What's the next grouping of schools after T20-30

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't care about specific ranking but curious what people consider in the second grouping.

This is our (totally unscientific) dinner table list so far:

Out of Reach, so assume top tier:
Notre Dame, UC, UCLA, UVA, UNC Chapel Hill, CMU, probably Boston College, Georgetown, Emory


Second tier:
Tulane
Villanova
U Miami
Wake Forest
Tufts?
NYU
UGA

There's nothing out or Reach about UNC, UVA, And Boston College. These are second their schools.

Sure, we'll take your opinion, Anonymous Poster who struggles with capitalization and spelling, over the actual facts that make all of these schools out of reach for 80-90% of the students who seek admission to them

Yes with acceptance rates in the 20's, and rankings in the high 20's. They aren't first tier. When has BC ever been considered a top school? Honestly when asking people top school stops at about Emory/CMu/UCLA. UVA doesn't raise eyebrows if you tell people DC went there.

UNC is a strange one, because it's basically second-tier quality, with first tier selectivity if you're OOS. It's not actually that great academically, because most of the kids who are accepted went to crappy NC public schools. I know, because I went there for grad school, and I encountered a ton of undergrads from some tiny rural town in NC who weren't really prepared for college-level work. Not worth the price for OOS, if you can even get in. Anyone who gets in OOS will have much better options to choose from.

UNC is second-tier relative to Berkeley, but so are most of the very "top" private schools as well; clearly not in UMich's range, but easily the peer of UVA or any other large public overall. I think mid-20s is about right. And of course the large numbers of weaker NC students (there are some very strong ones from RD area) is an issue, but remember a full 1/5 of the student body are OOS kids with 1500+ SATs and comparable GPAs. That's about 4000 kids, in total. The net effect is a two-tiered student body, with a high-achieving, bright core and a bottom 60 percent that is any-old-state-U.

+1

[Anonymous]

T40-T50

[Anonymous]

You mean "others receiving votes"?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't care about specific ranking but curious what people consider in the second grouping.

This is our (totally unscientific) dinner table list so far:

Out of Reach, so assume top tier:
Notre Dame, UC, UCLA, UVA, UNC Chapel Hill, CMU, probably Boston College, Georgetown, Emory


Second tier:
Tulane
Villanova
U Miami
Wake Forest
Tufts?
NYU
UGA

There's nothing out or Reach about UNC, UVA, And Boston College. These are second their schools.

Sure, we'll take your opinion, Anonymous Poster who struggles with capitalization and spelling, over the actual facts that make all of these schools out of reach for 80-90% of the students who seek admission to them

Yes with acceptance rates in the 20's, and rankings in the high 20's. They aren't first tier. When has BC ever been considered a top school? Honestly when asking people top school stops at about Emory/CMu/UCLA. UVA doesn't raise eyebrows if you tell people DC went there.

UNC is a strange one, because it's basically second-tier quality, with first tier selectivity if you're OOS. It's not actually that great academically, because most of the kids who are accepted went to crappy NC public schools. I know, because I went there for grad school, and I encountered a ton of undergrads from some tiny rural town in NC who weren't really prepared for college-level work. Not worth the price for OOS, if you can even get in. Anyone who gets in OOS will have much better options to choose from.

UNC is second-tier relative to Berkeley, but so are most of the very "top" private schools as well; clearly not in UMich's range, but easily the peer of UVA or any other large public overall. I think mid-20s is about right. And of course the large numbers of weaker NC students (there are some very strong ones from RD area) is an issue, but remember a full 1/5 of the student body are OOS kids with 1500+ SATs and comparable GPAs. That's about 4000 kids, in total. The net effect is a two-tiered student body, with a high-achieving, bright core and a bottom 60 percent that is any-old-state-U.

+1

Nah. If anything it is Michigan and some of the CA schools that don't belong in the top 25. Do we suddenly think Michigan has some really great public schools?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't care about specific ranking but curious what people consider in the second grouping.

This is our (totally unscientific) dinner table list so far:

Out of Reach, so assume top tier:
Notre Dame, UC, UCLA, UVA, UNC Chapel Hill, CMU, probably Boston College, Georgetown, Emory


Second tier:
Tulane
Villanova
U Miami
Wake Forest
Tufts?
NYU
UGA

There's nothing out or Reach about UNC, UVA, And Boston College. These are second their schools.

Sure, we'll take your opinion, Anonymous Poster who struggles with capitalization and spelling, over the actual facts that make all of these schools out of reach for 80-90% of the students who seek admission to them

Yes with acceptance rates in the 20's, and rankings in the high 20's. They aren't first tier. When has BC ever been considered a top school? Honestly when asking people top school stops at about Emory/CMu/UCLA. UVA doesn't raise eyebrows if you tell people DC went there.

UNC is a strange one, because it's basically second-tier quality, with first tier selectivity if you're OOS. It's not actually that great academically, because most of the kids who are accepted went to crappy NC public schools. I know, because I went there for grad school, and I encountered a ton of undergrads from some tiny rural town in NC who weren't really prepared for college-level work. Not worth the price for OOS, if you can even get in. Anyone who gets in OOS will have much better options to choose from.

UNC is second-tier relative to Berkeley, but so are most of the very "top" private schools as well; clearly not in UMich's range, but easily the peer of UVA or any other large public overall. I think mid-20s is about right. And of course the large numbers of weaker NC students (there are some very strong ones from RD area) is an issue, but remember a full 1/5 of the student body are OOS kids with 1500+ SATs and comparable GPAs. That's about 4000 kids, in total. The net effect is a two-tiered student body, with a high-achieving, bright core and a bottom 60 percent that is any-old-state-U.

