2022 Best Global Universities by City

[homebucket]

Surprised to see Columbia ranked 2nd. Out here at least it doesn’t seem to have the same cachet as Stanford or Cal, or even UCLA for that matter.

[subterranean]

Originally Posted by Shawn

Degree specifics matter a lot more in certain fields / industries. And while you may have never been directly asked to provide details, I'm willing to bet those details were checked without your knowledge. Especially for roles above a certain level. Director-level and up hires at companies I work for have rigorous background checks done by a third party who specialize in doing just that. This includes degree details verification.

More broadly speaking, don't discount the alumni network effect, which is real at all position levels, not just entry roles / getting a foot in the door. I've made hiring choices based on schools, both for entry positions and for account directors. In my case, I used schools as a tie-breaker for otherwise more or less identical candidates.

And I definitely gave preference to the school I graduated from in these cases.

I don't doubt any of that in some instances, or that an upper echelon Ivy education, in certain fields, has a lot of sway. Particularly for higher-up positions, or in certain STEM fields that require licensure, or whatever, in the private sector. But that is just not the case in the public sector, with a public or private school education, no matter how good. It's super funny because I keep seeing my classmates who went into the private sector with director level jobs, but those in the public sector have lesser titles but make way better money and much better benefits.

Public sector jobs are all about people you've worked WITH, or grinding from the very bottom-up. People just don't turn over the same way they do in the private sector. Some--many--hang onto jobs for life. There's heavy union activity. They also help and protect their own. It's like a family. I have been on enough NeoGov Subject Matter Expert review panels to understand how it works. It's what you know, but more importantly, it's who you have worked with.

I am 2500 miles away from my alma mater and not a soul in my 250+ person department went to my school (U. of Michigan), and the vast majority of people have such a terrible idea of geography and school rank that it's often the case where people say "you went to Minnesota....err...Wisconsin....?, right?" Michigan is the Berkeley of the Midwest. No one gives a fuck. I could have just as soon gone to Eastern Michigan right up the road for a fraction of the cost, and I should have.

If I would've applied for a planning job in Oregon straight out of college from Michigan, I would never have gotten hired unless it was WELL below my qualifications, and even that would've been a stretch. For my first job out of college, I was told from HR that over 200 people applied for my job in the public sector in Michigan. They only posted the job because they were required to by law. I interned there for 2 years and of course they were going to give the job to me. That is the way 95% of public sector hiring works.

Most senior planner jobs you see posted....if you think there aren't 5 or 6 associate planners in the department waiting to step into that role, you're sadly mistaken. For every associate planner, there are several assistant planners waiting in the wings. A degree from Harvard isn't going to get you anything but an interview when your cube mate has been making minimum wage and doing the grunt work for years.

[pico44]

Originally Posted by Boerumer

I had to chuckle when I saw Princeton and Yale put in the NYC column, I can't think of anyone who would consider those two to be "New York" institutions. Princeton is a small college town on the periphery of the metro area, and Yale is in New Haven, which is nearly as far from NYC as Philadelphia (yes, I know it's in the csa).

So as flattering as it may be and despite all the junior investment bankers they feed into the city, those two should be under their own municipalities imho.

Yeah this is just wrong. Sorry bud.

[craigs]

Originally Posted by dimondpark

That effectively and henceforth has shut out all public schools from the top 20.

UCLA clocks in at #20 among National Universities in the US version of the 2022 USNWR rankings. Berkeley is #22.

[CaliNative]

I would love to see a global ranking of universities in various fields. For example, a ranking of best undergrad/graduate schools in geology, mathematics, physics, biology, chemistry, medicine, astronomy, architecture, law, engineering, philosophy etc. Do such rankings exist? Also, Nobel recipients. Which schools have the most? Student SAT scores--which schools have the highest? Where the smartest kids goes matters in terms of rank.

