Life’s Just Swell at the Ivy Plus
By BankersBall on Dec 3, 2007 in Ivy League, Rankings
Times have changed. The Ivy Plus (Ivy League plus Stanford & MIT) have more dough than they know what to do with. So say hello to complimentary hand soap and stables.
College is downright cushy these days. Or at least when it comes to certain institutions that are well endowed, such as Stanford, Yale and Princeton. BusinessWeek reports on what these schools are doing with their dough.
Beyond typical university investments in research facilities and financial aid, the schools are spending in somewhat unusual ways.
Princeton’s new Whitman College dorm, which will house approximately 500 undergrads, cost approximately $136MM to build. Replete with “triple-glazed mahogany casement windows made of leaded glass … [t]he dining hall boasts a 35-foot ceiling gabled in oak and a ’state of the art servery.’”
Stanford’s students have room not just for themselves, but for their horses. For $500/mo, students’ Seabiscuits get to dorm at Red Barn, which recently got a $4MM renovation.
Yalies recently “gave in to student demands” and began installing hand soap in student dorms (estimated cost: $100,000 per year).
The other area that schools are spending against is talent. The Ivy Plus can outbid public schools when it comes to in-demand teachers and professors. More money also means that class sizes get to shrink, as well.
So will Ivies vs other schools result in a winner-take-all outcome when it comes to quality? Two thoughts — depends on how the Ivy Plus grads fare (and how generous they feel afterwards). And secondly, how the endowments continue to perform, which is where you come in. To the extent that these school help their grads rise to positions of power, wealth and dominance, then I see nothing that will derail the Ivy train.
On Dec 3, 2007, mkilz said:
Shouldn’t Michigan, Georgetown, and Berkelely be considered Ivy Plus?
On Dec 3, 2007, j said:
Does that mean Yalies weren’t washing their hands up until now?
On Dec 3, 2007, I Read Good said:
Based on the comment, I am guessing you attended one of those institutions. Your spelling of Berkeley is strong evidence to run against your point.
On Dec 4, 2007, james said:
only harvard, princeton, yale, stanford and mit are elite. the rest of the ivy plus are in the same league as mich, georgetown, cal.
On Dec 7, 2007, really said:
Michigan? Huh?
Add Cal Tech, Columbia, UPenn, and Chicago to the elite list. Yale is fading fast. Duke has a legitimate shot of being considered elite; it just doesn’t have the history of the other schools. Oh yeah, we should consider Gonzaga too. They’re just darling.
On Dec 8, 2007, RPB said:
Chicago blows all those schools out of the water. Comparing Chicago to something like Michigan is like comparing a high school to an elementary school.
On Dec 11, 2007, Chicago does "Blow" said:
I think your assestment is a bit exaggerated. Comparing Chicago to MIchigan is like comaring UNC to Duke. I do not think MIchigan is inferior in this matter but I guess switching with UPenn every year as the best business school in the nation where billonaires feel it worthy enough of 100 million dollar donations does fall in the “elementary” category. Chicago is great but until it can produce generals, presidents, billon dollar CEO’s, Hollywood stars, professional athletes, noble prize winners, ground breaking scientists, than I suggest you be quiet little boy.
On Dec 11, 2007, checkyo'self said:
Regarding the above statement - well said.
To the ivy leaguers - suck it and keep bending over like you’re used to…biatches!
Go Blue
On Dec 12, 2007, james said:
sounds like someone didn’t get into a decent ivy
On Dec 14, 2007, Troy said:
“only harvard, princeton, yale, stanford and mit are elite. the rest of the ivy plus are in the same league as mich, georgetown, cal”
-James
I’ve attended Columbia, Harvard, and Yale, and I have been accepted by all of the schools you listed once if not twice (including MIT), and the idea that MIT is superior to Columbia overall as a university is just wrong.
Columbia is one of the original four ivy-league universities, has a larger endowment, has a more distinguished history, competes well with MIT in the sciences (Columbia’s scientific contributions include atomic energy, lasers, microwaves, and FM radio), outdoes MIT in the totality of non-science fields in which they both play, and has a host of top programs in disciplines that MIT lacks any presence at all (e.g., How’s MIT’s law school? Journalism school? School of social work? Medical school?). In short, it’s hardly a no-brainer that MIT belongs on your elite list and Columbia doesn’t.
I suspect Columbia is not the only university whose alumni you insulted without sufficient basis. Your claim is foolish, and you deserve to be called out for it.
On Dec 17, 2007, anon said:
Columbia on par with MIT?? This can’t be a serious thread.
