USNWR Top 10 Leaked

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm a Googler as well but that doesn't give me any deep insights into which top colleges are most impressive. I can say we have interns and new grads from a large number of schools and have been casting a wider rather than narrower net over the last 5+ years in where people come from (yes, still a lot from Stanford and Cal though).

Focusing so much on a departmental major ranking for undergrad is a mistake to me. It isn't the same as choosing a grad program where you really are sure what you'll study and want to research.

^ this board is obsessed with engineering. They literally can’t fathom people study other things or the value of not taking 99% of courses narrowly focused on one thing.

No.

It's a simple recognition that it's not 1995 anymore. And the really smart kids do tend to go towards engineering, math, computer science, neuroscience, philosophy, biology, neuroscience, and so on these days.

Perhaps in your era, they went towards "business administration."

It's a different era today.

And that's ok. It's super cool that there are still communications and psyche majors out there.

Go for it. Super awesome!

But some people are going to value the hard stuff - from engineering to philosophy.

Of course, if that's not your space that's cool. Not everyone is going to self-actualize with the difficult things

I just hope most choose "difficult things" based on legitimate interest and also try to take classes and get experience outside of 1-2 areas.

Most non-founder leaders, even in tech, have business backgrounds. Some may have started with a little hands on coding or eng, but that is hardly the most important part of their jobs now. Leaders specifically talk about how important their non-STEM experience has been.

The current top tech firms all have engineers as their non founder CEOs (Google, Microsoft, Apple and Nvdia (although CEO is still founder)).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Again, Caltech's entire student undergraduate student body is less than the freshman class at any of the other schools discussed.

It's also a relative unknown on the east coast to many.

https://tech.caltech.edu/2024/04/26/letter-sat-reinstatement/

Good read into the state of Caltech plaguing other schools I'm sure as well.

It's very well known. Most people I've spoken to about schools consider it the west coast equivalent to MIT, just smaller

I think that the west cost people feel like Stanford is Harvard and MIT combined.

Cal Tech is where they film the big bang theory after the asians have left for the day.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Again, Caltech's entire student undergraduate student body is less than the freshman class at any of the other schools discussed.

It's also a relative unknown on the east coast to many.

https://tech.caltech.edu/2024/04/26/letter-sat-reinstatement/

Good read into the state of Caltech plaguing other schools I'm sure as well.

It's very well known. Most people I've spoken to about schools consider it the west coast equivalent to MIT, just smaller

I think that the west cost people feel like Stanford is Harvard and MIT combined.

Cal Tech is where they film the big bang theory after the asians have left for the day.

DP. I agree that people in general don't know about Caltech. Scientists know about Caltech, though. And for people who love rankings, it seems Caltech is #2 in the world and #1 in the US for producing Nobel Laureate alumni.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/jonathanwai/2020/10/08/the-undergraduate-institutions-with-the-most-nobel-prize-winners/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Chicago has to be a little nervous that this leaked ranking is true. I remember a few here thinking they'd be right back in the top 10. Maybe T14 will become a thing for undergrad too.

Chicago is going to be fine. Some schools float in and out of the top 10, and it really doesn't matter. Kids should really not be deciding where to go to college based in a ranking system that changes yearly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:


But, but, but those are grad school rankings. That’s how I know you’ve never attended a research university, otherwise you’d know the grad and undergraduate levels are intertwined; grad schools are ranked according to strength of faculty and students, and faculty also teaches the undergrads and grad students serve as TAs.

I think you mean they are ranked on the strength of faculty research, and most of those faculty want to spend as little time as possible with undergrads, and on the strength of the grad students, most of whom have never taught before.

These are issues with private universities as well, but at least they have far better ratios.

This lack of attention is one reason why UCB undergrads go on to earn PhDs at such a low rate (68th) compared to its private peers despite all the amazing research taking place on its campus.

Let’s not forget UCB guarantees only one year of on campus housing. Making friends and useful contacts is one of the primary benefits of attending college, and a 3/4 reduction in residential experience relative to many privates is not to be swept under the rug.

I like UCB and I think it’s a tremendous value. You’re just overstating its case pretty dramatically.

First of all, don’t call it UCB.

Second, Berkeley also has the most top undergrad programs. In fact, Berkeley practically sweeps the few undergrad programs that U.S. News does rank. Off the top of my head, Berkeley is ranked #1 for CS, #1 civil engineering, #1 psychology, #1 environmental engineering, #2 business administration, etc.

Faculty is ranked according to reputation, papers they’ve written, citations, awards, and yes, research. You’re just nitpicking at this point. Berkeley professors are top notch, and they do teach undergrads. And yes, they care about their undergrad students. I think you’ve been led astray by anti-Berkeley infidels propagating false cliches about cal professors to cope with the reality that the best professors would prefer to teach at public’s.