If such a list exists, pretty sure that Cal.Tech would be in the top 5 (possibly #1) in some of the scientific fields. For such a small school, Caltech kicks a**. Probably among the top in student SAT/GRE scores as well. "Big Bang Theory" wasn't set at CalTech/JPL for nothing. Cal.Tech also does the best pranks. The one back in the 1961 where they got the U. Wash team in the Rose Bowl to spell out "Caltech" in the card section was classic. Maybe it is still available on youtube.

Einstein probably would have remained at Caltech until Princeton secretly lured him away in the middle of the night. If he had of stayed, maybe he wouId have figured out his unified field theory equation. Einstein basically twiddled his thumbs at Princeton/Advanced Study Institute. No major publications. Maybe he was too old, and way past his prime, and a non believer in Quantum Theory ("God does not play dice with the universe" etc.), but I think he would have come up with more good insights at Caltech. In the old days, Princeton was a snobby party school for the elite. F. Scott Fitzgerald said as much. Dartmouth too. I just bet Mr. E late at night wished he had stayed at CalTech.

I fully agree with all the comments on Rice U., which used to be called Rice Institute. Still the best U. In Texas imho. William Sidis, perhaps the smartest person ever, taught math there briefly before 1920. Wasn't much of a prof. He was younger than many of the students, and was teased by some of them about girls. Just stayed one year.

As far as the Oxford vs. Cambridge debate goes, in the sciences & math at least, I would say Cam takes the prize. #1 in Europe. Newton, Keynes, Hardy, Ramanajan, Russell, Whitehead, Rutherford, Watson & Crick etc etc. No contest. Maybe Ox rules humanities, but Cam takes math+science.

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by Shawn

Degree specifics matter a lot more in certain fields / industries. And while you may have never been directly asked to provide details, I'm willing to bet those details were checked without your knowledge. Especially for roles above a certain level. Director-level and up hires at companies I work for have rigorous background checks done by a third party who specialize in doing just that. This includes degree details verification.

More broadly speaking, don't discount the alumni network effect, which is real at all position levels, not just entry roles / getting a foot in the door. I've made hiring choices based on schools, both for entry positions and for account directors. In my case, I used schools as a tie-breaker for otherwise more or less identical candidates.

And I definitely gave preference to the school I graduated from in these cases.

Some of the worst hires I've ever witnessed happened because someone on the hiring side got hung up on an Ivy League degree.

For me, the school usually ranks low, but I hire for skills instead of pedigree. The school would only be a tie-breaker for me if the candidate went to a school I attended, lol.

[Crawford]

I think it really depends on the position and employer. There are jobs where one's undergraduate/graduate school really matter, and others where it's largely irrelevant.

So much of hiring is a nepotism/favoritism/"culture fit" game. For example, I used to work in finance, and our trading floor was almost entirely composed of former athletes from Ivy League schools. If you played lacrosse at an Ivy, or Ivy equivalent, you already had one foot in the door.

And my former managing director, a Harvard grad of AA descent, hired tons of Harvard grads of AA descent. Even putting aside the issue of underrepresentation on Wall Street, and moral obligations behind paying it forward, this is human nature.

[pj3000]

Originally Posted by homebucket

Surprised to see Columbia ranked 2nd. Out here at least it doesn’t seem to have the same cachet as Stanford or Cal, or even UCLA for that matter.

Yeah exactly... "out here".

That says much more about the level of insularity "out there" than it does about Columbia's global academic excellence and prestige.

There seems to be a bit of skepticism in this thread regarding Columbia's ranking, which I'm rather surprised by. I mean, it's fucking Columbia... one of the 4 top Ivies. Regardless of whether it ranks 2nd or 5th or 10th or whatever... Columbia has very long been among the top universities on the planet.

[Crawford]

Looking at Columbia's undergrad profile, nearly 1/4 of U.S. students are from the West Coast, and CA is the second most common feeder state, after NY. So it doesn't appear that CA is underrepresented at Columbia.

https://undergrad.admissions.columbi...ssprofile/2025

But I suspect that basically all highly selective universities have broad national representation these days.

