|By Barrons (Barrons) on Thursday, August 19, 2004 - 01:04 pm: Edit|
Harvard,Pton,Yale,Penn,Duke,MIT,Stanford,Caltech,Columbia,Dartmouth,NU,WUSTL,Brown,Cornell,JHU,Chicago,Rice,ND,Vandy,Emory,Berkeley,Mich,Uva,??,UCLA,WM, USC,Wisconsin,NYU,Brandeis. That's the top 32 or so with a couple holes to fill.
|By Dstark (Dstark) on Thursday, August 19, 2004 - 01:06 pm: Edit|
Out on newsstands yet?
Any major changes?
|By Barrons (Barrons) on Thursday, August 19, 2004 - 01:14 pm: Edit|
Some places have it out early. I don't have an old list to compare. The post is in order but some are ties.
|By Newnudad (Newnudad) on Thursday, August 19, 2004 - 01:27 pm: Edit|
Thanks for doing the Research and passing it on!
|By Mini (Mini) on Thursday, August 19, 2004 - 01:34 pm: Edit|
So what else is new?
|By Palomino (Palomino) on Thursday, August 19, 2004 - 01:42 pm: Edit|
LACs--1. Williams, 2. Amherst/Swat 4. Wellesley 5. Carleton/Pomona 7. Bowdoin/Davidson 9. Haverford/Wesleyan 11. Middlebury
|By Kriskrass (Kriskrass) on Thursday, August 19, 2004 - 01:58 pm: Edit|
I am not going out tonight with my friends instead im hunkered down awaiting these results. I swear if my school goes down in ranking I will be transfering. I need the US NEWS as vindication for my four years in h.s of never leaving my home or the library at lunch. Sure I didnt go to prom/homecomming and nobody showed up to any of my birthdays, but if they take away my high US NEWS ranking I will die.
|By Barrons (Barrons) on Thursday, August 19, 2004 - 01:59 pm: Edit|
Good one K. Unfortunately some would be serious.
|By Candi1657 (Candi1657) on Thursday, August 19, 2004 - 02:00 pm: Edit|
Uhhhhh...I can't say that I'm not interested...but I can't say I look forward to the upcoming fierce debate about which schools merited their leaps, which didn't, etc.
|By Slipper2002 (Slipper2002) on Thursday, August 19, 2004 - 02:21 pm: Edit|
My guesses based on the alphabetic listings. First three a little vague alphabetically(tied at 1 or 1,2,3), as is 8-13.
|By Johnkerry (Johnkerry) on Thursday, August 19, 2004 - 02:23 pm: Edit|
I don't even understand the original post here. The author stated that the above schools are the top 32, but didn't even list 20 schools... Does anyone have an accurate listing of the new rankings?
|By Barrons (Barrons) on Thursday, August 19, 2004 - 02:29 pm: Edit|
Use your cursor,
|By Kk19131 (Kk19131) on Thursday, August 19, 2004 - 02:39 pm: Edit|
Yay, my school did nothing! woot!
|By Ainsley727 (Ainsley727) on Thursday, August 19, 2004 - 03:09 pm: Edit|
LAC acceptance rates-
Lane College (TN) 17%
Lane College?!? I have never heard of that school. Why is the acceptance rate so low??
|By Mini (Mini) on Thursday, August 19, 2004 - 03:17 pm: Edit|
All of the above are surpassed in selectivity by the Middlesex Community College nursing program (which is tied with Harvard and Princeton at 10%).
Folks know quality when they see it.
|By Newnudad (Newnudad) on Thursday, August 19, 2004 - 04:15 pm: Edit|
Is that Middlesex CC in Beverly, MA?
|By Mini (Mini) on Thursday, August 19, 2004 - 04:20 pm: Edit|
Bedford, MA. Ranks up there with Deep Springs.
|By Iceangeljt (Iceangeljt) on Thursday, August 19, 2004 - 04:24 pm: Edit|
anyone wanna share their username and password?? they stopped listing right above my dream school - duke! :-(
Per your terms of service, e-mail addresses and screen names may not be posted on College Confidential. Please refer readers to your Profile, that's what it's there for. Repeat violators may be banned. --Moderator Obiwan
|By Sg06 (Sg06) on Thursday, August 19, 2004 - 04:36 pm: Edit|
Iceangeljt, I sent you an email.
|By Iceangeljt (Iceangeljt) on Thursday, August 19, 2004 - 04:38 pm: Edit|
thanks sg06!! i've been looking for another college board for a while now
anyone with a password?
|By Collegeparent (Collegeparent) on Thursday, August 19, 2004 - 04:53 pm: Edit|
Under the "For What It's Worth" Category, the new USN&WR rankings are relatively unchanged. For the vast majority schools in the Top 50 universities and LACs, the rankings were either unchanged or went up or down one or two points so as not to make much of a difference -- and ultimately not make them worthy of comment.
