2022 US News Best National Universities

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People who defend the HYPSM acronym with yield rates, “daring” Columbia to change to SCEA and have a 70% yield rate is beyond insufferable. This is a typical chicken-or-egg fallacy that they use so it’s impossible for any school to join the acronym.

They believe that what separates HYPSM from the rest is their SCEA program and 70% yield rate. In other words, they believe that popular schools among laymen should be considered the best schools.

If you’re a high school student and you got into both Princeton and Columbia, chances are you are going to choose Princeton because it’s a “HYPSM school.” But since HYPSM is a term that is based on popularity, it creates a never ending cycle of reinforcing the HYPSM distinction.

The problem lies in that HYPSM was constructed out of measuring popularity through yield rates and early action programs. As long as those insufferable people don’t consider the academics of the schools, there would be no way for any school to join the HYPSM acronym.

So, please disregard any argument that uses yield rates to distinguish which school is better over another.

If you get into Princeton and Columbia for undergraduate, the odds are you are going to attend Princeton because it has a greater focus on undergraduate education, offers its undergraduates institutional resources that Columbia doesn't provide, and is located in a safe and beautiful location. There is a cohort that will always prefer Columbia because it's in New York City, and some students prefer urban environments and to live more independently, but changing an acronym isn't going to move that needle significantly.

I have yet to see anyone (personally) who got into both and chose Columbia. In the 5-6 cases all chose Princeton

Same with Princeton vs. Yale or Harvard. It's a notch below HYPM if you really want to split hairs like this, sure. I went to H/Y and Andover. Most techies chose MIT or Stanford. Harvard or Yale for the prestige. Princeton is like the ugly cousin for rich, well-endowed nerds and athletes who don't have the stats to get into any of them, but just connections.

That is a very strange post . Single choice early action fills up about forty percent of the class at PY and H.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People who defend the HYPSM acronym with yield rates, “daring” Columbia to change to SCEA and have a 70% yield rate is beyond insufferable. This is a typical chicken-or-egg fallacy that they use so it’s impossible for any school to join the acronym.

They believe that what separates HYPSM from the rest is their SCEA program and 70% yield rate. In other words, they believe that popular schools among laymen should be considered the best schools.

If you’re a high school student and you got into both Princeton and Columbia, chances are you are going to choose Princeton because it’s a “HYPSM school.” But since HYPSM is a term that is based on popularity, it creates a never ending cycle of reinforcing the HYPSM distinction.

The problem lies in that HYPSM was constructed out of measuring popularity through yield rates and early action programs. As long as those insufferable people don’t consider the academics of the schools, there would be no way for any school to join the HYPSM acronym.

So, please disregard any argument that uses yield rates to distinguish which school is better over another.

If you get into Princeton and Columbia for undergraduate, the odds are you are going to attend Princeton because it has a greater focus on undergraduate education, offers its undergraduates institutional resources that Columbia doesn't provide, and is located in a safe and beautiful location. There is a cohort that will always prefer Columbia because it's in New York City, and some students prefer urban environments and to live more independently, but changing an acronym isn't going to move that needle significantly.

I have yet to see anyone (personally) who got into both and chose Columbia. In the 5-6 cases all chose Princeton

Same with Princeton vs. Yale or Harvard. It's a notch below HYPM if you really want to split hairs like this, sure. I went to H/Y and Andover. Most techies chose MIT or Stanford. Harvard or Yale for the prestige. Princeton is like the ugly cousin for rich, well-endowed nerds and athletes who don't have the stats to get into any of them, but just connections.

That is a very strange post . Single choice early action fills up about forty percent of the class at PY and H.

Right, it was back in my days. Still P ranks the lowest of HYPSM if you really want to split hairs like this to make P look bad relative to their #1 US News Ranking when it's more like #5 based on real student preferences followed by Columbia and Penn maybe. Maybe 20 years ago it could outshine Stanford or MIT but not anymore these days. And kids do prefer big cities now. SCEA does not require you to commit to one school unliked ED.

[Anonymous]

No interest in splitting hairs or engaging in the ranking nonsense beyond seeing the top ranked schools as a group of outstanding institution and within that - choose the best fit for each particular student.

Saying YHMS are better than princeton is really silly unless you know the individual involved and which place will be the better fit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just look at yield rates for Columbia, even below Penn and Chicago

This list gives you a general ballpark idea of how schools are ranked. But it doesn't change people's mind much. I guess the Princeton alumni still work at US News. But very few believes Princeton being #1. Its yield rate in the 60% range is the lowest out of HYPSM. No one believes Chicago is tied with Stanford. Duke's yield rate is less than 50%. Few believes Columbia being #2 either. If you want to be in the top 5, you need to get rid of ED and see what your yield rate is with only EA as HYPSM do.

