Is this the Top 1-30 that everyone is referring to? I'm so confused when people reference T1 or T20 or T30.

[Anonymous]

So apparently there are 40+ colleges in the Top 30 ...

[Anonymous]

Lists are worthless unless you have no clue what you want to study. Look at the program first and the school second.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Lists are worthless unless you have no clue what you want to study. Look at the program first and the school second.

+1 exactly what some of us said about UMD CS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not that I agree with the list, but did UC San Diego somehow appear at #14 out of thin air?

CA parent checking in. UC San Diego is now considered on par with UCLA/Cal (Berkeley) as top 3 UCs. It is very hard to get into and fights for the same students as Cal and UCLA.

UC Tiers:

Tier 1: UCLA, UC Berkeley, UC San Diego
Tier 2: UC Santa Barbara, UC Irvine
Tier 3: UC Davis, UC Santa Cruz
Tier 4: Riverside, Merced

UCSD is not on those other 2's level.

[Anonymous]

Shouldn't Bucknell make top 30 list for "direct pipeline to the STREET"??

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:While acknowledging that this is a silly, navel-gazing exercise bereft of any empirical basis, below are my personal set of tiers, which are very loose. I honestly don't know how one can claim, as a very general matter, that Princeton is "better" than Harvard, Duke better than Brown, or Amherst better than Pomona. People get really upset because of a ridiculous obsession with ordinal numeration. Anyhow:

Tier 1: HYPSM

Tier 2: The remaining Ivies, Duke, CalTech, JHU, Northwestern, Rice, WASP

Tier 3: UCLA, Berkeley, Michigan, UVA, CMU, Georgetown, Notre Dame, WashU, Vanderbilt, Emory, USC, Bowdoin, Wellesley, Carleton, Mudd, CMC.

Tier 4: A bunch more really good schools that are very close to the Tier 3.

To be clear, all of the schools above are really, really good. Any kid who gains admission to any one of them is blessed. But people here always forget this as they take extreme positions in an effort to distinguish nearly identical schools.

Rice, Swarthmore, and Pomona down 1. Carleton, Mudd, CMC, Bowdoin,USC down 1.

[Anonymous]

Ivy plus Stanford MIT Duke UChicago

Thats the top group. There us a reason studies show these schools provide some benefit

[Anonymous]

There is absolutely no good reason to try to rank colleges.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:1. Harvard
2. Stanford
3. MIT
4. Yale
5. Princeton
6. UC Berkeley
7. Caltech
8. Columbia
9. UCLA
10. U Chicago

11. Penn
12. Duke
13. Brown
14. UC San Diego
15. NYU
16. Michigan
17. USC
18. Cornell
19. UT Austin
20. UNC Chapel Hill

21. Johns Hopkins U
22. Dartmouth
23. Rice
24. Pomona
25. Williams
26. Washington U (St. LouisK)
27. UW Madison
28. Swarthmore
29. Vanderbilt
30. UW Seattle
31. Northwestern

No. State schools don't qualify for top 30 list. Also in which universe's lists UT Austin and UNC are ranked higher than Northwestern, Rice or Hopkins?

Why?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:While acknowledging that this is a silly, navel-gazing exercise bereft of any empirical basis, below are my personal set of tiers, which are very loose. I honestly don't know how one can claim, as a very general matter, that Princeton is "better" than Harvard, Duke better than Brown, or Amherst better than Pomona. People get really upset because of a ridiculous obsession with ordinal numeration. Anyhow:

Tier 1: HYPSM

Tier 2: The remaining Ivies, Duke, CalTech, JHU, Northwestern, Rice, WASP

Tier 3: UCLA, Berkeley, Michigan, UVA, CMU, Georgetown, Notre Dame, WashU, Vanderbilt, Emory, USC, Bowdoin, Wellesley, Carleton, Mudd, CMC.

Tier 4: A bunch more really good schools that are very close to the Tier 3.

