World University Rankings 2025

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If your priority is to see your child experience the best of all worlds (elite education, strategic networking and preparing for graduate school and/or professional endeavors, career outcomes, and especially the overall social experience), the large public institutions like the Berkeley, UCLA, Michigan, Florida, Texas, UNC and Virginia are far ahead of the one- or two-dimensional environments that define all of the privates in the Top 25.

If you’re treating your child’s college experience as essentially a trade school where they are there exclusively to train for a specific career in finance or software development or civil engineering, sure, feel free to take the WSJ rankings seriously. But if you have any interest in college being the transformative experience for your child that it often is for those who get the most from it, flagship public over private all day, every day.

This assertion is not in any way supported by facts.

Berkeley CS places less percentage or size wise to big tech that Brown and I'm sure most of the other elite privates. that is a fact based on actual career survey outcomes at both schools.

And same with placement to top grad schools. Which does not surprise me one bit.

[Anonymous]

the average berkeley grad is very meh to me compare to an elite private grad.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:the average berkeley grad is very meh to me compare to an elite private grad.

The average elite private grad is very meh to me compared to the rest of the top 50.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:the average berkeley grad is very meh to me compare to an elite private grad.

The average elite private grad is very meh to me compared to the rest of the top 50.

Yeah, co-sign on that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:the average berkeley grad is very meh to me compare to an elite private grad.

The average elite private grad is very meh to me compared to the rest of the top 50.

Yeah, co-sign on that.

Glad you feel good about paying out of state tuition on an overpriced education.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous[b wrote:]If your priority is to see your child experience the best of all worlds (elite education, strategic networking and preparing for graduate school and/or professional endeavors, career outcomes, and especially the overall social experience),[/b] the large public institutions like the Berkeley, UCLA, Michigan, Florida, Texas, UNC and Virginia are far ahead of the one- or two-dimensional environments that define all of the privates in the Top 25.

If you’re treating your child’s college experience as essentially a trade school where they are there exclusively to train for a specific career in finance or software development or civil engineering, sure, feel free to take the WSJ rankings seriously. But if you have any interest in college being the transformative experience for your child that it often is for those who get the most from it, flagship public over private all day, every day.

False. I have had one graduate ivy and one more than half through a t10private. Both provide the bold in spades. None of their high school classmates from fancy dc private have had anywhere near the same extent as the bolded , at UCLA and michigan. Big classes, no ability to get into labs or school-year internships early, no pay for said opportunities for the few who get them, too many competing to curry favor with the same professors in large first yr classes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If your priority is to see your child experience the best of all worlds (elite education, strategic networking and preparing for graduate school and/or professional endeavors, career outcomes, and especially the overall social experience), the large public institutions like the Berkeley, UCLA, Michigan, Florida, Texas, UNC and Virginia are far ahead of the one- or two-dimensional environments that define all of the privates in the Top 25.

If you’re treating your child’s college experience as essentially a trade school where they are there exclusively to train for a specific career in finance or software development or civil engineering, sure, feel free to take the WSJ rankings seriously. But if you have any interest in college being the transformative experience for your child that it often is for those who get the most from it, flagship public over private all day, every day.

This assertion is not in any way supported by facts.

Berkeley CS places less percentage or size wise to big tech that Brown and I'm sure most of the other elite privates. that is a fact based on actual career survey outcomes at both schools.

And same with placement to top grad schools. Which does not surprise me one bit.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

This is a world ranking of the most prestigious universities on the planet. Half of the top 25 at USNWR wouldn’t register much attention across the globe.

Tbh I'm surprised that Princeton made the top five on the world ranking haha. Usually they don't do well on international rankings for whatever reason even though they dominate USNWR.

QS is better and they are not even top10

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous[b wrote:]If your priority is to see your child experience the best of all worlds (elite education, strategic networking and preparing for graduate school and/or professional endeavors, career outcomes, and especially the overall social experience),[/b] the large public institutions like the Berkeley, UCLA, Michigan, Florida, Texas, UNC and Virginia are far ahead of the one- or two-dimensional environments that define all of the privates in the Top 25.

If you’re treating your child’s college experience as essentially a trade school where they are there exclusively to train for a specific career in finance or software development or civil engineering, sure, feel free to take the WSJ rankings seriously. But if you have any interest in college being the transformative experience for your child that it often is for those who get the most from it, flagship public over private all day, every day.

