where would Williams and Amherst rank in the ivy league..

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is no way you all are obsessed with this on new years.

I wanna chime in as someone who has ample experience at t10s and LACs (my friends go to Williams and Swat). I have had a professor at my t10 (jhu) who also taught at Williams, overall the standard for teaching support, interactions with professors, and pedagogy for classes that hes taught at Williams were far higher compared to jhu. The rigor at most of these top institutions are exactly the same, I think STEM other then Physics and math seems to be harder here at JHU then Williams but the Humanities classes are definetly more serious at Williams (JHU is a stem school after all which is why im here for premed chem). He has also taught at Princeton as well as a visiting faculty member, Princeton seems to have just as good as teaching as the top LACs so if you get in you should always go there.

The faculty student ratios are misleading and comparing them to LACs is frankly stupid, LACs are intended to teach and all faculty at LACs are dedicated solely to teaching and some research work. There are faculty at many R1s who will never step into a classroom, so while williams and penn may both have 7:1 student faculty ratios, the teaching ratios are much lower at Williams. Thats the trade off you get with going to a top research school, its amazing for some students and not so great for others, acknowledging that doesnt take away from the teaching available at Penn that is still infinetly better then at UMD.

There are no LAC targets for jane street or quant lol, theres only like 5 universities that are quant targets at all and thats pushing it. The top LACs seem to be ivy equivalents for all intents and purposes, you wont have as much R1 on campus research opportunities but the education is definetly stronger. Just consider the trade off whenever your choosing between the two types of schools.

Hate to break it to you, but JHU is top 10 in name only for undergrad. There is no question that Williams slots in higher than JHU, so your noblesse oblige act does not work and makes you seem ignorant.

Hate to break it to you but your useless little retort just identifies you as one of the mindless drones on this thread who are so insecure about anyone questioning the relative quality of Ivies doesn't make you seem ignorant, it identifies you as ignorant. The truth is that there are many schools across many subjects whom are equal to or better than the group of schools which comprise that athletic conference. Top SLACs, including many beyond Amherst and Williams are superior schools for undergraduate education outside of Engineering and CS. Technical focused schools both public and private lead most of the conference in engineering fields. I know that it hurts, I know that it stings your fragile sense of self-worth. Strive to move beyond your infantile emotions in the new year. You can strive to be better.

Hate to break it to you, but you're useless.

LAC “education” epitomized here. would send kid to jhu 10/10 times over an LAC. Yield, selectivity, freshman stats all agree over a lackluster williams or amherst

The delusion runs strong in this one.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is no way you all are obsessed with this on new years.

I wanna chime in as someone who has ample experience at t10s and LACs (my friends go to Williams and Swat). I have had a professor at my t10 (jhu) who also taught at Williams, overall the standard for teaching support, interactions with professors, and pedagogy for classes that hes taught at Williams were far higher compared to jhu. The rigor at most of these top institutions are exactly the same, I think STEM other then Physics and math seems to be harder here at JHU then Williams but the Humanities classes are definetly more serious at Williams (JHU is a stem school after all which is why im here for premed chem). He has also taught at Princeton as well as a visiting faculty member, Princeton seems to have just as good as teaching as the top LACs so if you get in you should always go there.

The faculty student ratios are misleading and comparing them to LACs is frankly stupid, LACs are intended to teach and all faculty at LACs are dedicated solely to teaching and some research work. There are faculty at many R1s who will never step into a classroom, so while williams and penn may both have 7:1 student faculty ratios, the teaching ratios are much lower at Williams. Thats the trade off you get with going to a top research school, its amazing for some students and not so great for others, acknowledging that doesnt take away from the teaching available at Penn that is still infinetly better then at UMD.

There are no LAC targets for jane street or quant lol, theres only like 5 universities that are quant targets at all and thats pushing it. The top LACs seem to be ivy equivalents for all intents and purposes, you wont have as much R1 on campus research opportunities but the education is definetly stronger. Just consider the trade off whenever your choosing between the two types of schools.

Hate to break it to you, but JHU is top 10 in name only for undergrad. There is no question that Williams slots in higher than JHU, so your noblesse oblige act does not work and makes you seem ignorant.

