Why do you care so much? If you were to do a side by side comparison of all the schools, each would be found better in some ways than others in the same group. Colleges rise and fall based on how well they are minding the shop.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And you are?

+2. Who is this person? I've been looking at this stuff for years now and I've seen Chicago and Columbia as the C, never CalTech. CalTech is a great school, but it's not liberal arts the way even MIT approaches for non-STEM majors. You can't lump it on with the liberal arts schools and claim it's absolutely better than many nationally-recognized liberal arts school.

HYPSM refers to the most prestigious schools in the country. Columbia and UChicago are not part of this group, they do not offer anything different from HYPSM, they are not better than HYPSM in any way. Caltech is niche and is better or as good as some of HYPSM in that specific niche area. That is why it is included. That is also why MIT is included. Columbia and Chicago have never been thought of on par with HYPSM.

just do a google search of HYPSMC and see what comes up:

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=HYPSMC
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/HYPSMC
http://www.yourdictionary.com/hypsmc
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NJajpJGsuYE

Anonymous wrote:Most people will never meet a Cal Tech grad in their life. It is elite, obviously, but too small to make the big 5 or 6 list.

+1. About 2,000 total for undergrad and grad. I mentally categorize it with Julliard and Coiper Union--incredibly hard to get into (Julliard's acceptance rate is 6-%) and almost impossible to beat if your focus is what they offer. But they're not even trying to compete with the broad sweep of the major, big research institutions, so why are we trying to compare them.

Most people will never meet a Cal Tech grad in their life. It is elite, obviously, but too small to make the big 5 or 6 list.

Anonymous wrote:Curious who this Columbia and UChicago basher is. Statistically, there is very little difference between top 10 schools. Don't forget the margin of error in the ratings data. Once you have made it to top tier, no one particularly cares if you went to Harvard or Stanford or Columbia or even Duke or Cornell. These schools give you baseline credentials that imply you are smart and hardworking. The rest you still have to prove. All of these schools somehow still manage to admit some morons.

+1. Must be a CalTech grad or parent. I suppose she has to knock out not only Penn and Duke (currently ranked above CalTech in the USNWR) but also both UChicago (USNWR #3) and Columbia (#5) because, according to USNWR, CalTech is just hanging on there at #10. It's a tough argument, however, because UChicago and Columbia beat CalTech not just in USNWR this year, but also on admissions rates, yields, and in being internationally-admired research institutions across a broad range of subjects not just STEM. She's probably also the poster bashing Duke and Penn ("bottom of the Ivies!" too, in the silly hope that she could actually build some consensus, on some suburban mom's chatboard, and that this would help CalTech move up in somebody's rankings.

Can't we all agree that anything in the top 10 or top 20 is fabulous? And each is best for different kids? The top 10 are very different schools. The US has, what, 1,400 colleges and universities. I guess, though, that agreeing on a top 20 sets us up for different posters to bash schools #10-20 to make room to move up their candidate that's now at #22 or whatever.

Curious who this Columbia and UChicago basher is. Statistically, there is very little difference between top 10 schools. Don't forget the margin of error in the ratings data. Once you have made it to top tier, no one particularly cares if you went to Harvard or Stanford or Columbia or even Duke or Cornell. These schools give you baseline credentials that imply you are smart and hardworking. The rest you still have to prove. All of these schools somehow still manage to admit some morons.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would definitely say Notre Dame. I would also question Duke being at #8, but have an admitted bias. I wouldn't consider any of the SLAC list, although very fine colleges which I'd be fine with my DC's attending, to be "elite".

Nd is not elite - I've worked with way too many average nd grads.

Honestly I think UMD grads are smarter - I wouldn't be surprised if umd had a higher median sat

+1

Can't believe I am dignifying this ridiculous thread with a response.
Mean SATs
ND 1465
Duke 1460
UMD 1315

They are all great schools. Go to whichever one fits best.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would definitely say Notre Dame. I would also question Duke being at #8, but have an admitted bias. I wouldn't consider any of the SLAC list, although very fine colleges which I'd be fine with my DC's attending, to be "elite".

Nd is not elite - I've worked with way too many average nd grads.

Honestly I think UMD grads are smarter - I wouldn't be surprised if umd had a higher median sat

+1

Anonymous wrote:And you are?

+2. Who is this person? I've been looking at this stuff for years now and I've seen Chicago and Columbia as the C, never CalTech. CalTech is a great school, but it's not liberal arts the way even MIT approaches for non-STEM majors. You can't lump it on with the liberal arts schools and claim it's absolutely better than many nationally-recognized liberal arts school.

Anonymous wrote:Who cares. I know morons from Harvard and very competent people from State U.

-Person with Ivy degrees who learned long ago that competence and ability matter far more than pieces of paper.

Thank you for speaking the truth.

And you are?

Anonymous wrote:Good thing nobody cares what one highly opinionated parent/grad/random bully on a mom's website thinks about Duke or Columbia or Chicago or anything else.

Seriously? Duke is *exactly* better than ABC (pick 3 schools) but worse than XYZ (pick three other schools)? And Caltech is "ranked higher" than Columbia--even though it's actually ranked lower in USNWR--and U Chicago (currently ranked #3 in USNWR) couldn't possibly be the "C" in HYPSMC either?

PP's can continue quibbling about Duke and whether CalTech is "better" than everyone else. (I too had always heard the "C" was Chicago or Columbia. CalTech is like Juilliard or Cooper Union, all fabulous schools that are very hard to get into, but more specialized and so they aren't generally put up against broader universities.)

The rest of us will help our qualified kids pick elite schools based on fit: liberal arts vs STEM, frats vs no frats, strong or not-so-strong athletics, and so on.

HYPSMC is very rarely used, but when it is used it does refer to Caltech. Caltech is a niche school but it is top and extremely prestigious at that niche. I have never heard of Columbia or Chicago as being the C in HYPSMC, and I don't see why they would anyway. They do not have the prestige level or the strength of HYPSM in any field. Chicago being #3 at USNews is also laughable, no one is buying that. USNews is important but not the authority on how people view top schools.

Good thing nobody cares what one highly opinionated parent/grad/random bully on a mom's website thinks about Duke or Columbia or Chicago or anything else.

Seriously? Duke is *exactly* better than ABC (pick 3 schools) but worse than XYZ (pick three other schools)? And Caltech is "ranked higher" than Columbia--even though it's actually ranked lower in USNWR--and U Chicago (currently ranked #3 in USNWR) couldn't possibly be the "C" in HYPSMC either?

PP's can continue quibbling about Duke and whether CalTech is "better" than everyone else. (I too had always heard the "C" was Chicago or Columbia. CalTech is like Juilliard or Cooper Union, all fabulous schools that are very hard to get into, but more specialized and so they aren't generally put up against broader universities.)

The rest of us will help our qualified kids pick elite schools based on fit: liberal arts vs STEM, frats vs no frats, strong or not-so-strong athletics, and so on.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Duke is bottom of elite, after Ivys Chicago MIT Cal Tech.

Duke is about equivalent to the bottom ivies (Dartmouth, Cornell, Brown), some would say even better. But it is sure worse than the rest of the ivies, Chicago,MIT, Caltech.

I would say Duke is better than Dartmouth, Brown and Cornell, but worse than the other USNews top 10 schools.

Anonymous wrote:Duke is bottom of elite, after Ivys Chicago MIT Cal Tech.

Duke is about equivalent to the bottom ivies (Dartmouth, Cornell, Brown), some would say even better. But it is sure worse than the rest of the ivies, Chicago,MIT, Caltech.