/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.6771622]

>2014
>not being at a top 10 university

Why not /sci/?

[Anonymous No.6771623]

>>6771622
The dealer gave me shitty cards...

[Anonymous No.6771626]

Because you need to pay a boatload of money to get highly overpriced education.

[Anonymous No.6771630]

>>6771622
because your shitty ranking is one of the few that doesn't place my school in its top 10, mostly

[Anonymous No.6771631]

>>6771630
same here
fucking Columbia man

[Anonymous No.6771632]

>>6771622
Oxford here. In any case, you need to take out all that minority representation ranking, it's bullshit. No uni should be rated on how multiculti it is.

[Anonymous No.6771645]

Because I already graduated.

[Anonymous No.6771649]

I'm at a top20 in the US. That almost counts right?

Also
>implying UG rankings matter
>implying it's not all about your major and the networking/recruiting you get

[Anonymous No.6771653]

>>6771622
During the Big Bang this one particle had a slight different velocity that I would have wanted.

As a result, it led to a chain of events where I acquired shitty genetics.

Can you blame me OP?

[Anonymous No.6771654]

because i go to uoft

[Anonymous No.6771657]

>>6771622
Feels good to be at Imperial I guess, though I believe it should be ranked like 8th-10th

[Anonymous No.6771660]

>tfw dropped to 54th or something
>Tuition still in the top 5 in the US
>Student body is pretty ass

[Anonymous No.6771666]

i live in serbia

[Anonymous No.6771667]

>>6771660
Brown? Went there for a term as an exchange student, was pretty cool.

[Anonymous No.6771672]

I feel like giving a savage beating to everyone in this thread and everyone who goes to those schools because of what happened.

Also general bitterness. An awful life I've lived.

[Anonymous No.6771673]

Cambridge masterace reporting in. Bow the fuck down to me plebs.

[Anonymous No.6771678]

>>6771667
Naw, Tulane. I mostly picked it cuz it's in New orleans, so I've been going to a ton of live music

Is brown really that low in rankings? I don't put much stock in rankings, but that's still surprising

[Anonymous No.6771680]

>>6771673
>no proof

timestamped photo of id card

[Anonymous No.6771686]

Don't at least a few of you guys think arguing about this is kind of stupid?

[Anonymous No.6771695]

>>6771678
In both Times Higher Education rankings and QS it's in the 50-60 band worldwide. Doubt if Tulane is in top 100 at either.
>>6771678
:^)
>>6771686
No one's arguing but it's indeed childish to make this into a dickwaving contest

[Anonymous No.6771703]

>>6771695
Dude I'm not going to bat for my alma mater here. It's an overpriced school with a douchey frat culture built around 2 shithole bars that probably have a higher rate of date rape than some smaller states

But we have a ton of cool student movements for stuff like divestment, so if you find a niche it's fine here

[Anonymous No.6771707]

>>6771680
>tard wants proof of anything anon claims
Autism?

[Anonymous No.6771709]

Yeah I'm not going to post my id on 4chan... Ask me anything however

[Anonymous No.6771713]

>>6771703
It's more important to be satisfied with your college experience rather than attending a school in "top whatever" according to some ranking site anyway. If you enjoyed it, that's awesome-I had a friend who went to Tulane because he got a full ride and loved the place.

[Anonymous No.6771719]

>>6771713
Exactly, I feel like rankings have no bearing on how much I enjoy my college experience

I didn't apply to any high ranking schools anyway. UofC is in a shitty part of chicago and has a huge suicide problem, and Ivy League schools sound scary and dystopian

[Anonymous No.6771734]

>>6771686
Relatively, everything we do is stupid.

[Anonymous No.6771740]

Cambridge here I got in cos I'm half brown

[Anonymous No.6771752]

I go to UC Berkeley because I'm broke. They have a wonderful physics program so I'm happy.

Also, it's all about where you go to grad school

[Anonymous No.6771756]

>>6771740
College?

[Anonymous No.6771760]

>>6771622

How does Berkley compare in the real world? I know it's no MIT, but but is it still worth something on a resume? More than, say, Shitty State College?

[Anonymous No.6771764]

>>6771760
Depends on your major. If STEM then latch on to a research internship ASAP. It will look pretty great once you graduate

[Anonymous No.6771772]

>>6771622
Ranking are stupid. Let's say you trained to run a 4 minute mile at a certain track field facility. Someone out there trains at a track field too. Both of you get you the 4 minute mile yet he's somehow better than you because he's track field is crowned a higher ranking. The analogy is that the track field are colleges and people have a delusion that a decent college is somehow inferior to the best college in the world.