For several schools, though, the change was less negligible. A few went up three points such as BC, Syracuse and NYU -- while some others went down three points such as Union, Skidmore, Whitman, Cal Tech and UCSD.
However, when the change is four or more points difference over the previous year, it's worth noticing. Four schools in the Top 50 went down four points (Bryn Mawr, Middlebury, Colorado College and Georgia Tech), one slipped five places (Bard), and one six places (Yeshiva).
There were four schools that went up noticeably: Brown and Furman by four, U Texas at Austin by seven, and Scripps by eight.
Again, for what it's worth.
|By Calidan (Calidan) on Thursday, August 19, 2004 - 04:57 pm: Edit|
Anyone wanna send me an email for username+password, too? My email is email@example.com
|By Yodisistim (Yodisistim) on Thursday, August 19, 2004 - 04:58 pm: Edit|
Yes..well Chapel Hill is stiil da SAME...and my other non-chosen NYU has moven up in the ranks...good.
As long @ UNC places among the top 5 publc schools in the country Im cool.
|By Slipper2002 (Slipper2002) on Thursday, August 19, 2004 - 09:57 pm: Edit|
glad to see brown back in the top 15 where it belongs...
|By Fonzie (Fonzie) on Thursday, August 19, 2004 - 10:50 pm: Edit|
Univ of Michigan moved to #22... that's up 3, although it is due to some complex ties. Case Western also moved up a few.
|By Jerome12345 (Jerome12345) on Thursday, August 19, 2004 - 11:01 pm: Edit|
password? me too...please???
|By Jerome12345 (Jerome12345) on Thursday, August 19, 2004 - 11:03 pm: Edit|
E-mail link deleted. Please refer readers to your Profile. Repeat violators may be banned. --Admin
|By Jerome12345 (Jerome12345) on Thursday, August 19, 2004 - 11:03 pm: Edit|
|By Synapse (Synapse) on Thursday, August 19, 2004 - 11:04 pm: Edit|
Im being nice.. check my profile...
|By Jerome12345 (Jerome12345) on Thursday, August 19, 2004 - 11:05 pm: Edit|
thank you veeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeery much
|By Synapse (Synapse) on Thursday, August 19, 2004 - 11:07 pm: Edit|
|By Jerome12345 (Jerome12345) on Thursday, August 19, 2004 - 11:15 pm: Edit|
just went on a web page saving and printing spree
|By Flopsy (Flopsy) on Thursday, August 19, 2004 - 11:33 pm: Edit|
Thanks, Synapse. I appreciate the extra access, even though all I really wanted was the main rankings.
|By Bern700 (Bern700) on Thursday, August 19, 2004 - 11:39 pm: Edit|
you are awesome, I love you!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
|By Lahhdyydum (Lahhdyydum) on Friday, August 20, 2004 - 12:25 am: Edit|
me too plz?
|By Ainsley727 (Ainsley727) on Friday, August 20, 2004 - 01:16 am: Edit|
Thanks much, Synapse!
|By Synapse (Synapse) on Friday, August 20, 2004 - 01:44 am: Edit|
If someone could like.. hook me up on a blind date in return that would be awesome *Winky*
|By Raven001 (Raven001) on Friday, August 20, 2004 - 01:51 am: Edit|
Same here please! I'll make it worth your while (not sure how...)
|By Rtkysg (Rtkysg) on Friday, August 20, 2004 - 01:52 am: Edit|
I'd protest for MIT/Caltech position. Penn is above MIT, Duke above Caltech, no way man !!!
The techer get cheated
|By Gih (Gih) on Friday, August 20, 2004 - 05:11 am: Edit|
While I am not one of these people in any way (I didn't apply to either of Penn or Duke, and wouldn't have even thought about going if I had got accepted), there are probably some people out there for whom Caltech and MIT would be worse than Penn and Duke. I am more familiar with Caltech, which is where I attend, and for what I study I wouldn't want to go to any other school ahead of Caltech.
That said, USNews is at least clear on their ranking methodology with a few exceptions, so if you have the premium content edition then you can see exactly why numberically Duke is ahead of Caltech and Penn is ahead of MIT. My guess is that Caltech is really badly hurt by its low graduation rate, but otherwise it has extremely favorable ranking statistics, like high SATs, students have high high school gpas, a low acceptance rate, 3/1 student faculty ratio, and hence small average class sizes. Since Caltech is research university with not many undergraduates, that probably inflates the financial resources rank.
