, etc. etc. - rarely hits above $5 billion.

Pitt’s endowment is close to 5 billion. It’s ranked in the top 20 of all college endowments. And Pitt is public.

Pitt is ranked 24. VCU is 53, which puts it well ahead of Virginia Tech at 83. I'll bet that difference is all down to the hospital/medical school at VCU.

https://www.nacubo.org/-/media/Nacubo/Documents/research/2021-NTSE-Public-Tables--Endowment-Market-Values--REVISED-February-18-2022.ashx?la=en&hash=FA57411CC4244B7D49C25377165FEC42FFBDEB56

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:UCLA, UCSD, UCI and probably even UCSB all get over 100k applications every year, UCLA is barely T50 regardless of public news rankings, the others are around a T100 school which is actually pretty good, think 50 states, T100 is top 2 per state and given states like NY and MA have many elite colleges T100 is actually very good

Northeastern is a solid school but in all seriousness its barely a T100, maybe in a few decades it could be perceived as a T50, but still too early to tell

A telling indicator is endowment, NEU is barely above $1 billion which is not in the T100 in the US

The T10 schools have enormous endowments which provides a real competitive advantage to not only attract students but also their experience + influence among alumni

Harvard has $53 billion, Yale $43 billion, Princeton $38 billion, Penn $38 billion, Columbia $14 billion, Cornell $10 billion, Dartmouth $8 billion, Brown $7 billion - keep in mind to get these endowments alumni + their networks had to donate funds which indicate that the alumni are disproportionately successful + loyal, important factors for consideration among the most talented of college applicants, think top 1% of top 1%, that one kid in a great high school that everybody knows can go anywhere, etc. - these are the kids that largely end up at T10 schools

NEU is around the T125 to T150 at $1 billion, similar to Fordham, Lafayette, or Bucknell

Its a great school but the perception among younger students is that its safety for students that are targeting T30 to T50 schools

UCLA is barely T50 and UCSB, UCSD are T100? What are you smoking?

Endowments relate to the prestige garnered by the school throughout its entire existence more so than its current quality.

Also, public universities tend to have lower endowments despite having a huge number of successful alumni because (a) they don't bother much in getting donations out of alumni and (b) they are backed by the state so (a) is unnecessary.

Is that why University of Texas has a larger endowment than any ivy other than Harvard? Texas A&M has a larger endowment than Darthmouth and Brown...combined. Michigan is larger than Columbia. You assertion of public not having large endowments is just talking out of your rearend without any basis in facts.

So you pick out 3 examples out of 100s of public universities in the country for your comparison?

UT Austin and Texas A&M both have high endowments due to oil money. They literally struck black gold. No other reason.

U. Michigan and UVA are outliers in terms of public endowment and their endowment is still paltry in a per-student basis compared to the privates like Columbia.

The endowment of the remaining top public universities - UC Berkeley, UCLA, UC San Diego, U. Washington, Georgia Tech, etc. etc. - rarely hits above $5 billion.

Pitt’s endowment is close to 5 billion. It’s ranked in the top 20 of all college endowments. And Pitt is public.

Some of the public shcools have large endowment due to the medical school and facilities, and the revenues from it.
It doesn't really effect undergraduate education much. It maybe beneficial to Pre-Med students a little.
Looks like Pitt is the case.

Obviously you don’t do your research, or did they forget to teach you how in your high school. Having a top medical school must not be so bad since all of the top colleges have them. Plus, nearly every private college with a top endowment has one. Oops, forgot about Northeastern.