[SIGSEGV]

Originally Posted by CaliNative

I would love to see a global ranking of universities in various fields. For example, a ranking of best undergrad/graduate schools in geology, mathematics, physics, biology, chemistry, medicine, astronomy, architecture, law, engineering, philosophy etc. Do such rankings exist? Also, Nobel recipients. Which schools have the most? Student SAT scores--which schools have the highest? Where the smartest kids goes matters in terms of rank.

If such a list exists, pretty sure that Cal.Tech would be in the top 5 (possibly #1) in some of the scientific fields. For such a small school, Caltech kicks a**. Probably among the top in student SAT/GRE scores as well. "Big Bang Theory" wasn't set at CalTech/JPL for nothing. Cal.Tech also does the best pranks. The one back in the 1961 where they got the U. Wash team in the Rose Bowl to spell out "Caltech" in the card section was classic. Maybe it is still available on youtube.

Einstein probably would have remained at Caltech until Princeton secretly lured him away in the middle of the night. If he had of stayed, maybe he wouId have figured out his unified field theory equation. Einstein basically twiddled his thumbs at Princeton/Advanced Study Institute. No major publications. Maybe he was too old, and way past his prime, and a non believer in Quantum Theory ("God does not play dice with the universe" etc.), but I think he would have come up with more good insights at Caltech. In the old days, Princeton was a snobby party school for the elite. F. Scott Fitzgerald said as much. Dartmouth too. I just bet Mr. E late at night wished he had stayed at CalTech.

I fully agree with all the comments on Rice U., which used to be called Rice Institute. Still the best U. In Texas imho. William Sidis, perhaps the smartest person ever, taught math there briefly before 1920. Wasn't much of a prof. He was younger than many of the students, and was teased by some of them about girls. Just stayed one year.

As far as the Oxford vs. Cambridge debate goes, in the sciences & math at least, I would say Cam takes the prize. #1 in Europe. Newton, Keynes, Hardy, Ramanajan, Russell, Whitehead, Rutherford, Watson & Crick etc etc. No contest. Maybe Ox rules humanities, but Cam takes math+science.

There's this for physics:
https://www.topuniversities.com/univ...sics-astronomy

I would selfishly say the top two are right but UChicago should be higher :-p. Also Oxford is too high IMO.

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by pj3000

There seems to be a bit of skepticism in this thread regarding Columbia's ranking, which I'm rather surprised by. I mean, it's fucking Columbia... one of the 4 top Ivies. Regardless of whether it ranks 2nd or 5th or 10th or whatever... Columbia has very long been among the top universities on the planet.

Yeah, lol. I think Ivies tend to be overranked on these lists, but Columbia is a cream of the crop status school. You got in there either because you're really smart, or your parents are really rich.

[homebucket]

I'm sure Columbia is worthy of its ranking, although I'm not sure how you could definitively state with any authority that it is better than some other [insert top tier school].

Also, does Columbia have any good sports teams? That could be another factor. Places like Stanford, Cal, UCLA have the brawns to go along with the brains. More well rounded. I think USC, Stanford, UCLA, and Cal round out the top 4 in Olympic medal counts out of all American universities.

[edale]

Not that this means much of anything, but I know several people who've gone to Columbia, and none of them are people I'd consider very smart. Seems like they factor legacy and family money into admissions VERY highly.

I'm sure this happens at every Ivy or competitive private university, but at least the people I know who went to Princeton, Harvard, Yale...even Duke...are very smart and accomplished. Anecdotal, sure, but it definitely shapes my impression of Columbia as being less prestigious.

[citizensf]

Originally Posted by DCReid

Rankings seem inconsistent to me - some like MIT, and easter IVYs seems properly ranked, but others do not, at least to me….U of Cal universities are good, but is UUC San Francisco really so much better than the U Michigan or Wisconsin?

