The entire Brown campus would probably fit onto the campus of Harvard Business School.
This contrast of scale and resources holds true for Yale, Princeton, and Columbia, not to mention some of the non-Ivy powerhouses like Berkeley, MIT, Stanford, etc. In size, Brown is much closer to Dartmouth.
As Garris pointed out, Brown lacks a business and a law school and its medical school is not all that old. This means that there has not been the massive inflow of money from legions of grateful and very wealthy alums that these schools have enjoyed for many years. Also Brown's reputation did not really take off on a national and international scale until the 80s.
Brown's endowment is certainly growing but the other places are not exactly standing still. This discrepancy puts the Brown administration in a kind of dilemma: does Brown try to compete with the major research places like Harvard and Yale albeit by standing out in a few key areas (this is Simmons' strategy) or should it essentially be a liberal arts college with a modest array of grad level programs? This was the idea behind the so-called "University-College" that pretty much characterized the institution going back to the 70s.
I don't know how realistic Brown's current agenda is to hold its own next to the heavyweights, but I admire it for trying.
Edited by gregw, 02 January 2006 - 02:14 PM.














