This looks perfect! |
+1 |
I don't know don't some places have Amherst or Pomona #1 from time to time. I thought they kind of travel together. All three. |
Agreed |
That looks really solid |
Only list that matters |
This is perfection |
This has the entire package!!!!!! |
Omg this one is fabulous!!! |
Looks good but is Claremont McKenna really in the same bracket as Rice and Johns Hopkins? Truthfully I know nothing about it, but maybe that's a problem in itself? What are they good at/known for? |
| Remove UIUC entirely, strong in CS, Eng, Ag, Biz but weak everywhere else |
Criteria? |
UIUC is also strong for Econ for what it's worth. |
|
I don't understand the energy directed into this thread. Besides the fact that no ranking means much without a clear methodology, it seems clear what's best for one kid isn't necessarily best for the other. The student for whom Yale is best is probably not the same as the student for whom Caltech is best. Same for Williams and UCLA, UChicago and Brown, or Harvey Mudd (missing!) and Penn. Focus on fit. If anything, there should be more lists by type of school, not fewer. All lists have limited utility, super-lists comparing very different schools even more so, and super-lists without methodologies are just distractions from the hard but more relevant work of figuring out what is best for an individual situation. |
|
1A) MIT, Stanford, Princeton, Harvard, Yale
1B) Caltech, Duke, Penn, Columbia 2A) Dartmouth, Northwestern, Brown, UChicago, Cornell, Williams, Pomona, Amherst 2B) UMich, Rice, Vanderbilt, Johns Hopkins, WashU, Notre Dame, Georgetown, UCLA, Berkeley, Swarthmore, Bowdoin, Claremont McKenna 3A) UVA, UNC, CMU, Emory, USC, Georgia Tech, Wellesley, Barnard, Carleton, Middlebury 3B) BC, UT Austin, W&M, W&L, Vassar, Davidson, Haverford This is a so perfect. Nice work. |