They’ll make a believer out of me if and when they come up with a space program that’s better than ours. And that goes for all non-US universities.
The point was the IIT may be more selective than US schools, in terms of percentage of applicants accepted. Again, it comes down to how you’re defining the best school.
Here is an attempt at ranking the top 500 universities.
Bingo. I don’t have a cite, but I remember reading a recent newspaper report stating that the acceptance rate into IITs is about 2%. And given the huge disparity between applicants and available seats, less than half of those accepted get into their first choice of department. BTW, the same article mentioned that the IITs don’t have the lowest rate of acceptance in the world. Unfortunately, I don’t remember which institute bears that particular honour.
In terms of resources, material and financial, none of the IITs come close to what the top 20 US engineering colleges have to offer. I really don’t see too many students rejecting acceptance letters from an MIT or CalTech in favour of an IIT.
Financing of educational institutions is a pricky issue in India, espcially when it concerns the IITs and IIMs. A previous government enacted a law (without any opposition) stating that any financial endowments to Indian universities need to be routed through a special government agency set up for that purpose, and that the agency would get to decide on how that money got spent. Way to attract more money, fellas :rolleyes:
That’s funny. They misspelled Northern Illinois University.
What?
Hey, we’re not dorks! We’re nerds and geeks.
OK, some of us are dorks, but mostly we’re nerds and geeks.
#39 baby! Woohoo! Woot! Pwned!!!111!!!onehundredeleven!!!
Okay. I’ll define the “best school” as one that has great resources, professors, and puts out a high number of grads (to impact the world); therefore, the University of Michigan takes the honor.
I’m really surprised to see how far Brown has fallen (ranked in the 80’s). And Dartmouth was not in the top 100. What happened?
I wouldn’t take that list too seriously. Rutgers is ranked higher than Carnegie-Mellon, Purdue and Dartmouth. For most people I knew in college, Rutgers was a safety school.
Well, as i’ve already made clear, i don’t take lists like that too seriously either.
But that fact that Rutgers was a “safety school” for some people that you knew is probably just as much a reflection of those people’s attitudes as it is of the quality of education at Rutgers. It’s certainly no more reliable a guide to Rutgers than those lists are.
Odd thing I learned about RU after I moved to California. It’s a safety school if you’re from Jersey. . . and you’re willing to attend one of the lesser colleges within the university (Rutgers College is surprisingly picky). I keep meeting people out here that are like, “Hey, you went to Rutgers, that’s a good school.”
I realized it is if you make it. You can drink your way through rocks for jocks, or you can be taught by someone who knew Harry Truman and delve into one of the best libraries region.
You could say the same thing about most of the universities and colleges on the list, including some in the top ten. University, as a general rule, is what you make it, in my opinion.
I’m a grad student at a school ranked in the top 20 on the worldwide list provided by don’t ask in post 23. There are undergrads at this place who make full use of all the incredible intellectual and educational resources available to them, while there are others who coast through and, as far as their actual education goes, could have saved their parents over 100 grand by going to a much cheaper institution. And even places like Harvard suffer from the unfortunate tendency towards grade inflation, with the result that a relatively mediocre performance can still often receive a grade of “B.”
Also, as others have pointed out, the overall ranking of a university often means almost nothing in terms of particular subject areas. A school can have a world-class reputation overall, but that’s not much use to you if you want to study linguistics and the Linguistics Department of that particular university is not especially good. My grad school’s worldwide reputation as a medical institution is not much use to me as a student of US history.
Hell, even within subjects it’s necessary to find out where a particular institution’s strengths and weaknesses are. A history department that does not make an appearance when the list of Top 20 history departments in the United States is compiled might still be the perfect place for a student looking to study a particular branch of history, or work with a particular faculty member. Specialization, both within institutions and within individual schools and departments, means that anyone seeking to attend one of these places should look further than the institution’s overall ranking.
Also, some of the very things that earn certain universities high rankings on these lists can actually result in a reduction in the quality of education for a potential student. For example, i’ve known undergrads who have been students at very prestigious institutions, but who barely ever got to meet one-on-one with the brilliant faculty members, and spent most of their time interacting with inexperienced grad student TAs. I’ve known grad students who went to places like Columbia, but who barely got to speak with their advisers, who were always busy at conferences or doing research or whatever.
I’m not saying that the schools at the top of these lists are bad places. That would clearly be absurd. At a certain level, there’s a reason that certain institutions are consistently ranked near the top. I guess, for me, the biggest issue is not whether the top schools are any good (clearly they are), but whether the lower-ranked schools are as far behind as these lists can make them appear. Another problem is the issue of the self-fulfilling prophecy, where an institution’s reputation can be just as important a factor in its perceived quality as the actual level of academic excellence.
Another point about Rutgers is that, as you say, it’s pretty selective. For many New Jersey students, Rutgers is a fantastic option, and for many more, it’s an unattainable fantasy.
I’m willing to bet that Rutgers is a “safety school” largely for folks who are incredibly smart and have their choice of institutions, and/or people whose parents can afford to fork out $30K+ a year for a prestigious private university.
Also, the last time i read an article on this particular issue (a few years back), New Jersey had fewer colleges and universities per head of population than any other state. It’s a very populous state without a whole lot of large, four-year institutions. If i remember correctly, the piece that i read also said that Jersey sends more college students out of state than any other state. Not sure if this is still true.
My own grad school, here in Baltimore, is filled with undergrads from New Jersey. Hell, i’ve even heard the place referred to as the University of New Jersey at Baltimore. 
According to the list on dont ask’s link, the University of California system seems to have a very good representation with 4 schools in the top 20. Cal-Berkeley (GO BEARS!) is listed at #4. Of the schools in the Top 10, is that the only public university?
To some extent, breadth works against schools like Brown and Dartmouth (or, that is, lack of breadth). Those schools have excellent programs, but unlike some of the large research universities on the list, they don’t have programs in nearly every field. That doesn’t compromise their excellence in any way, but if you’re tallying “Top Ten” programs or surveying experts in a wide variety of fields to report on reputation, smaller schools will naturally be disadvantaged.
Bowdoin but no Pomona, eh?
Interesting …
No.
Cambridge and Oxford in England are public universities, in pretty much the same way as the term “public university” is understood in the United States. That is, they are self-governing and independent institutions, but get their funding largely from government funding and student fees. In the period 2000-2003, 61% of funding to UK universities and colleges came from the four main higher education funding bodies, each of which is funded by and responsible to parliament. The rest cames from non-government sources such as students fees, charitable and philanthropic donations, industry, etc., etc.
There are private and independent ionstitutions of higher learning in the UK, but these are not generally proper universities or four-year academic colleges. They tend to be vocational or technical institutions, generally outside the ambit of the public higher education system that dominates UK post-secondary education. A key difference between public universities in the US and the UK is that the former are largely funded and overseen at the state level, whereas this is done on a national level in the UK.
Sorry, forgot to cite the source of my figures:
Check out this pdf document for an overview of the UK higher education system.
I’m a big fan of small, liberal-arts colleges. i think that they provide a fantastic education, and the faculty members are often excellent teachers and mentors.
But to assert, as Phlosphr has, that a liberal arts college like Bowdoin, with an enrolment of less than 2000 students and essentially no graduate and post-doctoral research, belongs in the top 10 “Based on well rounded academia and research,” is patently ridiculous.
Bowdoin might offer the best undergraduate education in the known world, but it’s not a research university, and really can’t be compared at all with institutions like Harvard, MIT, Oxford, Cal-Berkeley, etc.