RE: UCSF (University of California, San Francisco), it’s a bit of an odd-duck in that it has no undergraduate program and is entirely dedicated to health sciences—medical and biological research and graduate programs in medicine (e.g., medical school, dental school etc.).

That said, the school is world-class and typically is in the mix of top medical schools and medical research facilities—it ranked as the #4 US medical school alongside Stanford and Columbia in the latest US News Grad School rankings.

Its well-regarded by people in the field, but sometimes unknown by the general public owing to its lack of undergraduate school (and thereby absent from the “visible” collegiate sports scene) as well as its relatively narrow academic focus. I’ve even met people from the Bay Area and SF proper who will casually mix up USF and UCSF—they’re not the same (the former is a private Jesuit university).

[pj3000]

Originally Posted by homebucket

I'm sure Columbia is worthy of its ranking, although I'm not sure how you could definitively state with any authority that it is better than some other [insert top tier school].

Also, does Columbia have any good sports teams? That could be another factor. Places like Stanford, Cal, UCLA have the brawns to go along with the brains. More well rounded. I think USC, Stanford, UCLA, and Cal round out the top 4 in Olympic medal counts out of all American universities.

I don't think it's generally possible to claim that any top-tier university is definitively "better" than any other. I think these rankings are pretty much bullshit. But it's not, and shouldn't be, surprising to see the same mix among the top year after year, decade after decade.

And I don't think intercollegiate athletics has any place in rankings of universities, when it comes to academics.

We'd be kidding ourselves if we believed that the Stanford football team (or any college football, basketball, etc. team) gained admission based on its academic achievement.

Originally Posted by edale

Not that this means much of anything, but I know several people who've gone to Columbia, and none of them are people I'd consider very smart. Seems like they factor legacy and family money into admissions VERY highly.

I'm sure this happens at every Ivy or competitive private university, but at least the people I know who went to Princeton, Harvard, Yale...even Duke...are very smart and accomplished. Anecdotal, sure, but it definitely shapes my impression of Columbia as being less prestigious.

One could say the same thing about Harvard or Duke or Penn or Cornell or Stanford or...

I know a guy who attended Harvard for undergrad... he was a B student in high school, but he is Mexican and gay and grew up in a single-parent household, so he gained admission. He's no dummy by any means, but you'd never mistake him for brainy Harvard material.

My neighbor attended Princeton. She studied her ass off in high school to get As. Have a conversation with her... very smart is not a description you'd hang on her.

Our high school valedictorian is likely a genius... she didn't get into Harvard or Yale or Columbia for god only knows what reason, but was accepted by and attended Stanford.

But none of these personal anecdotes cause me to believe that Harvard and Princeton and Stanford aren't among the very top universities in the world.

I would say the legacy and family money/influence is MUCH more of a description of Harvard, Yale, Princeton. Those Ivies have long been much more about family legacy and wealth -- the blue blood Ivies.

Columbia began admitting religious and ethnic minorities and Catholics far earlier than the HYP club did so. This led to Columbia being seen as "lesser" than the WASP-y HYP bastion many years ago, and the attitude still persists that Columbia somehow admits people who don't make the cut for the HYP club.

[MolsonExport]

why in Gawd's name should athletics have anything to do with University ratings, unless it is for sports teams?

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by MolsonExport

why in Gawd's name should athletics have anything to do with University ratings, unless it is for sports teams?

uhhhhh, we all know that 'bama is much better school than the university of chicago because FOOTBALL!!!!!!!!!!!!!




source: https://eutawstreetreport.com/wednes...oop-home-wins/

[homebucket]

Athletics obviously don't matter for academic rankings, but it's still a nice thing to have to promote student life and overall branding.

Here's another interesting ranking where they incorporate both academics and athletics with a scoring weight of 50% each.