+1
Almost no one chooses to go to Chicago or Columbia if they think they can be accepted at HYPSM.

Note: if they *think*

Not true. I know at least three people who turned down Harvard undergraduate to attend Columbia College. They wanted small classes which Columbia provided a part of the undergraduate experience, and which Harvard did not do anywhere as much as at Columbia. Thye were quite happy campers at Columbia with their decision to attend.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People who defend the HYPSM acronym with yield rates, “daring” Columbia to change to SCEA and have a 70% yield rate is beyond insufferable. This is a typical chicken-or-egg fallacy that they use so it’s impossible for any school to join the acronym.

They believe that what separates HYPSM from the rest is their SCEA program and 70% yield rate. In other words, they believe that popular schools among laymen should be considered the best schools.

If you’re a high school student and you got into both Princeton and Columbia, chances are you are going to choose Princeton because it’s a “HYPSM school.” But since HYPSM is a term that is based on popularity, it creates a never ending cycle of reinforcing the HYPSM distinction.

The problem lies in that HYPSM was constructed out of measuring popularity through yield rates and early action programs. As long as those insufferable people don’t consider the academics of the schools, there would be no way for any school to join the HYPSM acronym.

So, please disregard any argument that uses yield rates to distinguish which school is better over another.

If you get into Princeton and Columbia for undergraduate, the odds are you are going to attend Princeton because it has a greater focus on undergraduate education, offers its undergraduates institutional resources that Columbia doesn't provide, and is located in a safe and beautiful location. There is a cohort that will always prefer Columbia because it's in New York City, and some students prefer urban environments and to live more independently, but changing an acronym isn't going to move that needle significantly.

I have yet to see anyone (personally) who got into both and chose Columbia. In the 5-6 cases all chose Princeton

Same with Princeton vs. Yale or Harvard. It's a notch below HYPM if you really want to split hairs like this, sure. I went to H/Y and Andover. Most techies chose MIT or Stanford. Harvard or Yale for the prestige. Princeton is like the ugly cousin for rich, well-endowed nerds and athletes who don't have the stats to get into any of them, but just connections.

That is a very strange post . Single choice early action fills up about forty percent of the class at PY and H.

Right, it was back in my days. Still P ranks the lowest of HYPSM if you really want to split hairs like this to make P look bad relative to their #1 US News Ranking when it's more like #5 based on real student preferences followed by Columbia and Penn maybe. Maybe 20 years ago it could outshine Stanford or MIT but not anymore these days. And kids do prefer big cities now. SCEA does not require you to commit to one school unliked ED.

Not always true by any means.

I know some students who chose Columbia over Harvard, and several who chose Columbia over Stanford. The excitement of the undergraduate programs at Columbia College and in being able to benefit from New York City were significant pluses that these students sought with keen interest.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Plus, at harvard you get to be surrounded by students that are very secure they are the track to pre-eminence as opposed to merely excellence.

'merely ' ? How bizarre an adverb to use.

Tell that adverb to Columbia College, Columbia Law School and Columbia Medical School. 'Preeminent ' is the proper adjective. So lucky to be able to get into any of these programs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People who defend the HYPSM acronym with yield rates, “daring” Columbia to change to SCEA and have a 70% yield rate is beyond insufferable. This is a typical chicken-or-egg fallacy that they use so it’s impossible for any school to join the acronym.

They believe that what separates HYPSM from the rest is their SCEA program and 70% yield rate. In other words, they believe that popular schools among laymen should be considered the best schools.

If you’re a high school student and you got into both Princeton and Columbia, chances are you are going to choose Princeton because it’s a “HYPSM school.” But since HYPSM is a term that is based on popularity, it creates a never ending cycle of reinforcing the HYPSM distinction.

The problem lies in that HYPSM was constructed out of measuring popularity through yield rates and early action programs. As long as those insufferable people don’t consider the academics of the schools, there would be no way for any school to join the HYPSM acronym.

So, please disregard any argument that uses yield rates to distinguish which school is better over another.

If you get into Princeton and Columbia for undergraduate, the odds are you are going to attend Princeton because it has a greater focus on undergraduate education, offers its undergraduates institutional resources that Columbia doesn't provide, and is located in a safe and beautiful location. There is a cohort that will always prefer Columbia because it's in New York City, and some students prefer urban environments and to live more independently, but changing an acronym isn't going to move that needle significantly.

I have yet to see anyone (personally) who got into both and chose Columbia. In the 5-6 cases all chose Princeton

Actress Brook Shield went to Princeton. She even chose to publish her Princeton transcript. It was all Micky mouse courses. People’s choice can be a function of how easy the program is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People who defend the HYPSM acronym with yield rates, “daring” Columbia to change to SCEA and have a 70% yield rate is beyond insufferable. This is a typical chicken-or-egg fallacy that they use so it’s impossible for any school to join the acronym.