On Dec 17, 2007, MD said:
I think Columbia is a great school, and congratulations on choosing it over every other school.
Not sure what you studied in college, but I think there is very little competition between MIT and Columbia in terms of attracting students. Hypothetically, if you were to only get into those two schools, it would be almost a no-brainer for anyone interested in pure sciences, engineering, or economics to choose MIT. Vice-versa, most people would choose Columbia for humanities/pre-law. Over the past 30-50 years, Columbia simply does not compare favorably in any technical (math, science, engineering) discipline with MIT.
The schools MIT loses most students to is Harvard, which are more “complete” university with incredible math/sciences but lacks engineering and CalTech/Stanford for sciences/engineering.
P.S. Columbia does not have a larger endowment. Columbia’s endowment as of 2007 is $7.2B while MIT’s is $9.9B (and for comparison, MIT has ~11K students while Columbia has ~25K so that is also an unfavorable comparison).
On Dec 18, 2007, anonymous said:
You are completely missing Troy’s major point: Columbia is a complete university, while MIT is not.
On Dec 18, 2007, Troy said:
“I think Columbia is a great school, and congratulations on choosing it over every other school.”
Not exactly right, since the majority of my degrees are from Harvard and Yale.
Columbia doesn’t need to be better in the sciences, since it beats MIT in the non-sciences. You’re crazy if you think that MIT is better in the overall Social Sciences than Columbia is. You already admitted that Columbia is better in the Humanities. And what about all the areas where MIT doesn’t even compete? Bottom line: MIT does not belong on a short-list with Harvard, Yale, and Stanford, which are comprehensive, elite universities.
On Dec 27, 2007, Anonymous said:
Dec 7.: Columbia and UPENN actually are in the Ivy League. Seriously, come on. And “Yale is fading fast?” of yeah, only 3 presidential front runners in ‘04, and the lowest acceptance rates of any college recently. And Stamford and MIT should definitely be included, but that is it.
On Dec 30, 2007, Anonymous said:
Dec. 7, Dec. 27: I agree, Columbia and UPenn are definitely among the nation’s elite universities. The view that Yale is fading fast is absurd. A Yalie has been on a major party’s ticket presidential ticket in every election since 1968. No other university comes close to that run. Yale has the reputation as the most blue blooded and elite of America’s universities, just as Harvard has the reputation as the most intellectual. Of course both are exclusive and intellectual. I am just making subtle distinctions between their reputations.
On Dec 30, 2007, Ph.D. said:
Dec. 7, Dec. 27: I agree, Columbia and UPenn definitely belong among America’s elite universities. The view that Yale is fading fast is absurd. A Yalie has been on a major party’s presidential ticket in every election since 1968. No other university comes close to that consistent placement among the elite in recent history. Yale has the reputation as the nation’s most blue blooded and elite university, while Harvard has the reputation as the most intellectual. Of course, both are elite and intellectual. I am just pointing out the subtle distinctions in their general reputations.
On Dec 31, 2007, anon said:
1. troy doesn’t know the definition of a university.
2. princeton doesn’t have graduate programs in most fields. by his amateur logic, princeton is among the worst institutions in the country.
On Dec 31, 2007, anonymous said:
The only real objective benchmark is cross-admit stats.
80% of MIT and Columbia admits will choose MIT.
In fact, Columbia loses cross-admits to all the elite schools, and is only able to truly dominate one Ivy (cornell).
On a side note, Troy makes a major mistake by assuming elite schools are built by breadth, rather than depth. MIT is the very best(or close to it) in a number of areas, yet I can’t think of a single field that Columbia would be considered the best. So just having a presence in an area hardly qualifies, or disqualifies, one for elite status (if this was the case, huge state schools that teach every ridiculous major and have hundreds of departments would be the new Harvards and would be gaining in the race to elite status).
http://www.nytimes.com/imagepages/2006/09/17/weekinreview/20060917_LEONHARDT_CHART.html
On Jan 1, 2008, Anonymous said:
Took a course at MIT this past semester (and shopped but subsequently dropped a second course) and was very underwhelmed by both - in terms of the professors, the lecture content, and the students’ comments in class. That MIT class didn’t nearly measure up to even my worst class experience at Harvard. In fact, in the MIT class, the students who most regularly commented and had provoking thoughts were the Harvard students who were cross-registered there.
Top five: Harvard Princeton Yale Stanford MIT? Forget it.
On Jan 1, 2008, gg said:
Mit not a comprehensive university?? Are you on crack? Just because mit doesn’t have a major in japanese peddagogy like columbia does not make mit incomplete or columbia superior. You embarrass yourself by denigrating an instituion that every educated person knows to be elite.
