[quote=Anonymous]Prattle on all you want, but the top 10 will always be some combination of Harvard, Yale, Princeton, Stanford, Columbia, U Chicago, MIT, U Penn, Northwestern, and Duke. Vast majority of people in this country simply don’t even know of Williams and Amherst, though they are great schools. This is also not helped by the fact that in most parts of the world, a “college” is a lesser institution to a “university” (for example in the UK, where the designation of “university” is closely guarded by a government body).[/quote]
Talk about a reification of rankings. You do realize that several of the schools you listed are relatively new to the top 10, don’t you? [/quote]

Besides, Northwestern does not belong in the top 10. You just have to ED the school to get in. [/quote]

There is a difference. The other ivy ED schools do not accept 80% of their class from EDs like Northwestern and Chicago. It's more like 20% or below. For Northwestern and UChicago, you do not have to be a top student, you just have to ED. [/quote]

I don't think anyone can feel entitled to admission to either of those schools just by ED'ing. This has simply never been true.

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Prattle on all you want, but the top 10 will always be some combination of Harvard, Yale, Princeton, Stanford, Columbia, U Chicago, MIT, U Penn, Northwestern, and Duke. Vast majority of people in this country simply don’t even know of Williams and Amherst, though they are great schools. This is also not helped by the fact that in most parts of the world, a “college” is a lesser institution to a “university” (for example in the UK, where the designation of “university” is closely guarded by a government body).[/quote]
Talk about a reification of rankings. You do realize that several of the schools you listed are relatively new to the top 10, don’t you? [/quote]

Besides, Northwestern does not belong in the top 10. You just have to ED the school to get in. [/quote]

There is a difference. The other ivy ED schools do not accept 80% of their class from EDs like Northwestern and Chicago. It's more like 20% or below. For Northwestern and UChicago, you do not have to be a top student, you just have to ED.

Anonymous wrote:Why does Columbia have so many side/back doors? Barnard and GS, namely.

Most ivies had sister colleges in the men-only days. Harvard had Radcliffe. Yale had Vassar. Radcliffe women folded when asked to join Harvard. Vassar refused Yale, as did Barnard refused Columbia. They were never side/back doors - unless you are talking Radcliffe.

Why does Columbia have so many side/back doors? Barnard and GS, namely.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Columbia's snafu proves it's a step below HYPMS. It will likely drop out of the top 10 when it returns to USnews, meaning there will be only 4 ivys in the top 10, HYP and Upenn. Columbia, Dartmouth, Brown, and Cornell will be lumped in with the Vandy/Emory tier of school which is still great but not as elite as you guys make them seem.

Columbia is already in a league all by itself for exposing USNews' shady business. Princeton president agrees with Columbia. Their whole point is the rankings, especially among the top ivy plus hitters, is questionable.

I'm not sure what you mean. If by Columbia exposing USNews, you are referring to the Columbia professor, then yes, bravo! If you mean the administration of the University, then not at all. They venerated the rankings so much that they were willing to lie to move up. If you think they did this with the intention of being found out so that they could disparage the rankings, that is a little bit fanciful. CU is a great school, but it is crazy to try to turn lying and cheating into a positive.

Columbia prof, unable to publish in a peer review journal, published in a Columbia website. It was as official as it can be. No media picked it up until one of the Columbia student newspapers published an article on it. It was Columbia through and through.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Columbia's snafu proves it's a step below HYPMS. It will likely drop out of the top 10 when it returns to USnews, meaning there will be only 4 ivys in the top 10, HYP and Upenn. Columbia, Dartmouth, Brown, and Cornell will be lumped in with the Vandy/Emory tier of school which is still great but not as elite as you guys make them seem.

Columbia is already in a league all by itself for exposing USNews' shady business. Princeton president agrees with Columbia. Their whole point is the rankings, especially among the top ivy plus hitters, is questionable.

I'm not sure what you mean. If by Columbia exposing USNews, you are referring to the Columbia professor, then yes, bravo! If you mean the administration of the University, then not at all. They venerated the rankings so much that they were willing to lie to move up. If you think they did this with the intention of being found out so that they could disparage the rankings, that is a little bit fanciful. CU is a great school, but it is crazy to try to turn lying and cheating into a positive.

Totally agree with the above statement. We wouldn’t even be having this discussion if it weren’t for that brave CU professor.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Columbia's snafu proves it's a step below HYPMS. It will likely drop out of the top 10 when it returns to USnews, meaning there will be only 4 ivys in the top 10, HYP and Upenn. Columbia, Dartmouth, Brown, and Cornell will be lumped in with the Vandy/Emory tier of school which is still great but not as elite as you guys make them seem.

Columbia is already in a league all by itself for exposing USNews' shady business. Princeton president agrees with Columbia. Their whole point is the rankings, especially among the top ivy plus hitters, is questionable.

I'm not sure what you mean. If by Columbia exposing USNews, you are referring to the Columbia professor, then yes, bravo! If you mean the administration of the University, then not at all. They venerated the rankings so much that they were willing to lie to move up. If you think they did this with the intention of being found out so that they could disparage the rankings, that is a little bit fanciful. CU is a great school, but it is crazy to try to turn lying and cheating into a positive.

