where would Williams and Amherst rank in the ivy league..
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
As opposed to your "rock solid" proof that Ivies have better teaching and resources? Proof which is non existent. Anyway, here is some actual material from strong sources along with a research paper explicitly pointing out that the incentives for teaching are misaligned at R1s. https://www.macfound.org/press/press-releases/creativity-benefit-liberal-education https://www.aei.org/politics-and-public-opinion/why-are-liberal-arts-college-faculty-building-better-relationships-with-their-students/ https://www.hillpublisher.com/UpFile/202405/20240521181851.pdf |
Anonymous
Well, the proof that my AW kid's educational experience is far superior to mine at HYP is all the evidence I need. Since you clearly attended neither kind of institution, that suggests your opinion is irrelevant. |
Anonymous
More like oranges & tangerines. The idea that a Columbia grad has a better education than a Williams grad is laughable. The size is different. That’s about it. |
Anonymous
For SLACs: Soka and Principa are their own stories associated with religion (cult?) money. Those aside, endowment per student rankings: Amherst, Swarthmore, Pomona, Grinnell, Williams, Bowdoin (all well over a million per student) For research universities: Princeton, Yale, Stanford, MIT, Harvard (all 2 million + per student, except Harvard only 1.75 milllion) Pretty good way to compare schools: https://www.collegeraptor.com/college-rankings/details/EndowmentPerStudent/ As for the R1’s being less endowment independent than SLACs? Is that why Columbia (only 448k per student) took 400 kids off the waitlist for its largest class ever and is expanding enrollment permanently? Is that why Johns Hopkins could only go need blind only after a big Bloomberg donation? (still only 366k per student) If anything, this proves that private research universities are more endowment dependent than SLACs, not less… |
Anonymous
Less resources, but better access: it's generally easier to get opportunities to do research when you don't have to fight with hundreds of graduate students. But at this level, it depends far more on what you're looking for than absolute ranking. |
Anonymous
R1s range from Harvard to ASU. It’s a bit disingenuous to say you’re going to give sources and then not compare the topic at hand. The ivies have undergraduate colleges that are highly focused on teaching while connecting undergraduate students with research institutes. What makes you think Princeton is a worse teaching institution than Williams? |
Anonymous
|
[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Endowment per student comparisons at the top are overrated. Research universities are less endowment dependent than LACs, which is why trump nearly crumpled them with the endowment tax and they had to be exempt. If higher endowment per student automatically improved your resources and made you a better institution, Soka university would be the first college we’d all be looking to, and Pomona would have 80,000+ applications. Because DCUM is so grad focused, people dismiss very real resources by these institutions, their research centers, and their faculty. It’s a weird opinion I’ve only really seen here.[/quote]
For SLACs: Soka and Principa are their own stories associated with religion (cult?) money. Those aside, endowment per student rankings: Amherst, Swarthmore, Pomona, Grinnell, Williams, Bowdoin (all well over a million per student) For research universities: Princeton, Yale, Stanford, MIT, Harvard (all 2 million + per student, except Harvard only 1.75 milllion) Pretty good way to compare schools: https://www.collegeraptor.com/college-rankings/details/EndowmentPerStudent/ As for the R1’s being less endowment independent than SLACs? Is that why Columbia (only 448k per student) took 400 kids off the waitlist for its largest class ever and is expanding enrollment permanently? Is that why Johns Hopkins could only go need blind only after a big Bloomberg donation? (still only 366k per student) If anything, this proves that private research universities are more endowment dependent than SLACs, not less…[/quote] I’m sorry but no- the liberal arts colleges would’ve had a crisis if the endowment tax hit them. [url] https://www.pomona.edu/administration/president/statements/posts/federal-developments-related-college[/url] [url]https://www.chronicle.com/article/small-colleges-are-banding-together-against-a-higher-endowment-tax-this-is-why[/url] Unlike LACs, Columbia experienced a double whammy- the endowment tax was hit on them (luckily at a much smaller percentage than originally proposed) and their research funds were hijacked by the administration. I’m surprised you have this opinion, since the small colleges were all storming capitol hill and paying a ton in representation to get congressional members to stop the endowment tax on small colleges. It was a real crisis that would’ve crippled these colleges. They wouldn’t have been poor, but they basically all would’ve had to massively restructure their budget. [url]https://williamsrecord.com/470109/news/college-spared-from-endowment-tax-increase/[/url] |
Anonymous
I’m sorry but no- the liberal arts colleges would’ve had a crisis if the endowment tax hit them. https://www.pomona.edu/ad...ed-college" target="_new" rel="nofollow"> https://www.pomona.edu/ad...ed-college https://www.chronicle.com/article/small-colleges-are-banding-together-against-a-higher-endowment-tax-this-is-why Unlike LACs, Columbia experienced a double whammy- the endowment tax was hit on them (luckily at a much smaller percentage than originally proposed) and their research funds were hijacked by the administration. I’m surprised you have this opinion, since the small colleges were all storming capitol hill and paying a ton in representation to get congressional members to stop the endowment tax on small colleges. It was a real crisis that would’ve crippled these colleges. They wouldn’t have been poor, but they basically all would’ve had to massively restructure their budget. https://williamsrecord.com/470109/news/college-spared-from-endowment-tax-increase/ |
Anonymous
| As a Princeton alum, I don’t fully understand most of the comments in this thread, and it’s making me consider that most people here haven’t actually been to the schools they’re critiquing. Unless someone was a research associate, it was very rare a Princeton lab didn’t have undergraduates in it. These days, it’s very easy to access research, and the institution will throw money at the undergrads to do so. I felt my professors were amazing at teaching and they were also some of the best researchers in the world. I don’t know many people who would disagree. |
Anonymous
Clearly you don’t get the point. Columbia and JHU were vulnerable because they have poor endowments. SLACs played the lobbying game. Surprised you don’t know the real reason SLACs were not taxed. One word: Hillsdale. |
Anonymous
wtf are you talking about? jhu’s endowment is 13 billion. How is that poor? |
Anonymous
| this thread has certified slacs as idiots. poor at stem and math especially |
Anonymous
I don’t think anyone on this thread has suggested WASP-B should be above HYPSM. More to the point, it does not sound like you know what Columbia, Cornell and Penn, say, are really like— let alone the Berkeleys of the world. Have you been? |
Anonymous
Make this your homework assignment. |
Anonymous
And most of it has nothing to do with undergraduate study. |