They believe that what separates HYPSM from the rest is their SCEA program and 70% yield rate. In other words, they believe that popular schools among laymen should be considered the best schools.

If you’re a high school student and you got into both Princeton and Columbia, chances are you are going to choose Princeton because it’s a “HYPSM school.” But since HYPSM is a term that is based on popularity, it creates a never ending cycle of reinforcing the HYPSM distinction.

The problem lies in that HYPSM was constructed out of measuring popularity through yield rates and early action programs. As long as those insufferable people don’t consider the academics of the schools, there would be no way for any school to join the HYPSM acronym.

So, please disregard any argument that uses yield rates to distinguish which school is better over another.

If you get into Princeton and Columbia for undergraduate, the odds are you are going to attend Princeton because it has a greater focus on undergraduate education, offers its undergraduates institutional resources that Columbia doesn't provide, and is located in a safe and beautiful location. There is a cohort that will always prefer Columbia because it's in New York City, and some students prefer urban environments and to live more independently, but changing an acronym isn't going to move that needle significantly.

I have yet to see anyone (personally) who got into both and chose Columbia. In the 5-6 cases all chose Princeton

I have seen three chose Columbia over Harvard; and know of one who chose Columbia over Stanford. Most of the students at Columbia I knew had well into the 700's SAT''s, some 790-800; and all A's in high school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just look at yield rates for Columbia, even below Penn and Chicago

Chicago has two rounds of ED, please. Princeton has the same yield rate as Penn.

You are confusing Wharton with Penn College of Arts and Sciences.

Wharton might have higher yield rate, but certainly not Penn CAS. Also, some different students might be applying to Penn CAS.

You are comparing apples to oranges ( or, apples to bananas ?) You can't combine Wharton to the separate Penn CAS admissions.

Columbia is much more difficult to get accepted.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:No interest in splitting hairs or engaging in the ranking nonsense beyond seeing the top ranked schools as a group of outstanding institution and within that - choose the best fit for each particular student.

Saying YHMS are better than princeton is really silly unless you know the individual involved and which place will be the better fit.

Just as nonsensical as assuming that beyond HYPSM there seems to be a massive drop off, or to even have an acronym as such. I was the previous Andover and H/Y poster. It makes our grads look narcissist, elitist, and foolishly insecure as if getting into one of those schools was the biggest ever accomplishment of our lives.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People who defend the HYPSM acronym with yield rates, “daring” Columbia to change to SCEA and have a 70% yield rate is beyond insufferable. This is a typical chicken-or-egg fallacy that they use so it’s impossible for any school to join the acronym.

They believe that what separates HYPSM from the rest is their SCEA program and 70% yield rate. In other words, they believe that popular schools among laymen should be considered the best schools.

If you’re a high school student and you got into both Princeton and Columbia, chances are you are going to choose Princeton because it’s a “HYPSM school.” But since HYPSM is a term that is based on popularity, it creates a never ending cycle of reinforcing the HYPSM distinction.

The problem lies in that HYPSM was constructed out of measuring popularity through yield rates and early action programs. As long as those insufferable people don’t consider the academics of the schools, there would be no way for any school to join the HYPSM acronym.

So, please disregard any argument that uses yield rates to distinguish which school is better over another.

If you get into Princeton and Columbia for undergraduate, the odds are you are going to attend Princeton because it has a greater focus on undergraduate education, offers its undergraduates institutional resources that Columbia doesn't provide, and is located in a safe and beautiful location. There is a cohort that will always prefer Columbia because it's in New York City, and some students prefer urban environments and to live more independently, but changing an acronym isn't going to move that needle significantly.

I have yet to see anyone (personally) who got into both and chose Columbia. In the 5-6 cases all chose Princeton

Actress Brook Shield went to Princeton. She even chose to publish her Princeton transcript. It was all Micky mouse courses. People’s choice can be a function of how easy the program is.

A lot more actors went to Columbia or Yale... Christopher Reeve turned down Princeton and Columbia to go to Cornell.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No interest in splitting hairs or engaging in the ranking nonsense beyond seeing the top ranked schools as a group of outstanding institution and within that - choose the best fit for each particular student.

Saying YHMS are better than princeton is really silly unless you know the individual involved and which place will be the better fit.

Just as nonsensical as assuming that beyond HYPSM there seems to be a massive drop off, or to even have an acronym as such. I was the previous Andover and H/Y poster. It makes our grads look narcissist, elitist, and foolishly insecure as if getting into one of those schools was the biggest ever accomplishment of our lives.

The irony of your post is that you made sure it included your educational resume which is irrelevant to the discussion.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Columbia?

No.

This survey has NO credibility.