To be clear, all of the schools above are really, really good. Any kid who gains admission to any one of them is blessed. But people here always forget this as they take extreme positions in an effort to distinguish nearly identical schools.

Rice, Swarthmore, and Pomona down 1. Carleton, Mudd, CMC, Bowdoin,USC down 1.

I don’t agree at all. Bowdoin, Stilton, Wellesley, CMC, Mudd bing in Tier two with WASP. All top ten LAC’s have similarly strong academics. Rigor of academics and quality of teaching alone puts thyme a tier above tier 3 schools.

[Anonymous]

I don’t think UCLA belongs. Their ROI is extremely low. One of the worst paid graduates. That’s why they did so poorly on WSJ’s ranking. Their students are too concerned with social life. In fact it’s the biggest reason I noticed why people want to go there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:While acknowledging that this is a silly, navel-gazing exercise bereft of any empirical basis, below are my personal set of tiers, which are very loose. I honestly don't know how one can claim, as a very general matter, that Princeton is "better" than Harvard, Duke better than Brown, or Amherst better than Pomona. People get really upset because of a ridiculous obsession with ordinal numeration. Anyhow:

Tier 1: HYPSM

Tier 2: The remaining Ivies, Duke, CalTech, JHU, Northwestern, Rice, WASP

Tier 3: UCLA, Berkeley, Michigan, UVA, CMU, Georgetown, Notre Dame, WashU, Vanderbilt, Emory, USC, Bowdoin, Wellesley, Carleton, Mudd, CMC.

Tier 4: A bunch more really good schools that are very close to the Tier 3.

To be clear, all of the schools above are really, really good. Any kid who gains admission to any one of them is blessed. But people here always forget this as they take extreme positions in an effort to distinguish nearly identical schools.

Berkeley is too low. Should be tier 1. #1 feeder for tech, top five feeder for finance/wallstreet, and produced more startups by undergrads than any school in the country. They’re also ranked #1 CS, #2 business, #3 engineering, #1 psychology, #5 economics for undergrad programs ranking. People disrespect this school so much on this site.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Lists are worthless unless you have no clue what you want to study. Look at the program first and the school second.

I want to study Naval Architecture.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lists are worthless unless you have no clue what you want to study. Look at the program first and the school second.

I want to study Naval Architecture.

Here on DCUM, that would be Navel Architecture.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:While acknowledging that this is a silly, navel-gazing exercise bereft of any empirical basis, below are my personal set of tiers, which are very loose. I honestly don't know how one can claim, as a very general matter, that Princeton is "better" than Harvard, Duke better than Brown, or Amherst better than Pomona. People get really upset because of a ridiculous obsession with ordinal numeration. Anyhow:

Tier 1: HYPSM

Tier 2: The remaining Ivies, Duke, CalTech, JHU, Northwestern, Rice, WASP

Tier 3: UCLA, Berkeley, Michigan, UVA, CMU, Georgetown, Notre Dame, WashU, Vanderbilt, Emory, USC, Bowdoin, Wellesley, Carleton, Mudd, CMC.

Tier 4: A bunch more really good schools that are very close to the Tier 3.

To be clear, all of the schools above are really, really good. Any kid who gains admission to any one of them is blessed. But people here always forget this as they take extreme positions in an effort to distinguish nearly identical schools.

Rice, Swarthmore, and Pomona down 1. Carleton, Mudd, CMC, Bowdoin,USC down 1.

Pomona and Swarthmore beat Williams and Amherst in selectivity, cross-admits, yield, and number of ED apps despite less app-friendly policies (e.g., need blind for internationals). That's not a diss on Williams and Amherst, but a simple recognition that the Pomona and Swat are more coveted among actual students. Otherwise, unless you want a career in finance (W and A) or tech (P and S), the four schools are extremely similar in resources, student body qualifications, and overall quality. Otherwise, we're dealing with the narcissism of small differences.