1. Stanford University
2. Duke University
3. University of Southern California
4. University of Florida
5. University of Notre Dame
6. University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
7. University of Virginia
8. University of Michigan - Ann Arbor
9. Vanderbilt University
10. University of Miami
11. Northwestern University
12. University of Texas - Austin
13. Yale University
14. University of California - Los Angeles
15. Florida State University
16. Harvard University
17. Villanova University
18. Princeton University
19. Rice University
20. The Ohio State Univeristy
21. University of Maryland - College Park
22. Clemson University
23. Dartmouth College
24. University of California - Berkeley
25. Baylor University

https://www.niche.com/colleges/searc...dent-athletes/

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by pj3000

One could say the same thing about Harvard or Duke or Penn or Cornell or Stanford or...

I know a guy who attended Harvard for undergrad... he was a B student in high school, but he is Mexican and gay and grew up in a single-parent household, so he gained admission. He's no dummy by any means, but you'd never mistake him for brainy Harvard material.

My neighbor attended Princeton. She studied her ass off in high school to get As. Have a conversation with her... very smart is not a description you'd hang on her.

Our high school valedictorian is likely a genius... she didn't get into Harvard or Yale or Columbia for god only knows what reason, but was accepted by and attended Stanford.

But none of these personal anecdotes cause me to believe that Harvard and Princeton and Stanford aren't among the very top universities in the world.

I would say the legacy and family money/influence is MUCH more of a description of Harvard, Yale, Princeton. Those Ivies have long been much more about family legacy and wealth -- the blue blood Ivies.

Columbia began admitting religious and ethnic minorities and Catholics far earlier than the HYP club did so. This led to Columbia being seen as "lesser" than the WASP-y HYP bastion many years ago, and the attitude still persists that Columbia somehow admits people who don't make the cut for the HYP club.

I know a few Harvard alums, and most of them aren't geniuses... But one thing a lot of Harvard alums seem to have in common is being very personable. The one exception is a guy I worked with who is a complete dick. He's what I would consider extremely smart, but his social skills are terrible.

I also know quite a few Columbia alums. Generally speaking, they're kind of the reverse of Harvard alums. The ones I know aren't personable in the way that Harvard alums are, but they tend to be "eggheads". They analyze everything to death.

[pj3000]

Originally Posted by homebucket

Athletics obviously don't matter for academic rankings, but it's still a nice thing to have to promote student life and overall branding.

Here's another interesting ranking where they incorporate both academics and athletics with a scoring weight of 50% each.

1. Stanford University
2. Duke University
3. University of Southern California
4. University of Florida
5. University of Notre Dame
6. University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
7. University of Virginia
8. University of Michigan - Ann Arbor
9. Vanderbilt University
10. University of Miami
11. Northwestern University
12. University of Texas - Austin
13. Yale University
14. University of California - Los Angeles
15. Florida State University
16. Harvard University
17. Villanova University
18. Princeton University
19. Rice University
20. The Ohio State Univeristy
21. University of Maryland - College Park
22. Clemson University
23. Dartmouth College
24. University of California - Berkeley
25. Baylor University

https://www.niche.com/colleges/searc...dent-athletes/

Interesting look at it...

So by college conferences:

ACC - Duke, Notre Dame, Virginia, North Carolina, Miami, Florida State, Clemson

Big 10 - Michigan, Northwestern, Ohio State, Maryland

Ivy - Yale, Harvard, Princeton, Dartmouth

PAC-12 - Stanford, USC, UCLA, Cal

Big 12 - Texas, Baylor

SEC - Florida, Vanderbilt

Big East - Villanova

Conference USA - Rice


Also interesting to note that Texas will be joining the SEC.

And, not surprisingly, the ACC-Big 10-Pac 12 alliance is forming... truly being the the alliance of the top academic-athletic universities in the land.

Surprised that Penn State did not make the list for the Big 10... based on the methodology here: national championships and athletic dept reveues.