Regarding the US, I can only offer how I came by my own priors in family that in traditional subcontinental style is always on the lookout for prestegious schools. I learned at my father's knee that US postgrad schools were the best in the world, but that undergrad education was soft and "mickey mouse".
I'd need data rather than annecdotes to say if this is really the international preception of US education, rather than just my family's the lore. But so much that I see out of America confirms that lore, that I guess other people have come to the same conclusion.
A huge portion of the middle class in the UK went to Oxford or Cambridge. Something like 25% of Etonians get into Oxford or Cambridge. For the Westminster school that number is something like 45%.
Harvard does not have that same grip on the corresponding class stratum in the US, but Harvard also has far fewer undergraduates than Oxford or Cambridge and the US is a much larger country.
Of course these are the future power players whether we like it or not. "Old Money" feels inadequate.
Sure, there's plenty of people who will try to redefine it to mean people with substantial investment/property income who send their kids to private schools and own second homes abroad... in general to justify claiming that cuts to capital gains and inheritance tax are 'to help the middle class'. But that stockbroker-belt lifestyle is more specific to what you'd call the 'upper middle class'. And even stockbrokers aren't sending their kids to Eton...
>>> A huge portion of the middle class in the UK went to Oxford or Cambridge.
Confusing, I know.
[1]: http://www.indexmundi.com/graphs/population-pyramids/united-...
Obviously that's only one measure of prestige.
Of course however these universities are very popular internationally.
Low hanging fruit would be diehard applicants to MIT, Caltech, or the Service Academies
And an institution with thousands of dead people behind it is obviously going to be more prestigious than one with mere hundreds. Huge, weighty anchors biting into the benthic depths of our past - that's how you get to be a Prestigious Institution of global Renown.
Prestige is determined by money and power. Oxford doesn't really measure up to harvard or yale in this regard.
https://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2016/05/05/harvard-mit-ran...
The most important and wealthiest universities in the most important country is going to be more prestigious.
It's why chinese parents choose american universities for their children.
http://www.bbc.com/news/business-32969291
More importantly, it's why top chinese leaders send their children to american universities.
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/foreigners/2...
Oh. I see. The joke went completely over my head.
http://www.hepi.ac.uk/2017/08/05/uk-just-number-1-educating-...
people from the ivy league run the US, so it's prestigious in the US. people from oxford and cambridge run the UK, so it's prestigious in the commonwealth. it's really not any more complicated than that.
It's also been my experience that most chinese/asians prefer harvard/yale/ivy league and of course our top engineering schools ( MIT/Cal Tech/etc ). Stanford and Carnegie Mellon also seem to be very desired by chinese/asian students as well due to prominence of technology.
Are you european? If so what's the reputation of harvard/yale in europe vis a vis oxford/cambridge and other european colleges?