Have to admit it, New York does give off one massive edge (and will only get bigger), especially going into the 21st century with young people pouring into the cities. Plus it's an Ivy and people associate it with Wall Street and so on. It will only keep rising in rankings, popularity, and prestige as long as it gets to keep a top 5 ranking and more people move into the cities. Even COVID-19 won't reverse this trend. Columbia was historically a top 3 school during the 1960s, then urban decay and white flight during the 70s and 80s brought it to the verge of bankruptcy along with the rest of New York. Lots of good professors gone and students left. There were also campus riots. But now it's on a comeback.

I went to an HYP for undergrad and knew kids from Columbia. Spent time in Morningside Heights as a grad student too. Back in the days it was probably the least desirable Ivy. Just went coed, situated in a dangerous neighborhood inside a dangerous city. It was just plain dirty and filthy. There were some high achievers from local publics like Stuy or Bronx Science but a lot more were just the urban, hipster, and creative types who are dead set on living in a city and won't really consider anywhere else, those from my prep school who went there mostly didn't really fit in but at Columbia those misfits were the mainstream. John Lennon's son went there - which probably gives you a general idea of their student body. Now the city experience has drastically improved and the demographics is lot more like HYP, plus a lot of international wealth, more so than you can imagine. The international wealthy don't send their kids to Princeton or Yale anymore (or never to begin with) but to schools in big cities like Harvard, Columbia, or Penn/Wharton. Would I have gone to Columbia in 2021 instead? Probably. DS is also looking into Columbia and didn't even bother looking at my alma mater.

Duke used to be that high, like really high, when everyone was moving into the suburbs and the countryside during the 80s and 90s, then it just stopped being popular and went into decline in rankings on all fronts: Forbes, US News, you name it, because it no longer has the pull for high-achieving kids these days. Was #12 last year I think, first time in 40 years it fell out of the rankings. How times have changed! Unless it's a southern school, it's also no longer the top college where all the prep school kids would go outside of HYP or Dartmouth (was the #4 ivy back in my age). To give you an example, Andover used to send a dozen kids to Duke every year but in 2021, just one. Eight or nine went to Columbia. Exeter sent 40 to Columbia in the past 3 years but just 5 to Duke.

Some of what you are saying is not correct. I went to Columbia in the 1970's. Many brilliant students from all over the US. I was from New England and was very excited about attending Columbia. Nice dorms ( eg certainly in my freshman and senior years ) , New York was still great with the museums and restaurants. Tons of great teachers. City bankruptcy threats under Mayor Beame had nothing to do with our small classes and having brilliant teachers. also, New York then as now is like the New York Yankees bench depth of tons of great players and great teachers. No shortage of them. The students were top students. I had all A's in my high school and so did most of my college classmates Also, many visiting professors from Princeton were on-campus teaching and they told me how stimulating the campus was. I was sad to have graduated, and from Columbia I went on scholarship to University of Oxford.

I remember having conversations in 1971 about Ivy League choices,and after HYP, at the time, I distinctly remember seeing Columbia as the intellectual choice. who could say no to small classes, the United Nations, museums, and unique restaurants and bookshops all at one's choosing ? I felt then as now it was a fantastic investment ( of my father's money).

Brown was the 'hot' college among the Ivies, but it felt like a gimmick for its trustees to permit no formal course requirements and to allow all pass-fail - a way to cover the fact that it was the poorest of the Ivy League Colleges in terms of the endowment. I didn;believe it in 1971 and I don't believe it now as a suitable way to educate 18-year-olds.

The 1970's issues affected every American city, not just New York. All were facing the courage of budgets, bankruptcy threats, drug-related crime.

Riots ? No riots. Wrong noun choice. You mean the famous strike of 1968 against the Vietnam war and the gym construction ? The brilliance of the New York Times was able to present the student strike, being 25-minute subway ride away. A testament to the rapid infrastructure of the subway and bus systems and world-class media in a world-class city. The following year, in 1969, many other major universities had strikes and in 1970, kent State atrocities, so the 1968 strike at Columbia decreased by comparison to those in 1970 at Kent State and elsewhere across the US. In fact, the Columbia strike proved to be something of an intellectual leader for strikes at Harvard in 1969 and elsewhere during the following two years.

[Anonymous]

I think the really 'top of top' colleges are Harvard, Stanford and MIT.

Then some gap, then Princeton, Yale, Caltech.

Then some more gap

then Columbia, Chicago, etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think the really 'top of top' colleges are Harvard, Stanford and MIT.

Then some gap, then Princeton, Yale, Caltech.

Then some more gap

then Columbia, Chicago, etc.

I think this is wrong. For starters..plenty of Harvard or Stanford or Yale or princeton or Columbia or Chicago kids would struggle at MIT and Caltech.