False. I have had one graduate ivy and one more than half through a t10private. Both provide the bold in spades. None of their high school classmates from fancy dc private have had anywhere near the same extent as the bolded , at UCLA and michigan. Big classes, no ability to get into labs or school-year internships early, no pay for said opportunities for the few who get them, too many competing to curry favor with the same professors in large first yr classes.

DP

Describe the application profile for your two kids, please. How well-rounded are they? ECs?

[Anonymous]

Are these rankings for undergrad or graduate work?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:people who get regents at berkeley are choosing top privates instead let alone regular admits

My DC chose Berkeley with Regents OOS instead of Caltech and JHU.

They are the exception. Go check reddit and other sources for confirmation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous[b wrote:]If your priority is to see your child experience the best of all worlds (elite education, strategic networking and preparing for graduate school and/or professional endeavors, career outcomes, and especially the overall social experience),[/b] the large public institutions like the Berkeley, UCLA, Michigan, Florida, Texas, UNC and Virginia are far ahead of the one- or two-dimensional environments that define all of the privates in the Top 25.

If you’re treating your child’s college experience as essentially a trade school where they are there exclusively to train for a specific career in finance or software development or civil engineering, sure, feel free to take the WSJ rankings seriously. But if you have any interest in college being the transformative experience for your child that it often is for those who get the most from it, flagship public over private all day, every day.

False. I have had one graduate ivy and one more than half through a t10private. Both provide the bold in spades. None of their high school classmates from fancy dc private have had anywhere near the same extent as the bolded , at UCLA and michigan. Big classes, no ability to get into labs or school-year internships early, no pay for said opportunities for the few who get them, too many competing to curry favor with the same professors in large first yr classes.

This has already been debated many times. Privates and Ivy don’t guarantee small class size. Example- Cornell Intro to Psych has 800 students typically.

Source: https://ezramagazine.cornell.edu/winter15/CoverStorySidebar5.html#:~:text=Cornell's%20largest%20course%20for%20years,as%20laughter%2C%20memory%20and%20sex.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous[b wrote:]If your priority is to see your child experience the best of all worlds (elite education, strategic networking and preparing for graduate school and/or professional endeavors, career outcomes, and especially the overall social experience),[/b] the large public institutions like the Berkeley, UCLA, Michigan, Florida, Texas, UNC and Virginia are far ahead of the one- or two-dimensional environments that define all of the privates in the Top 25.

If you’re treating your child’s college experience as essentially a trade school where they are there exclusively to train for a specific career in finance or software development or civil engineering, sure, feel free to take the WSJ rankings seriously. But if you have any interest in college being the transformative experience for your child that it often is for those who get the most from it, flagship public over private all day, every day.

False. I have had one graduate ivy and one more than half through a t10private. Both provide the bold in spades. None of their high school classmates from fancy dc private have had anywhere near the same extent as the bolded , at UCLA and michigan. Big classes, no ability to get into labs or school-year internships early, no pay for said opportunities for the few who get them, too many competing to curry favor with the same professors in large first yr classes.

This has already been debated many times. Privates and Ivy don’t guarantee small class size. Example- Cornell Intro to Psych has 800 students typically.

Source: https://ezramagazine.cornell.edu/winter15/CoverStorySidebar5.html#:~:text=Cornell's%20largest%20course%20for%20years,as%20laughter%2C%20memory%20and%20sex.

Yes, but on average, class sizes are far smaller at privates while research opportunities are more per student

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What the hell happened to UVA?

These rankings are rigged.

All rankings are "rigged" in the sense that each uses different criteria.

UVa does not have a high enough % of non-US undergraduate students. This particular ranking, the "THE World Universities" list, factors that variable in.

Recall that the Commonwealth insists that VT, UVa, and W&M have VA residents for roughly 2/3 of total undergrads. That pushes all 3 schools down the list.

The same factor boosts many UK universities, because UK universities lose money on their UK undergrads and use numerous non-UK students (who pay much higher fees) to make their budgets balance.

[Anonymous]

Every ranking uses different criteria.

For example, THE has a different ranking scheme for its other big list - which is a UK universities only list.