Anonymous wrote:Columbia's snafu proves it's a step below HYPMS. It will likely drop out of the top 10 when it returns to USnews, meaning there will be only 4 ivys in the top 10, HYP and Upenn. Columbia, Dartmouth, Brown, and Cornell will be lumped in with the Vandy/Emory tier of school which is still great but not as elite as you guys make them seem.

Columbia is already in a league all by itself for exposing USNews' shady business. Princeton president agrees with Columbia. Their whole point is the rankings, especially among the top ivy plus hitters, is questionable.

Columbia's snafu proves it's a step below HYPMS. It will likely drop out of the top 10 when it returns to USnews, meaning there will be only 4 ivys in the top 10, HYP and Upenn. Columbia, Dartmouth, Brown, and Cornell will be lumped in with the Vandy/Emory tier of school which is still great but not as elite as you guys make them seem.

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Prattle on all you want, but the top 10 will always be some combination of Harvard, Yale, Princeton, Stanford, Columbia, U Chicago, MIT, U Penn, Northwestern, and Duke. Vast majority of people in this country simply don’t even know of Williams and Amherst, though they are great schools. This is also not helped by the fact that in most parts of the world, a “college” is a lesser institution to a “university” (for example in the UK, where the designation of “university” is closely guarded by a government body).[/quote]
Talk about a reification of rankings. You do realize that several of the schools you listed are relatively new to the top 10, don’t you? [/quote]

Besides, Northwestern does not belong in the top 10. You just have to ED the school to get in. [/quote]
‐‐--------------
UChicago accepts almost most of its class through ED1 and ED2. From private schools you do not even have to be top of the class. Other than HYPMS, any other school that has ED is in the league below. It's those 5 on the top and many schools that can fit the next tier.

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Prattle on all you want, but the top 10 will always be some combination of Harvard, Yale, Princeton, Stanford, Columbia, U Chicago, MIT, U Penn, Northwestern, and Duke. Vast majority of people in this country simply don’t even know of Williams and Amherst, though they are great schools. This is also not helped by the fact that in most parts of the world, a “college” is a lesser institution to a “university” (for example in the UK, where the designation of “university” is closely guarded by a government body).[/quote]
Talk about a reification of rankings. You do realize that several of the schools you listed are relatively new to the top 10, don’t you? [/quote]

Besides, Northwestern does not belong in the top 10. You just have to ED the school to get in.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do Harvard Extension students take some of the classes as the regular students?

Heck no! Anybody can sign up for a Harvard extension course. Your local Massachusetts high school grad or community college dropout, say. It’s night school. Not sure you even need a high school degree. In any event, a GED will suffice...

As for Columbia GS, I feel bad for the kids from great schools like Trinity Dublin and Sciences Po who excitedly enroll in the joint degree program, thinking its with “Columbia.” Did I say Columbia? I meant Columbia GS. Spend 2 years at Trinity Dublin studying your actual major and then, as a junior, you get to go to “Columbia” and take the GS common core. Correct me if I’m wrong, but my understanding is that the GS and Columbia common core courses, unlike other courses for your major, are separate and not at all integrated. Shame on Trinity Dublin and Sciences Po for allowing themselves to be duped...

Do Harvard Extension School has a different set of instructors from those at regular Harvard?

It offers an undergraduate degree program and graduate degree programs.

[quote=Anonymous]Prattle on all you want, but the top 10 will always be some combination of Harvard, Yale, Princeton, Stanford, Columbia, U Chicago, MIT, U Penn, Northwestern, and Duke. Vast majority of people in this country simply don’t even know of Williams and Amherst, though they are great schools. This is also not helped by the fact that in most parts of the world, a “college” is a lesser institution to a “university” (for example in the UK, where the designation of “university” is closely guarded by a government body).[/quote]
Talk about a reification of rankings. You do realize that several of the schools you listed are relatively new to the top 10, don’t you?

Anonymous wrote:Do Harvard Extension students take some of the classes as the regular students?

Heck no! Anybody can sign up for a Harvard extension course. Your local Massachusetts high school grad or community college dropout, say. It’s night school. Not sure you even need a high school degree. In any event, a GED will suffice...

As for Columbia GS, I feel bad for the kids from great schools like Trinity Dublin and Sciences Po who excitedly enroll in the joint degree program, thinking its with “Columbia.” Did I say Columbia? I meant Columbia GS. Spend 2 years at Trinity Dublin studying your actual major and then, as a junior, you get to go to “Columbia” and take the GS common core. Correct me if I’m wrong, but my understanding is that the GS and Columbia common core courses, unlike other courses for your major, are separate and not at all integrated. Shame on Trinity Dublin and Sciences Po for allowing themselves to be duped...

[/quote]
Columbia GS is Columbia GS, not Columiba "proper", we all know that, why include the transfer rate of Columbia GS?[/quote]

A proper measure of selectivity would have to include transfer rates, percentage of “Spring admissions” — everything. Now, you can argue that selectivity should not be a criterion. But if it is, you can’t compare a high selectivity standard that applies to only 50% of a school’s total student body (very high proportion of transfers), then apply it to 75% of students at another school (moderately high proportion of transfers), and then apply it to 95% of yet another school (with a tiny transfer rate). This is not about just Columbia; the data would need to be smoothed out for all schools.