My biggest regret at Berkeley is ignoring the hundreds of emails I received from professors practically begging for us to come to office hours. They absolutely care about teaching undergrads. This is common sense. In fact, when former Secretary of treasury for Bill Clinton, Robert Reich, conducted his final lecture at Berkeley for his famous Poverty and Wealth course, he sat outside of Wheeler Hall (where Oppenheimer was filmed) and greeted practically half of the school.

I think you’re far too obsessed with ratios, and a university’s ability to coddle their students. I get it, the lesser the competition, the better access you have to the folks who will give you the answers.

But at Berkeley, professors and TAs won’t hold your hands even if you’re in a classroom of 12 students. Their goal is for you to learn how to learn. I hated it myself at first, but now I can’t imagine a better form of education. I wouldn’t trade it for the world. That’s why Berkeley students lead the way with the most venture capitalist-backed startups. It’s simply a different of teaching philosophy and not lack of resources. Would you rather have a bunch of navy Seals put through hell to protect you, or regular recruits who got unlimited resources?

Berkeley also sends the most kids to grad schools. Again, using ratio here is flawed because universities are made up of different colleges and programs, and students have different goals. Private schools specialize in the humanities so naturally they’re gonna wanna go to grad schools en masses because you’re not gonna get very many job offers with that degree (and I was a philosophy major). They also tend to come from money so they can pay for it. Most CS, engineering, data science, etc majors at cal already have jobs in Silicon Valley lined up for them, so why go to grad school?

I will concede to lack of student housing, that’s cal’s biggest problem. But I’m primarily focused on academics, that’s the only thing I’m concerned about.

It’s not that I’m overstating its case, this forum is downplaying it dramatically to cater to their elitism and their warped sense of “good education” that’s centered on exclusivity and wealth.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I feel like I have to defend my beloved Berkeley from you private school fan boys who probably can’t even find the administrations office without your counselor holding your hand. That’s why Berkeley grads run circles around you at the workplace. We’re actually taught how to survive in the real world.

Berkeley has been under-ranked for the last 30 or so years. You’re talking about US News rigging the methodology to favor publics last year? Well, what the heck did they do around 1990 when perennial top 5 Berkeley was suddenly pushed out of top 20? Even Michigan used to be consistently top 10.

Here are the facts: Berkeley has more top 10 departments than any school not named Harvard (I think we’re tied); including #1 CS, #2 engineering, #1 chemistry, #3 physics, #3 math, #1 english, #1 sociolgy, #1 english, #1 history, #3 political science, #1 psychology, and so on.

But, but, but those are grad school rankings. That’s how I know you’ve never attended a research university, otherwise you’d know the grad and undergraduate levels are intertwined; grad schools are ranked according to strength of faculty and students, and faculty also teaches the undergrads and grad students serve as TAs.

Berkeley also tied with Harvard with most Nobel prize (although I think we have more in recent memory. David card and Jennifer doudna each won one the last few years).

Our history is literally unrivaled, at least the last 100 years. From the Manhattan project, the free speech movement, contribution to tech and rise of Silicon Valley, periodic table, immunotherapy, gene editing, perhaps no institution has helped shape the country in the world more.

Times higher education calls us one of the super six universities, along with mit, Harvard, Stanford, Oxford, and Cambridge.

So, eat it. I hope Berkeley moves up even higher this year in this stupid ranking just pissed you guys off even more. Time to accept the fact that public schools are just as good, if not better, than most ivies and “elite” private schools. Your time has passed. It’s the era of the tech-heavy schools.

if this was true, every top 10 ranking would be dominated by the top engineering schools which it is not


berkeley always has been and always will be an overpriced shithole for undergrad. a 4 year graduation rate in the 70s and now completely test optional. lolz

#5 forbes
#8 WSJ
#10 Washington monthly
#5 U.S. news global
#5 ARWU
#12 QS
#9 THE

And in a couple weeks, #13 US news national. You heard it here first. Cry.

Cool - a bunch of rankings based on Berkeley grad school

Quite possibly the 6th best college in California after:

Stanford
Caltech
Pomona
Harvey Mudd
UCLA (more applications than Berkeley for a reason)

https://www.niche.com/colleges/search/best-colleges/s/california/

Or maybe worse according to the above

Thank good news I didn't have to be amongst the homeless across the bay

No, half of those are undergrad rankings, like wsj, Washington monthly, and Forbes. THE also use undergrad teaching in its formula; its goal to give international students an idea of what schools to go to internationally.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Chicago has to be a little nervous that this leaked ranking is true. I remember a few here thinking they'd be right back in the top 10. Maybe T14 will become a thing for undergrad too.

Chicago is going to be fine. Some schools float in and out of the top 10, and it really doesn't matter. Kids should really not be deciding where to go to college based in a ranking system that changes yearly.

