4 ms·

Can someone clarify this for me? > A few days before Robinson’s appointment as institute director, the University also announced that two scholars, an associat

by dsacco 9y ago

Can someone clarify this for me? > A few days before Robinson’s appointment as institute director, the University also announced that two scholars, an associate professor at Columbia University and an assistant professor at New York University, would assume named full professorships at the Pearson Institute. > “For the other two chaired positions, the U of C hired two junior, non-tenured professors from academic institutions that are ranked below the U of C in national academic standings,” the complaint reads. Putting aside the difficulty of rating universities by any objective metric, when did UChicago become more highly ranked than NYU and Columbia? I'm surprised about both, but I'm rather shocked about Columbia. According to US News and World Report[1], UChicago is in a two-way tie for third place among all universities in the US. I'm aware it's a good school, but I didn't realize it's "officially" beating out Stanford, MIT, Berkeley, CalTech and every Ivy except for Harvard and Princeton. _____________________________ 1. https://www.usnews.com/best-colleges/rankings/national-universities https://www.usnews.com/best-colleges/rankings/national-unive...

yostrovs 9y ago
It was always ranked higher than NYU, but has trended nearly 1:1 with Columbia for a while till just last couple years it seems: http://publicuniversityhonors.com/2015/06/13/u-s-news-national-university-rankings-2008-present/ http://publicuniversityhonors.com/2015/06/13/u-s-news-nation...
egocodedinsol 9y ago
Forgetting about “official” rankings for now, Iirc uchicago has had more nobel prize winners passing through in some capacity than anywhere else, and its graduate programs have been among, or the best for a long, long time. It may not have had “kitchen table” renown but it was well known in academics. For example, several years ago a couple friends I knew withdrew their undergrad applications to Harvard when they were granted acceptance to uchicago because of the mathematics curriculum (it wasn’t an objective choice necessarily, but it was a well thought out one that was academically motivated). It was a little odd that its graduate programs were almost universally held at the pinnacle of academics, while most people didn’t think the undergrad was that good. That changed when uchicago accepted the common app (looks more selective) even though the rest didn’t change as much. Suddenly it skyrocketed in the rankings. It was always that good, though.
- srtjstjsj 9y ago
  https://www.bestmastersprograms.org/50-universities-with-the-most-nobel-prize-winners/ https://www.bestmastersprograms.org/50-universities-with-the... Most Nobel Prizes (per "unnoficial" counts that have some weird inflation for some universities but not Chicago!): 1. Harvard 2. Columbia 3. Cambridge (UK) 4. Chicago 5. MIT 6. Berkely 7. Oxford (UK)
  - cowsandmilk 9y ago
    And if you eliminate those unofficial counts, it is 1. Cambridge (UK) 2. Chicago
  - CurtMonash 9y ago
    In 1976 I applied to the 4 of the 5 top grad schools in math (I let my mother decree that Berkeley was too far away from where she lived -- if that sounds weird, please realize I was 16 years old at the time). Those were Harvard, MIT, Chicago and Princeton. I was accepted at all except Princeton, and visited the other 3. There was no apparent academic difference between the Harvard and MIT departments, because both schools said one could study interchangeably at either of them. Harvard easily beat MIT on other criteria. As for Chicago -- well, when I asked Irving Kaplansky to volunteer something I might not yet know, he told me the history of the department. That didn't impress me. I eventually picked Harvard over Chicago for several reasons: -- Chicago had a fixed course curriculum. Harvard had zero actual course requirements. -- Harvard's faculty seemed more approachable by and engaged with the students. -- I was more attracted to Harvard's resources in other departments. (And in fact, I wound up post-doccing at Harvard in public policy.) -- Cambridge was a lot nicer area to live in than the area around University of Chicago. I made the right choice. But I surely would have been happy with Chicago as well.
icelancer 9y ago
UChicago to me has always been a better program than NYU and at least on par with Columbia, depending on the academic discipline. It's Tier S in academia, though it's not always reflected that way in general conversation.

by dsacco 9y ago

yostrovs 9y ago

It was always ranked higher than NYU, but has trended nearly 1:1 with Columbia for a while till just last couple years it seems: http://publicuniversityhonors.com/2015/06/13/u-s-news-national-university-rankings-2008-present/ http://publicuniversityhonors.com/2015/06/13/u-s-news-nation...

egocodedinsol 9y ago

Forgetting about “official” rankings for now, Iirc uchicago has had more nobel prize winners passing through in some capacity than anywhere else, and its graduate programs have been among, or the best for a long, long time. It may not have had “kitchen table” renown but it was well known in academics. For example, several years ago a couple friends I knew withdrew their undergrad applications to Harvard when they were granted acceptance to uchicago because of the mathematics curriculum (it wasn’t an objective choice necessarily, but it was a well thought out one that was academically motivated). It was a little odd that its graduate programs were almost universally held at the pinnacle of academics, while most people didn’t think the undergrad was that good. That changed when uchicago accepted the common app (looks more selective) even though the rest didn’t change as much. Suddenly it skyrocketed in the rankings. It was always that good, though.

srtjstjsj 9y ago
https://www.bestmastersprograms.org/50-universities-with-the-most-nobel-prize-winners/ https://www.bestmastersprograms.org/50-universities-with-the... Most Nobel Prizes (per "unnoficial" counts that have some weird inflation for some universities but not Chicago!): 1. Harvard 2. Columbia 3. Cambridge (UK) 4. Chicago 5. MIT 6. Berkely 7. Oxford (UK)
- cowsandmilk 9y ago
  And if you eliminate those unofficial counts, it is 1. Cambridge (UK) 2. Chicago
- CurtMonash 9y ago
  In 1976 I applied to the 4 of the 5 top grad schools in math (I let my mother decree that Berkeley was too far away from where she lived -- if that sounds weird, please realize I was 16 years old at the time). Those were Harvard, MIT, Chicago and Princeton. I was accepted at all except Princeton, and visited the other 3. There was no apparent academic difference between the Harvard and MIT departments, because both schools said one could study interchangeably at either of them. Harvard easily beat MIT on other criteria. As for Chicago -- well, when I asked Irving Kaplansky to volunteer something I might not yet know, he told me the history of the department. That didn't impress me. I eventually picked Harvard over Chicago for several reasons: -- Chicago had a fixed course curriculum. Harvard had zero actual course requirements. -- Harvard's faculty seemed more approachable by and engaged with the students. -- I was more attracted to Harvard's resources in other departments. (And in fact, I wound up post-doccing at Harvard in public policy.) -- Cambridge was a lot nicer area to live in than the area around University of Chicago. I made the right choice. But I surely would have been happy with Chicago as well.

icelancer 9y ago

UChicago to me has always been a better program than NYU and at least on par with Columbia, depending on the academic discipline. It's Tier S in academia, though it's not always reflected that way in general conversation.