Hate to break it to you but your useless little retort just identifies you as one of the mindless drones on this thread who are so insecure about anyone questioning the relative quality of Ivies doesn't make you seem ignorant, it identifies you as ignorant. The truth is that there are many schools across many subjects whom are equal to or better than the group of schools which comprise that athletic conference. Top SLACs, including many beyond Amherst and Williams are superior schools for undergraduate education outside of Engineering and CS. Technical focused schools both public and private lead most of the conference in engineering fields. I know that it hurts, I know that it stings your fragile sense of self-worth. Strive to move beyond your infantile emotions in the new year. You can strive to be better.

Hate to break it to you, but you're useless.

LAC “education” epitomized here. would send kid to jhu 10/10 times over an LAC. Yield, selectivity, freshman stats all agree over a lackluster williams or amherst

The delusion runs strong in this one.

Keep yelling delusion when you don't understand math. Stick to meth.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is no way you all are obsessed with this on new years.

I wanna chime in as someone who has ample experience at t10s and LACs (my friends go to Williams and Swat). I have had a professor at my t10 (jhu) who also taught at Williams, overall the standard for teaching support, interactions with professors, and pedagogy for classes that hes taught at Williams were far higher compared to jhu. The rigor at most of these top institutions are exactly the same, I think STEM other then Physics and math seems to be harder here at JHU then Williams but the Humanities classes are definetly more serious at Williams (JHU is a stem school after all which is why im here for premed chem). He has also taught at Princeton as well as a visiting faculty member, Princeton seems to have just as good as teaching as the top LACs so if you get in you should always go there.

The faculty student ratios are misleading and comparing them to LACs is frankly stupid, LACs are intended to teach and all faculty at LACs are dedicated solely to teaching and some research work. There are faculty at many R1s who will never step into a classroom, so while williams and penn may both have 7:1 student faculty ratios, the teaching ratios are much lower at Williams. Thats the trade off you get with going to a top research school, its amazing for some students and not so great for others, acknowledging that doesnt take away from the teaching available at Penn that is still infinetly better then at UMD.

There are no LAC targets for jane street or quant lol, theres only like 5 universities that are quant targets at all and thats pushing it. The top LACs seem to be ivy equivalents for all intents and purposes, you wont have as much R1 on campus research opportunities but the education is definetly stronger. Just consider the trade off whenever your choosing between the two types of schools.

And here we have a loser likely over 40 LAC grad with a lackluster career moonlighting as a college student. Because what college student is going to wax poetic on the depth of their humanities professors teachings at another college on new years while pretending to be a chem premed student (lol). The starting emphasized capitalization on Williams and other LACs over his supposed home school is another shit touch.

They mentioned the humanities in one sentence.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is no way you all are obsessed with this on new years.

I wanna chime in as someone who has ample experience at t10s and LACs (my friends go to Williams and Swat). I have had a professor at my t10 (jhu) who also taught at Williams, overall the standard for teaching support, interactions with professors, and pedagogy for classes that hes taught at Williams were far higher compared to jhu. The rigor at most of these top institutions are exactly the same, I think STEM other then Physics and math seems to be harder here at JHU then Williams but the Humanities classes are definetly more serious at Williams (JHU is a stem school after all which is why im here for premed chem). He has also taught at Princeton as well as a visiting faculty member, Princeton seems to have just as good as teaching as the top LACs so if you get in you should always go there.

The faculty student ratios are misleading and comparing them to LACs is frankly stupid, LACs are intended to teach and all faculty at LACs are dedicated solely to teaching and some research work. There are faculty at many R1s who will never step into a classroom, so while williams and penn may both have 7:1 student faculty ratios, the teaching ratios are much lower at Williams. Thats the trade off you get with going to a top research school, its amazing for some students and not so great for others, acknowledging that doesnt take away from the teaching available at Penn that is still infinetly better then at UMD.

There are no LAC targets for jane street or quant lol, theres only like 5 universities that are quant targets at all and thats pushing it. The top LACs seem to be ivy equivalents for all intents and purposes, you wont have as much R1 on campus research opportunities but the education is definetly stronger. Just consider the trade off whenever your choosing between the two types of schools.

And here we have a loser likely over 40 LAC grad with a lackluster career moonlighting as a college student. Because what college student is going to wax poetic on the depth of their humanities professors teachings at another college on new years while pretending to be a chem premed student (lol). The starting emphasized capitalization on Williams and other LACs over his supposed home school is another shit touch.

They mentioned the humanities in one sentence.