If it didn't matter, they wouldn't have tried so hard to game the rankings. Like it or not, US News rankings matter to some extent.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Cal gets overlooked on DCUM a lot. People here seem to equate it to Michigan. On the West Coast reputation wise and in the engineering recruiting world, it is right up there with Stanford.
If you are looking for a private school that has a great tech reputation but isn't quite at the top ranking wise, take a good look a CMU. Big tech loves CMU. I frequently hear it mentioned alongside MIT and Caltech.

cal undergrad is in no way shape or form “right up there with stanford”

it has a horrible rep as berzerkeley. low yield at 44% vs stanford at 82% despite cheaper instate discount. test blind, unsafe campus, overcrowded, and poor quality of education.

no one is making that mistake.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To the UCal-Berkeley supporter: If "exciting environment" were a rating factor, then UCB would almost certainly be among the top few schools each year. Unfortunately, the resources at UCB are far superior for graduate students than for undergraduate students, and the undergraduate resources pale in comparison to the top 15 private universities.

What resources do you mean for undergrads? They are not spending at the same per student rates as smaller privates but scale also has advantages.

And?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I feel like I have to defend my beloved Berkeley from you private school fan boys who probably can’t even find the administrations office without your counselor holding your hand. That’s why Berkeley grads run circles around you at the workplace. We’re actually taught how to survive in the real world.

Berkeley has been under-ranked for the last 30 or so years. You’re talking about US News rigging the methodology to favor publics last year? Well, what the heck did they do around 1990 when perennial top 5 Berkeley was suddenly pushed out of top 20? Even Michigan used to be consistently top 10.

Here are the facts: Berkeley has more top 10 departments than any school not named Harvard (I think we’re tied); including #1 CS, #2 engineering, #1 chemistry, #3 physics, #3 math, #1 english, #1 sociolgy, #1 english, #1 history, #3 political science, #1 psychology, and so on.

But, but, but those are grad school rankings. That’s how I know you’ve never attended a research university, otherwise you’d know the grad and undergraduate levels are intertwined; grad schools are ranked according to strength of faculty and students, and faculty also teaches the undergrads and grad students serve as TAs.

Berkeley also tied with Harvard with most Nobel prize (although I think we have more in recent memory. David card and Jennifer doudna each won one the last few years).

Our history is literally unrivaled, at least the last 100 years. From the Manhattan project, the free speech movement, contribution to tech and rise of Silicon Valley, periodic table, immunotherapy, gene editing, perhaps no institution has helped shape the country in the world more.

Times higher education calls us one of the super six universities, along with mit, Harvard, Stanford, Oxford, and Cambridge.

So, eat it. I hope Berkeley moves up even higher this year in this stupid ranking just pissed you guys off even more. Time to accept the fact that public schools are just as good, if not better, than most ivies and “elite” private schools. Your time has passed. It’s the era of the tech-heavy schools.

if this was true, every top 10 ranking would be dominated by the top engineering schools which it is not


berkeley always has been and always will be an overpriced shithole for undergrad. a 4 year graduation rate in the 70s and now completely test optional. lolz

#5 forbes
#8 WSJ
#10 Washington monthly
#5 U.S. news global
#5 ARWU
#12 QS
#9 THE

And in a couple weeks, #13 US news national. You heard it here first. Cry.

Cool - a bunch of rankings based on Berkeley grad school

Quite possibly the 6th best college in California after:

Stanford
Caltech
Pomona
Harvey Mudd
UCLA (more applications than Berkeley for a reason)

https://www.niche.com/colleges/search/best-colleges/s/california/

Or maybe worse according to the above

Thank good news I didn't have to be amongst the homeless across the bay

No, half of those are undergrad rankings, like wsj, Washington monthly, and Forbes. THE also use undergrad teaching in its formula; its goal to give international students an idea of what schools to go to internationally.

You cant even convince instate students to go to berkeley over ucla. good luck hyping up this “amazing” school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Cal gets overlooked on DCUM a lot. People here seem to equate it to Michigan. On the West Coast reputation wise and in the engineering recruiting world, it is right up there with Stanford.
If you are looking for a private school that has a great tech reputation but isn't quite at the top ranking wise, take a good look a CMU. Big tech loves CMU. I frequently hear it mentioned alongside MIT and Caltech.

cal undergrad is in no way shape or form “right up there with stanford”

it has a horrible rep as berzerkeley. low yield at 44% vs stanford at 82% despite cheaper instate discount. test blind, unsafe campus, overcrowded, and poor quality of education.

no one is making that mistake.