[Anonymous No.6771801]

>>6771772
But courses at different colleges aren't identical. Higher ranked schools often have better teachers and more resources for students.
Probably more important is the fact that (almost) any ranking of colleges based on student outcomes will depend heavily on incoming student intelligence, so having a degree from highly ranked college (i.e. a highly selective college) serves as a signal that you were smart enough to get in.

[Anonymous No.6771806]

>>6771801
Plus, you may not care about rankings, but grad schools or employers definitely will

[Anonymous No.6771811]

>>6771801
If you can run the 4 minute mile, who cares what your background is? Or if you pasts the test proving your competency at the knowledge.

[Anonymous No.6771815]

>>6771811

Because being able to prove that you can run a 4 minute mile is more useful than doing so secretly.

[Anonymous No.6771818]

>>6771806
They care about how well you did and your accomplishments. Would a C average Harvard student have better chances then a UCLA summa cum laude graduate?

[Anonymous No.6771822]

>>6771818
No, but I bet if they're equally qualified, the hahvahd man is getting the job

[Anonymous No.6771841]

>>6771815
There's variation in quality among those with the basic qualifications.
To extend the running analogy, the fact that the person graduated from Harvard makes it more likely that they may be able to run a 3 minute mile - and it's illegal to directly test whether they can.
Additionally, having many graduates from a well known school of high prestige may help a company be perceived as more prestigious.

[Anonymous No.6771856]

For my PhD I picked the prof with the highest h-index in my field. But the school is only ranked at around 150.

[Anonymous No.6771911]

>>6771622

>using a britbongistan ranking

Disgusting. Nobody gives a shit about the islamic college of London or the ummah college of london in the real world.

[Anonymous No.6771921]

Did my undergrad at a Top-20 in the US, now doing grad school in a STEM field at a "Public Ivy". No one gives a shit about the prestige of your undergrad in research. What matters is in undergrad is your major and research experience. Your PI and publication record matter in grad school.

[Anonymous No.6771923]

Cambridge Mathematics student here.

[Anonymous No.6771941]

>>6771622
ICL? What's the formula for these rankings?

[Anonymous No.6771943]

... because my poor family.
mfw I beat a CalTech grad for a nice research job.

[Anonymous No.6771947]

>>6771622
>10% for international students and faculty
That's the only reason why ICL and UCL are that high.

[Anonymous No.6772758]

>>6771911
>getting this buttmad

[Anonymous No.6772765]

cuz its expensive and you rich ass faggots pay lots of money just to go somewhere where a bunch of really smart people went and after in life got nobel prizes and stuff.self study is much more valuable than stupid top 10 uni.... go get a degree in management or something shitty like that rich ass idiot

[Anonymous No.6772767]

>>6771632
its measured by success of its students

[Anonymous No.6772788]

>>6771622
At the time I went to college I suppose I wished I went to a better one, but after experiencing a few universities, I have to say that these rankings are mostly bullshit. At least as far as undergraduate education is concerned.

First of all, these are all research universities, and this defines much of what goes on there. I.e. research is what brings in the money, NOT teaching. So teaching falls by the wayside. A typical undergraduate experience in any American research university is huge lecture halls for most of the first and second year and grad student TAs explaining shit to you. Having been one of those TAs, I can say that there absolutely no certification (while k-12 teachers must be certified) or training, apart maybe from "don't fuck your students".

In this sense MIT and CalTech might be exceptions, because they are primarily grad schools and have like 1000 undergrads each, or something, so the instructor to student ratio is pretty good.

The higher ranked universities can attract better professors, but better is probably in the sense that they are better researchers. (I.e. a better player in the grant and publication game). Also, they attract a lot of ego cases, who think that you should be grateful just to smell their farts.

Having said that, part of your success in life is due to who you know, not just what, and these schools could be a good place to make some work connections.

From my experience, of the Universities listed:
MIT and CalTech are legit. I can't speak to other American unis on the list, but these are egalitarian in their admission and the undergrads there are fucking smart and studious.

Cambridge and Oxford are as old boy's club as it gets. There is a merit to the admission process, especially at graduate level, but for undergrads of Oxbridge it's largely a silver spoon situation. These places shit money, though.