Stop being insecure. No need to pretend to be a different persona. Your point isn't getting across either way.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is no way you all are obsessed with this on new years.

I wanna chime in as someone who has ample experience at t10s and LACs (my friends go to Williams and Swat). I have had a professor at my t10 (jhu) who also taught at Williams, overall the standard for teaching support, interactions with professors, and pedagogy for classes that hes taught at Williams were far higher compared to jhu. The rigor at most of these top institutions are exactly the same, I think STEM other then Physics and math seems to be harder here at JHU then Williams but the Humanities classes are definetly more serious at Williams (JHU is a stem school after all which is why im here for premed chem). He has also taught at Princeton as well as a visiting faculty member, Princeton seems to have just as good as teaching as the top LACs so if you get in you should always go there.

The faculty student ratios are misleading and comparing them to LACs is frankly stupid, LACs are intended to teach and all faculty at LACs are dedicated solely to teaching and some research work. There are faculty at many R1s who will never step into a classroom, so while williams and penn may both have 7:1 student faculty ratios, the teaching ratios are much lower at Williams. Thats the trade off you get with going to a top research school, its amazing for some students and not so great for others, acknowledging that doesnt take away from the teaching available at Penn that is still infinetly better then at UMD.

There are no LAC targets for jane street or quant lol, theres only like 5 universities that are quant targets at all and thats pushing it. The top LACs seem to be ivy equivalents for all intents and purposes, you wont have as much R1 on campus research opportunities but the education is definetly stronger. Just consider the trade off whenever your choosing between the two types of schools.

Hate to break it to you, but JHU is top 10 in name only for undergrad. There is no question that Williams slots in higher than JHU, so your noblesse oblige act does not work and makes you seem ignorant.

Hate to break it to you but your useless little retort just identifies you as one of the mindless drones on this thread who are so insecure about anyone questioning the relative quality of Ivies doesn't make you seem ignorant, it identifies you as ignorant. The truth is that there are many schools across many subjects whom are equal to or better than the group of schools which comprise that athletic conference. Top SLACs, including many beyond Amherst and Williams are superior schools for undergraduate education outside of Engineering and CS. Technical focused schools both public and private lead most of the conference in engineering fields. I know that it hurts, I know that it stings your fragile sense of self-worth. Strive to move beyond your infantile emotions in the new year. You can strive to be better.

Hate to break it to you, but you're useless.

LAC “education” epitomized here. would send kid to jhu 10/10 times over an LAC. Yield, selectivity, freshman stats all agree over a lackluster williams or amherst

The delusion runs strong in this one.

Keep yelling delusion when you don't understand math. Stick to meth.

You are either a striver kid or the parent of a little striver desperate for an Ivy league school to improve your social status. Neither is a good look.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:how would you rank overall based on the following - overall prestige, quality of undergraduate instruction, outcomes, quality of life, social. I’d wedge them in as follows:
Harvard, Yale, Princeton > Williams > Columbia, Dartmouth > Amherst > Brown, Cornell

The only ivies that matter now are HP and Cornell. The rest of the ivies have no real impact in this world. Note that H is declining fast.
MS Hopkins, CMU are way better than most of the ivies.

Earnings for CS degrees from College Scorecard data:

Brown: $271,601
CMU: $251,632
JHU: $183,104

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:how would you rank overall based on the following - overall prestige, quality of undergraduate instruction, outcomes, quality of life, social. I’d wedge them in as follows:
Harvard, Yale, Princeton > Williams > Columbia, Dartmouth > Amherst > Brown, Cornell

The only ivies that matter now are HP and Cornell. The rest of the ivies have no real impact in this world. Note that H is declining fast.
MS Hopkins, CMU are way better than most of the ivies.

Earnings for CS degrees from College Scorecard data:

Brown: $271,601
CMU: $251,632
JHU: $183,104

CS degree's are struggling a bit at the moment.

[Anonymous]

New poster here. The original post about ranking is kind of silly but recent comments are even weirder because I don’t know anyone who has actually attended an Ivy League school that looks down on the educational experience offered elite LACs as some of you here seem to do.

In fact, way back when, I was made aware of, applied to, and attended a top LAC at the urging of the chief of the hospital department where I volunteered, himself a Columbia graduate and totally unaffiliated.