I am glad DC made the mistake and I never read about Berkeley on these boards when he applied. He is a math major who got a return internship offer at a top firm next year making $85k for 12 weeks next summer. Berkeley is a much bigger school and obviously cannot compete with Stanford in terms of resources. However, my DC has had excellent math profs, research opportunities and the peer group is excellent. It is for a stufent that can seek opportunities. If you strip out ED from many ivies (except HYPMS) - the yield will not be better that high.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Cal gets overlooked on DCUM a lot. People here seem to equate it to Michigan. On the West Coast reputation wise and in the engineering recruiting world, it is right up there with Stanford.
If you are looking for a private school that has a great tech reputation but isn't quite at the top ranking wise, take a good look a CMU. Big tech loves CMU. I frequently hear it mentioned alongside MIT and Caltech.

cal undergrad is in no way shape or form “right up there with stanford”

it has a horrible rep as berzerkeley. low yield at 44% vs stanford at 82% despite cheaper instate discount. test blind, unsafe campus, overcrowded, and poor quality of education.

no one is making that mistake.

I am glad DC made the mistake and I never read about Berkeley on these boards when he applied. He is a math major who got a return internship offer at a top firm next year making $85k for 12 weeks next summer. Berkeley is a much bigger school and obviously cannot compete with Stanford in terms of resources. However, my DC has had excellent math profs, research opportunities and the peer group is excellent. It is for a stufent that can seek opportunities. If you strip out ED from many ivies (except HYPMS) - the yield will not be better that high.

the yield would still be significantly higher than berkeley and it is for RD

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Cal gets overlooked on DCUM a lot. People here seem to equate it to Michigan. On the West Coast reputation wise and in the engineering recruiting world, it is right up there with Stanford.
If you are looking for a private school that has a great tech reputation but isn't quite at the top ranking wise, take a good look a CMU. Big tech loves CMU. I frequently hear it mentioned alongside MIT and Caltech.

cal undergrad is in no way shape or form “right up there with stanford”

it has a horrible rep as berzerkeley. low yield at 44% vs stanford at 82% despite cheaper instate discount. test blind, unsafe campus, overcrowded, and poor quality of education.

no one is making that mistake.

I am glad DC made the mistake and I never read about Berkeley on these boards when he applied. He is a math major who got a return internship offer at a top firm next year making $85k for 12 weeks next summer. Berkeley is a much bigger school and obviously cannot compete with Stanford in terms of resources. However, my DC has had excellent math profs, research opportunities and the peer group is excellent. It is for a stufent that can seek opportunities. If you strip out ED from many ivies (except HYPMS) - the yield will not be better that high.

Berkeley yield
In-state 48.1%
Out-of-state 29.0%
International 50.2%

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Cal gets overlooked on DCUM a lot. People here seem to equate it to Michigan. On the West Coast reputation wise and in the engineering recruiting world, it is right up there with Stanford.
If you are looking for a private school that has a great tech reputation but isn't quite at the top ranking wise, take a good look a CMU. Big tech loves CMU. I frequently hear it mentioned alongside MIT and Caltech.

cal undergrad is in no way shape or form “right up there with stanford”

it has a horrible rep as berzerkeley. low yield at 44% vs stanford at 82% despite cheaper instate discount. test blind, unsafe campus, overcrowded, and poor quality of education.

no one is making that mistake.

You definitely sound like you already have your mind made up. No convincing you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One thing is for sure, Brown was way overrated at #9 last year. Bad for many stem majors.

Disagree if we're thinking undergraduate. Brown is excellent for STEM. PLME + top notch CS and excellent math and neuroscience. Doesn’t have the grad associated research that some of the other top schools have because it is just more focused on undergraduate, which is great IMO. I have a kid there.

Their other engineering programs are extremely meh. Lots of better options for CS as well.

Sigh… you have no idea what you are talking about. Brown’s CS department is legendary, especially WRT computer graphics. Google Andy Van Dam and the founders of a little company called Pixar.

i work for google and no it’s not as respected as MIT, Princeton, Penn, Cornell, Illinois, Harvard, Michigan, Caltech, Berkeley, UCLA, amongst a slew of other schools.

You actually dont know wtf you are talking about.

That’s not what you said. You said there were “lots of better options”. Not “10”. You slagged the school without knowing it’s strong suit. If you knew what you were talking about you would have mentioned CMU before Princeton. And IMHO Brown CS is more impressive than U of I or UCLA and equal to Michigan’s.

And I have hired programmers for 30 years so your brag is not impressive to me.

i named 10 out of many many more. Brown CS is ranked 23rd for undergrad by US News, and that's generous.

No, Brown CS is not as impressive as Michigan or U of I.

Well that’s great since they are much easier admits. It’s near impossible to get into Brown now.

much easier? hardly

https://siebelschool.illinois.edu/academics/undergraduate/degree-program-options/cs-undergraduate-degree-options-faq#:~:text=CS%20is%20a%20very%20rigorous,an%20admit%20rate%20of%206.7%25.

U of I CS has a 6.7% acceptance rate. Now imagine out of state

Do U of I CS graduates make more than Brown CS graduates? I don't think so.