You have no clear metrics to base your Northeastern superiority on other than a gut feel. Go back to English class and learn how to research schools and rankings. Your arguments are sophomoric. You sound like a high school senior looking to drum up support for NEU

[Anonymous]

14 pages of nonsense... anyone who believes NEU is in T50 is out of his f'king mind. At best T70-T100 level school. I think OP's been trolling us all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:UCLA, UCSD, UCI and probably even UCSB all get over 100k applications every year, UCLA is barely T50 regardless of public news rankings, the others are around a T100 school which is actually pretty good, think 50 states, T100 is top 2 per state and given states like NY and MA have many elite colleges T100 is actually very good

Northeastern is a solid school but in all seriousness its barely a T100, maybe in a few decades it could be perceived as a T50, but still too early to tell

A telling indicator is endowment, NEU is barely above $1 billion which is not in the T100 in the US

The T10 schools have enormous endowments which provides a real competitive advantage to not only attract students but also their experience + influence among alumni

Harvard has $53 billion, Yale $43 billion, Princeton $38 billion, Penn $38 billion, Columbia $14 billion, Cornell $10 billion, Dartmouth $8 billion, Brown $7 billion - keep in mind to get these endowments alumni + their networks had to donate funds which indicate that the alumni are disproportionately successful + loyal, important factors for consideration among the most talented of college applicants, think top 1% of top 1%, that one kid in a great high school that everybody knows can go anywhere, etc. - these are the kids that largely end up at T10 schools

NEU is around the T125 to T150 at $1 billion, similar to Fordham, Lafayette, or Bucknell

Its a great school but the perception among younger students is that its safety for students that are targeting T30 to T50 schools

UCLA is barely T50 and UCSB, UCSD are T100? What are you smoking?

Endowments relate to the prestige garnered by the school throughout its entire existence more so than its current quality.

Also, public universities tend to have lower endowments despite having a huge number of successful alumni because (a) they don't bother much in getting donations out of alumni and (b) they are backed by the state so (a) is unnecessary.

Is that why University of Texas has a larger endowment than any ivy other than Harvard? Texas A&M has a larger endowment than Darthmouth and Brown...combined. Michigan is larger than Columbia. You assertion of public not having large endowments is just talking out of your rearend without any basis in facts.

So you pick out 3 examples out of 100s of public universities in the country for your comparison?

UT Austin and Texas A&M both have high endowments due to oil money. They literally struck black gold. No other reason.

U. Michigan and UVA are outliers in terms of public endowment and their endowment is still paltry in a per-student basis compared to the privates like Columbia.

The endowment of the remaining top public universities - UC Berkeley, UCLA, UC San Diego, U. Washington, Georgia Tech, etc. etc. - rarely hits above $5 billion.

Pitt’s endowment is close to 5 billion. It’s ranked in the top 20 of all college endowments. And Pitt is public.

Some of the public shcools have large endowment due to the medical school and facilities, and the revenues from it.
It doesn't really effect undergraduate education much. It maybe beneficial to Pre-Med students a little.
Looks like Pitt is the case.

Obviously you don’t do your research, or did they forget to teach you how in your high school. Having a top medical school must not be so bad since all of the top colleges have them. Plus, nearly every private college with a top endowment has one. Oops, forgot about Northeastern.

You have no clear metrics to base your Northeastern superiority on other than a gut feel. Go back to English class and learn how to research schools and rankings. Your arguments are sophomoric. You sound like a high school senior looking to drum up support for NEU

Who said it's bad?  
You need to improve your basic reading comprehension skills.
You probably got below 600 on SAT English part.

Yes, endowment from hospitals doesn't really affect the quality of  undergraduate education.  

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:14 pages of nonsense... anyone who believes NEU is in T50 is out of his f'king mind. At best T70-T100 level school. I think OP's been trolling us all.

You must be like 90 years old.
It's better than some of the T30 schools such as Wake, UF, UNC, UCSD
At least by the selectivity and and student stats.

[Anonymous]

“ U. Michigan and UVA are outliers in terms of public endowment and their endowment is still paltry in a per-student basis compared to the privates like Columbia.”