+1

Indeed. My niece lives in Chapel Hill. Getting into UNC from her high school is OOS hard. But can’t beat the tuition!

[Anonymous]

I don't think people really care outside of the top 25 or so schools. Like, does anyone honestly really care about a private school ranked in the 50s? Er, no.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't care about specific ranking but curious what people consider in the second grouping.

This is our (totally unscientific) dinner table list so far:

Out of Reach, so assume top tier:
Notre Dame, UC, UCLA, UVA, UNC Chapel Hill, CMU, probably Boston College, Georgetown, Emory


Second tier:
Tulane
Villanova
U Miami
Wake Forest
Tufts?
NYU
UGA

There's nothing out or Reach about UNC, UVA, And Boston College. These are second their schools.

Sure, we'll take your opinion, Anonymous Poster who struggles with capitalization and spelling, over the actual facts that make all of these schools out of reach for 80-90% of the students who seek admission to them

Yes with acceptance rates in the 20's, and rankings in the high 20's. They aren't first tier. When has BC ever been considered a top school? Honestly when asking people top school stops at about Emory/CMu/UCLA. UVA doesn't raise eyebrows if you tell people DC went there.

UNC is a strange one, because it's basically second-tier quality, with first tier selectivity if you're OOS. It's not actually that great academically, because most of the kids who are accepted went to crappy NC public schools. I know, because I went there for grad school, and I encountered a ton of undergrads from some tiny rural town in NC who weren't really prepared for college-level work. Not worth the price for OOS, if you can even get in. Anyone who gets in OOS will have much better options to choose from.

UNC is second-tier relative to Berkeley, but so are most of the very "top" private schools as well; clearly not in UMich's range, but easily the peer of UVA or any other large public overall. I think mid-20s is about right. And of course the large numbers of weaker NC students (there are some very strong ones from RD area) is an issue, but remember a full 1/5 of the student body are OOS kids with 1500+ SATs and comparable GPAs. That's about 4000 kids, in total. The net effect is a two-tiered student body, with a high-achieving, bright core and a bottom 60 percent that is any-old-state-U.

+1

Nah. If anything it is Michigan and some of the CA schools that don't belong in the top 25. Do we suddenly think Michigan has some really great public schools?

The above statement must have been written by a 10 year old.

[Anonymous]

USNWR National Universities

#38 (tie) GA Tech, UC Davis, TX-Austin, William & Mary

#42 (tie) Brandeis, BU, UW-Madison, Case Western, Tulane

[Anonymous]

Of all those, William & Mary is tops! Surprised to see it grouped with the others.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Of all those, William & Mary is tops! Surprised to see it grouped with the others.

Why are you surprised? W&M is not that distinguished academically

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:USNWR National Universities

#38 (tie) GA Tech, UC Davis, TX-Austin, William & Mary

#42 (tie) Brandeis, BU, UW-Madison, Case Western, Tulane

All good schools. Choice depends on individual factors. Range of prices, locations and size of schools among those choices.

[Anonymous]

OP asked for schools after top 30. Should also include these

34 - UC-SD, U Rochester, BC
36 - UC-Irvine

[Anonymous]

Where you go to college does not determine your destiny.

[Anonymous]

Pleasantly surprised to see BU in the grouping. If I’ve got the right BU.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't care about specific ranking but curious what people consider in the second grouping.

This is our (totally unscientific) dinner table list so far:

Out of Reach, so assume top tier:
Notre Dame, UC, UCLA, UVA, UNC Chapel Hill, CMU, probably Boston College, Georgetown, Emory


Second tier:
Tulane
Villanova
U Miami
Wake Forest
Tufts?
NYU
UGA

There's nothing out or Reach about UNC, UVA, And Boston College. These are second their schools.

Sure, we'll take your opinion, Anonymous Poster who struggles with capitalization and spelling, over the actual facts that make all of these schools out of reach for 80-90% of the students who seek admission to them

Yes with acceptance rates in the 20's, and rankings in the high 20's. They aren't first tier. When has BC ever been considered a top school? Honestly when asking people top school stops at about Emory/CMu/UCLA. UVA doesn't raise eyebrows if you tell people DC went there.

UNC is a strange one, because it's basically second-tier quality, with first tier selectivity if you're OOS. It's not actually that great academically, because most of the kids who are accepted went to crappy NC public schools. I know, because I went there for grad school, and I encountered a ton of undergrads from some tiny rural town in NC who weren't really prepared for college-level work. Not worth the price for OOS, if you can even get in. Anyone who gets in OOS will have much better options to choose from.

UNC is second-tier relative to Berkeley, but so are most of the very "top" private schools as well; clearly not in UMich's range, but easily the peer of UVA or any other large public overall. I think mid-20s is about right. And of course the large numbers of weaker NC students (there are some very strong ones from RD area) is an issue, but remember a full 1/5 of the student body are OOS kids with 1500+ SATs and comparable GPAs. That's about 4000 kids, in total. The net effect is a two-tiered student body, with a high-achieving, bright core and a bottom 60 percent that is any-old-state-U.

+1

Nah. If anything it is Michigan and some of the CA schools that don't belong in the top 25. Do we suddenly think Michigan has some really great public schools?

The above statement must have been written by a 10 year old.

Definitely Michigan shouldn't be in the top 25. With the CA schools, it depends on which one. Michigan is a great state school - but academically isn't T25 material.