The kind of school that you don’t get into because you’ve earned it.
Living in Texas I’d add (to the OPs list):
Texas A&M
Rice
SMU
Outside of Tejas, I didn’t see Brown mentioned
I’ve always thought of AU as a diploma factory, it’s where rich parents send kids who can’t get in to elite schools.
I think of elite schools as being:
- Tough to get into, with many applicants per position
- Being perceived as prestigious or wealthy
- Having the reputation of being academically rigorous
- Having lots of money due to alumni support
- Having been around for many years
- Having sumptuous grounds and facilities
- Being widely quoted in media articles; having professors with high “quoted research” scores
A narrow view would restrict this to Oxford, Cambridge, The Ivy Leagues and Seven Sisters; tech schools like MIT, Caltech. Maybe Stanford, Harvey Mudd, Johns Hopkins, etc.
A broader view would include the best universities in China, Japan, Canada, India, Europe and many other countries. It would also apply to many decent law, business and medical schools.
As mentioned, much depends on whom you ask.
Taking care not to read the thread before answering…
As a Cornellian I don’t tend to think of Cornell as especially elite, so my knee-jerk elite school list would be:
Harvard
Yale
Princeton
MIT
Stanford
Oxford
Cambridge
Julliard
And as a Cornellian my [del]cult indoctrination[/del] years on the hill prevent me from EVER including Dartmouth or Brown. I would consider carefully crafted arguments about including Columbia and Penn. 
Well, yeah, people who know which schools are elite will most likely have a different opinion than people who don’t know which schools are elite.:)
The board membership tends to have a higher level of education than the general public, I think, and be more familiar with the actual reputation of universities.
That list doesn’t really narrow it down much; lots of state schools would meet 6 out of 7 of those criteria, with your #2 being the sticking point.
I had the best of both worlds at Cornell, since it’s a hybrid private and state school. I went to the New York State School of Agriculture there, and paid in-state tuition. I was an Ivy League Aggie. I took exactly the same courses as people doing the same major at the School of Arts and Sciences for a fraction the price (the main difference being having to take an “agricultural elective” each semester).
Of course, people who went to Harvard, Yale, or Princeton felt the same about Cornell. I understand that there used to be a sign at the entrance to the Cornell campus that said “Cornell, an Ivy League University.” People at other Ivies used to snicker and say “Cornell is the only Ivy League college that calls itself one - or needs to.”
Cornell and not Cornell Lab of Ornithology? I’m shocked.
I worked with them for a while when I ran marketing at Birdwatcher’s Digest. Those are some hardcore bird nerds, man.
In this country? Harvard. Anything else is secondary to me and most state schools (Pitt and PSU for example) are pretty much just advanced High Schools.
(I graduated from Pitt)
I would add University of Virginia, and I would take off the OP’s list University of Chicago and Caltech.
One which teaches well.
I’d rather my nephews go to a school without much of a publication record but which produces good professionals than to one where the teachers can be heard whining about being required to teach.
I’d guess tier one would be caltech, MIT and uc Berkeley. I’d rate caltech higher than MIT.
Second tier are the ivy leagues. But I don’t know how I’d rank them. Pennsylvania and brown are not equal to Harvard and Princeton.
Third tier are all the good schools that aren’t ivy league. Stanford, Chicago, UCLA, etc.
That’s just domestically. Internationally for tier one I’d include Oxford, Tsinghua, university of Seoul, Cambridge, etc.
I can’t really quibble with people’s choices, as the OP asked for what you think is an elite school.
But I think I’m seeing some divisions here among local, regional, national, and global definitions of elite. If there are four local universities and you really only consider them, then one is going to be the “elite” one. Similarly if you consider only certain regions (Dartmouth? UVA?) or nations (Oxford isn’t elite, really?).
While it is getting a little long in the tooth (2016), the Times World University Rankings has an interesting blog post from its 2016 rankings on “university superbrands”. Superbrands are universities that lead the world consistently in reputation. The Times survey took note of this phenomenon and gave it a name. For the record, the six they noted are:
[ul]
[li]Harvard University[/li][li]Massachusetts Institute of Technology[/li][li]University of Oxford[/li][li]University of Cambridge[/li][li]Stanford University[/li][li]University of California, Berkeley[/li][/ul]
The Laboratory of Ornithology is just an administrative unit within the University. It doesn’t grant degrees as such. And I went there as an undergrad and hadn’t settled on ornithology (which wouldn’t even had been a major). I was originally in the Department of Neurobiology and Behavior but ended up in Ecology.
Yeah, I know some of them. They sure are.
And I would argue the the actual reputation of a school is what the majority of people think and not the opinions of those with specialized knowledge think. After all this does stem from the usage of the term by the media to the masses not a couple of petroleum engineers discussing the best school in their field.
Ha. Me too. When you know the actual people that attend these schools, the luster fades pretty quick. There are smart people at ‘elite’ colleges, and lots of dumb ones too.
You’ve obv not heard that one about the faculty with 30 profs, 10 of whom were absolute research superstars, 10 inspirational and conscientious teachers, and 10 brilliant administrators and committee people who made the whole thing work?
Trouble was, it was the same ten profs…
For those of you who list Harvard, but not Yale, what’s up with that? Together, they’re the Oxford and Cambridge of America.