So in a lot of categories Caltech is probably number 1 or at least in the top 5. However it is extremely poor in graduation rate, and also probably has a lower peer assessment than other schools, and who knows about alumni giving rate.
If you are really interested and have all the data you can probably figure out what the rankings would have been with the graduation rate ignored.
I assume that MIT has a higher graduation rate than Caltech, and a higher peer assessment, though it is otherwise a similar institution statistically, although slightly worse in things like SAT score. But I actually would expect it to be ranked higher than Penn, but I actually don't get to see the data.
|By Alexandre (Alexandre) on Friday, August 20, 2004 - 05:32 am: Edit|
Penn, Duke, Dartmouth, Brown and Washington U. are ranked about 5 or 6 spots above their actual worth. On the other hand, Michigan and Cal are ranked about 12 or 13 spots below their actual worth. The rest is about right, although I think Chicago, Cornell and Johns Hopkins are also a little underrated..
|By Muppetcoat (Muppetcoat) on Friday, August 20, 2004 - 08:29 am: Edit|
Do you *go* to Penn, Duke, Dartmouth, Brown and Washington U, Michigan, Cal, Chicago, Cornell and Johns Hopkins?
Just wondering. I'm amazed that you know so much about each of these schools and have backed up your assertions with logical reasoning.
|By Alexandre (Alexandre) on Friday, August 20, 2004 - 08:38 am: Edit|
No, I did attend Michigan and Cornell, but that is about all. I am merely looking at dozens of independent rankings and at overall academic excellence in the various departments accross the board. I have been for 12 years. It is a speciality of mine. On average, it is generally acknowledged that Cal, Cornell, Johns Hopkins and Chicago are top 10 schools. It is also generally acknowledged that Penn and Duke are not top 5 schools. You may know people who rate Duke and Penn on par with Stanford and MIT, but it is not common. Penn and Duke are usually held in the same esteem as Chicago and Cornell...and all of those schools are usually ranked below MIT and Stanford, somewhere between #8 and #14.
People often misunderstand me. I am not talking about quality of education. I am talking about the ranking of a university. Those are two separate issues. One can get as good an education at USNWR's # 30 university as she/he can at its #9 university. The quality of education a person receives is purely based on that person's personal style and drive. But ranking universities is not that difficult. If a schools is ranked among the top 10 in every field imaginable both at the undergraduate and graduate levels (like Cal or Cornell), then it stands to reason that such a school as a university would be ranked ahead of a university that is hardly ranked in any field of study.
|By Iceangeljt (Iceangeljt) on Friday, August 20, 2004 - 09:52 am: Edit|
sorry moderator!! i didn't know we weren't allowed to put email links...
anyway, i still am unable to get a working username / password. anyone willing to share? email in profile :-)
|By Slipper2002 (Slipper2002) on Friday, August 20, 2004 - 10:06 am: Edit|
Okay Alexandre, that is bs.
I dont know ANYONE except you who would go to Michigan over Penn, Duke, Dartmouth, Brown without some sort of financial or family reason... I think its great that you keep bringing up michigan in these discussions, so some people might believe it and michigan might slowly increase in stature, but seriously, the rankings are pretty legit- this from an ivy alum who thinks his school is underranked at least a couple spots. Michigan has amazing grad schools and is an amazing GRADUATE institutions, but this is a ranking of undergraduate colleges!!
Undergrad wise for example I would say brown is top 10, but university wise its top 25 at best. I think you confuse the two, and I don't think I am the only one who feels this way.
|By Slipper2002 (Slipper2002) on Friday, August 20, 2004 - 10:28 am: Edit|
Rankings of largely grad departments does not make a school.
|By Slipper2002 (Slipper2002) on Friday, August 20, 2004 - 10:42 am: Edit|
I take that back. If I were going into business, had no intention of getting an MBA, I might choose Michigan over some of those schools. Or maybe if I were an engineer or wanted to pursue some other pre-professional undergrad degree, Michigan might be an ok option.