Columbia has approximately a 4:1 graduate/undergraduate ratio. Typically most publics schools are 2 or 3:1 or more undergraduate/graduate ratios. Graduate students typically are way more expensive to educate than undergraduates since they take up more resources and the time of educators. Once again, endowment per student is not always the best way to determine education quality. Columbia is very overloaded as a graduate school. Not a good example to use at all!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:UCLA, UCSD, UCI and probably even UCSB all get over 100k applications every year, UCLA is barely T50 regardless of public news rankings, the others are around a T100 school which is actually pretty good, think 50 states, T100 is top 2 per state and given states like NY and MA have many elite colleges T100 is actually very good

Northeastern is a solid school but in all seriousness its barely a T100, maybe in a few decades it could be perceived as a T50, but still too early to tell

A telling indicator is endowment, NEU is barely above $1 billion which is not in the T100 in the US

The T10 schools have enormous endowments which provides a real competitive advantage to not only attract students but also their experience + influence among alumni

Harvard has $53 billion, Yale $43 billion, Princeton $38 billion, Penn $38 billion, Columbia $14 billion, Cornell $10 billion, Dartmouth $8 billion, Brown $7 billion - keep in mind to get these endowments alumni + their networks had to donate funds which indicate that the alumni are disproportionately successful + loyal, important factors for consideration among the most talented of college applicants, think top 1% of top 1%, that one kid in a great high school that everybody knows can go anywhere, etc. - these are the kids that largely end up at T10 schools

NEU is around the T125 to T150 at $1 billion, similar to Fordham, Lafayette, or Bucknell

Its a great school but the perception among younger students is that its safety for students that are targeting T30 to T50 schools

UCLA is barely T50 and UCSB, UCSD are T100? What are you smoking?

Endowments relate to the prestige garnered by the school throughout its entire existence more so than its current quality.

Also, public universities tend to have lower endowments despite having a huge number of successful alumni because (a) they don't bother much in getting donations out of alumni and (b) they are backed by the state so (a) is unnecessary.

Is that why University of Texas has a larger endowment than any ivy other than Harvard? Texas A&M has a larger endowment than Darthmouth and Brown...combined. Michigan is larger than Columbia. You assertion of public not having large endowments is just talking out of your rearend without any basis in facts.

So you pick out 3 examples out of 100s of public universities in the country for your comparison?

UT Austin and Texas A&M both have high endowments due to oil money. They literally struck black gold. No other reason.

U. Michigan and UVA are outliers in terms of public endowment and their endowment is still paltry in a per-student basis compared to the privates like Columbia.

The endowment of the remaining top public universities - UC Berkeley, UCLA, UC San Diego, U. Washington, Georgia Tech, etc. etc. - rarely hits above $5 billion.

Pitt’s endowment is close to 5 billion. It’s ranked in the top 20 of all college endowments. And Pitt is public.

Some of the public shcools have large endowment due to the medical school and facilities, and the revenues from it.
It doesn't really effect undergraduate education much. It maybe beneficial to Pre-Med students a little.
Looks like Pitt is the case.

Obviously you don’t do your research, or did they forget to teach you how in your high school. Having a top medical school must not be so bad since all of the top colleges have them. Plus, nearly every private college with a top endowment has one. Oops, forgot about Northeastern.

You have no clear metrics to base your Northeastern superiority on other than a gut feel. Go back to English class and learn how to research schools and rankings. Your arguments are sophomoric. You sound like a high school senior looking to drum up support for NEU

Princeton, Caltech, Berkeley and others don't have medical schools, and no LACs have medical schools. I think the PPs point is it may help with endowment and ranking, at least for USNEWS resources, having a medical school is a benefit, but it doesn't really have much direct benefit for an undergraduate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:“ U. Michigan and UVA are outliers in terms of public endowment and their endowment is still paltry in a per-student basis compared to the privates like Columbia.”

Columbia has approximately a 4:1 graduate/undergraduate ratio. Typically most publics schools are 2 or 3:1 or more undergraduate/graduate ratios. Graduate students typically are way more expensive to educate than undergraduates since they take up more resources and the time of educators. Once again, endowment per student is not always the best way to determine education quality. Columbia is very overloaded as a graduate school. Not a good example to use at all!

Most endowment, usually about 80%, is restricted in purpose by the donor. Whatever purpose the donor designated may or may not benefit undergraduates. A lot of it may not.