On Jan 1, 2008, ug said:
Mit not a comprehensive university?? Are you on crack? Just because mit doesn’t have a major in japanese peddagogy, like columbia, does not make mit incomplete or columbia superior. You embarrass yourself by denigrating an instituion that every educated person knows to be elite.
On Jan 2, 2008, Anon said:
I took a class at harvard and the students were so overrated that it was comical.
On Jan 2, 2008, Anonymous said:
Columbia is now a very different school (3rd most selective school in the nation) and does not lose more cross-admits than it gains from Yale, UPenn, Dartmouth and Brown. Columbia is in NYC. Everyone wants to go to school in NYC. Who wants to spend 4 years in New Haven, Phillie, Rhode Island or New Hampshire? This is why Columbia is now part of the HYP trinity having replaced Yale.
On Jan 2, 2008, Justin said:
Duke is definitely an Ivy Plus school. It is a more prestigious school than many ivy league institutions including Brown and Cornell. It is even ranked one of the top 15 schools in the world.
On Jan 3, 2008, 2nd opinion said:
I went to college at MIT and grad school at Harvard and Columbia.
MIT students would often have much to say, but keep quiet out of meekness and fear of scrutiny (what else do you expect when you have tons of asian females). Harvard students were the opposite — just love to hear themselves speak, even if they have nothing to say.
Columbia students, surprisingly, are worse. They will always speak up, even if it’s just to spew verbal diarrhea.
On Jan 3, 2008, Anonymous said:
1. Everyone knows Columbia is a ‘default’ / ’safety’ ivy league school
2. I went high school in NY … students who hoped to go to schools like NYU and BU would apply to Columbia (in hopes of getting in) … they would never in the right mind apply to any other ivy league school, MIT, or stanford… cause they know they have no shot … but Columbia admits some of those dumbasses
3. To say Columbia is a better school than MIT is ludicrous.
On Jan 3, 2008, Ned said:
how interesting. a college flame war. i’ve never ever seen one of those on a website for junior bankers (aka - leveragedsellout.com)
On Jan 3, 2008, RPB said:
MIT is an excellent school for any quantitative based degree. Yet, since it lacks a medical school and a law school it is not a complete university.
Furthermore, the University of Michigan accepts those who score 900 on their SAT. Comparing that state school to the University of Chicago is a cruel farce. One quantifiable measure of a school’s academic prowess is its recognition by the Nobel Foundation. In this respect, the University of Chicago trounces Michigan like Appalachia State. The U of C has received more Nobel Prizes for its contribution to economics than Michigan has for contributing to all other fields combined. Nearly every modern theory in economics, finacial economics, or finance was authored or coauthored by a University of Chicago affiliate. Of near paramount value is fact that the University of Chicago’s GSB ranks far ahead of Michigan’s Ross School in any publication’s survey.
Pro Athletes? Movie Stars? What does that have to do with the quality of a school? And in terms of donations, even a USD125m donation wouldn’t buy the naming rights to the GSB.
On Jan 3, 2008, Chicago does "Blow" said:
Who are you, Jayson Blair from the New York Times? A little citation would be nice. 900 on your SAT’s? GSB ranks higher than Ross? More nobel prices combined? Not saying its not true, but damn those are some wild stats. As for movie stars and pro athletes, you must be a republican because way to take two examples out of ten to pick apart. The point was, its a way more well rounded school that attracts all sorts of professions. Not many nine year olds go, “man I can’t wait to let out my inner nerd and go to U of Chicago!!”
Maybe if they spent all their money on a few areas, then yes, they could be as lame as U of Chicago.
As for the Appalachian state reference, I’m sorry who beat Florida on New Years? I was so caught up on how well U of Chicago did in their fencing tourney. It was jolly good time, all my fellow highbrows came over and we used words like quantitative, farce, quantifiable, and prowness while drinking some chilled Zima.
I would have commented earlier, but your monolithic vernacular blew my “state education” out of the water.
On Jan 4, 2008, anon anon said:
RPB-
you’re as deluded as tony. princeton doesn’t have a law school, business school, or medical school. i guess you’re one of the few morons who turned down princeton for chicago?
On Jun 19, 2008, Andrew said:
Fact: you need to be 1500+/2250+ to get into an Ivy without a hook. Fact: that means you’re quick. Fact: you need to be quick in
i-banking. Thus: hiring an Ivy is a good bet.
P.S. Fact: People get jealous.