The investment firm where I currently work mostly hires T10 university & LAC graduates. During the interview process, I met the billionaire UPenn alum founder who had great things to say about my school & sent one of his own children to a similar LAC.

In my own field of finance, the top three major US investment banks (GS, MS, JPM) are all currently led by NESCAC graduates. Countless other high ranking executives across industries hold degrees from these schools. If that doesn’t demonstrate the value of a liberal arts education, I don’t know what to tell you.

[Anonymous]

People here have a weird idea of what STEM means. LACs have ST and M. Williams College has a strong physics program, for example. They have won more Apker awards than any other undergraduate physics program in the US, regardless of size..

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:New poster here. The original post about ranking is kind of silly but recent comments are even weirder because I don’t know anyone who has actually attended an Ivy League school that looks down on the educational experience offered elite LACs as some of you here seem to do.

In fact, way back when, I was made aware of, applied to, and attended a top LAC at the urging of the chief of the hospital department where I volunteered, himself a Columbia graduate and totally unaffiliated.

The investment firm where I currently work mostly hires T10 university & LAC graduates. During the interview process, I met the billionaire UPenn alum founder who had great things to say about my school & sent one of his own children to a similar LAC.

In my own field of finance, the top three major US investment banks (GS, MS, JPM) are all currently led by NESCAC graduates. Countless other high ranking executives across industries hold degrees from these schools. If that doesn’t demonstrate the value of a liberal arts education, I don’t know what to tell you.

This forum is full of losers and posers. Why are you surprised?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:how would you rank overall based on the following - overall prestige, quality of undergraduate instruction, outcomes, quality of life, social. I’d wedge them in as follows:
Harvard, Yale, Princeton > Williams > Columbia, Dartmouth > Amherst > Brown, Cornell

The only ivies that matter now are HP and Cornell. The rest of the ivies have no real impact in this world. Note that H is declining fast.
MS Hopkins, CMU are way better than most of the ivies.

Earnings for CS degrees from College Scorecard data:

Brown: $271,601
CMU: $251,632
JHU: $183,104

CS degree's are struggling a bit at the moment.

Not just CS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:People here have a weird idea of what STEM means. LACs have ST and M. Williams College has a strong physics program, for example. They have won more Apker awards than any other undergraduate physics program in the US, regardless of size..

Goldwater is actually known and a better barometer.

Go see for yourself how many Goldwaters have been produced over last 5 years by Williams/Amherst vs Ivies, JHU, CMU, MIT etc. The difference is stark. Keep in mind an institution can have a max of 4 so size is not a determining factor.

https://goldwaterscholarship.gov/2025-scholars/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People here have a weird idea of what STEM means. LACs have ST and M. Williams College has a strong physics program, for example. They have won more Apker awards than any other undergraduate physics program in the US, regardless of size..

Goldwater is actually known and a better barometer.

Go see for yourself how many Goldwaters have been produced over last 5 years by Williams/Amherst vs Ivies, JHU, CMU, MIT etc. The difference is stark. Keep in mind an institution can have a max of 4 so size is not a determining factor.

https://goldwaterscholarship.gov/2025-scholars/

Please share which R1 you attend — or do you represent all R1s? Clearly, you are not SLAC-educated. The more you post, the more we get a cliched image of what students prioritizing R1s are like.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People here have a weird idea of what STEM means. LACs have ST and M. Williams College has a strong physics program, for example. They have won more Apker awards than any other undergraduate physics program in the US, regardless of size..

Goldwater is actually known and a better barometer.

Go see for yourself how many Goldwaters have been produced over last 5 years by Williams/Amherst vs Ivies, JHU, CMU, MIT etc. The difference is stark. Keep in mind an institution can have a max of 4 so size is not a determining factor.

https://goldwaterscholarship.gov/2025-scholars/

Please share which R1 you attend — or do you represent all R1s? Clearly, you are not SLAC-educated. The more you post, the more we get a cliched image of what students prioritizing R1s are like.

A lot of rubbish spewed. Yes, clearly I am not SLAC educated. I have more than 2 brain cells.

[Anonymous]

As a Williams grad, this thread is really fascinating. Not sure why there is so much hate for SLACS. Doesn't really bother me, but its weird.

Williams was a great experience for me, and I feel like I've had a successful career, but that doesn't mean it would be for everyone. I assume the same thing would be true of virtually all R1 institutions.