But for a liberal arts degree in almost anything else I would take any of those Ivies in a second. An art history major from Duke or Dartmouth is going to have an alot easier time finding an i-banking or consulting job than the same person from Michigan.
|By Mysticwistful (Mysticwistful) on Friday, August 20, 2004 - 10:52 am: Edit|
Synapse, how come the email/pass doesn't work?
|By Slipper2002 (Slipper2002) on Friday, August 20, 2004 - 10:52 am: Edit|
Alexandre, thes best thing about a liberal arts education is that you can go to Duke/ Dartmouth/ Penn/ Brown/ etc, major in film and art history or econ, bio, whatever, and then go to Harvard medical, business, or law school as long as you manage to make the grades you need. It makes the possibilities limitless.
|By Barrons (Barrons) on Friday, August 20, 2004 - 11:09 am: Edit|
You also can go to just about any decent school and major in whatever and go to those grad schools if you have good grades and test scores. If you go to Duke and get a 600 on the GMAT or a 160 on the LSAT you ain't going to Harvard.
|By Prophecy (Prophecy) on Friday, August 20, 2004 - 11:12 am: Edit|
yeah can someone provide a working username and password it would be greatly appreciated by many of us here on the board. Thanks
|By Axfeaver (Axfeaver) on Friday, August 20, 2004 - 11:13 am: Edit|
Yeah, the e-mail/password thing doesn't seem to work for me either, I think someone is still logged on and that is why we can't see it
|By Lahhdyydum (Lahhdyydum) on Friday, August 20, 2004 - 11:19 am: Edit|
could someone provide me with a user/name password? thanks! check profile!
|By Cornellhopeful (Cornellhopeful) on Friday, August 20, 2004 - 11:32 am: Edit|
sigh, Georgetown, Cornell, and Dartmouth are underrated. ESPECIALLY Georgetown, seeing as how it has the 3rd highest graduation rate(above Yale, Harvard, Duke, Penn, Cornell, Brown, etc.), and it's still one of the most selective universities.
|By Mini (Mini) on Friday, August 20, 2004 - 11:47 am: Edit|
Haven't you all missed the BIG story?
|By Kk19131 (Kk19131) on Friday, August 20, 2004 - 11:47 am: Edit|
Iím sure my bosses will kill me for saying this but: I too think Penn is up a few point too high. It definitely should be below MIT, and somewhere around Dartmouth, Columbia, and Northwestern.
|By Slipper2002 (Slipper2002) on Friday, August 20, 2004 - 11:49 am: Edit|
True true Barrons
Yeah, I never understood why G-town is so low. I'd say:
Penn (not by too much)
UNC- Chapel Hill
|By Dstark (Dstark) on Friday, August 20, 2004 - 11:57 am: Edit|
How many i-bank jobs are there created every year that depend on where you went to undergrad?
|By Cloud1234 (Cloud1234) on Friday, August 20, 2004 - 12:01 pm: Edit|
sorry. but i really think the overrated / underrated thing is crap.
Many believe cornell & brown are underrated, and duke & wash u are overrated. The primary difference between the 2 sets of schools is: ivies vs non ivies.
With no doubt, cornell & brown were once top schools; however, their standards seem to stay at the same level (if not declining). On the other hand, duke and wash u are rising stars. If you have been to those 2 campuses, you wouldn't say they are overrated.
|By Mysticwistful (Mysticwistful) on Friday, August 20, 2004 - 12:02 pm: Edit|
Underrated: Stanford, MIT, Caltech
Overrated: UPenn (WTF?!), Duke (way overrated), Washington U (way-overrated), Princeton (slightly overrated)
The real list should be HYPSMC, then the rest. I don't know what the hell happened to UPenn, but it definitely doesn't outrank Stanford, MIT, and Caltech.
|By Slipper2002 (Slipper2002) on Friday, August 20, 2004 - 12:07 pm: Edit|
Yeah, Penn is great, but #4 is kinda crazy.
|By Cornellhopeful (Cornellhopeful) on Friday, August 20, 2004 - 12:13 pm: Edit|
last year it was 5...I don't know, for some reason I can kind of understand it.
|By Ay_Caramba (Ay_Caramba) on Friday, August 20, 2004 - 12:29 pm: Edit|
I agree with Cloud1234. People who think that Duke (and for the most part WUStl. too) are "way overrated" probably are just saying so because they don't know anything about the university and have never been there. Yes, the USNews rankings are based like 25% on reputation, so to speak, but the rest is actually based on numbers. People don't just make this stuff up. I'm not saying that the rankings are necessarily completely valid, but it seems to me that people who say that the "real list" should be always just be HYPSMC at the top no matter what are just listening to the hype and not making their own critical decisions.
|By Treyy685 (Treyy685) on Friday, August 20, 2004 - 01:18 pm: Edit|
--well..you can say that for a lot of schools. everyone makes judgements about schools even if they haven't visisted them. tons of people decide whether or not to apply to schools without ever visiting. i do agree though, that while i think the rankings are baloney, the people making them have their own stantards and base the rankings on that. considering the standards have been the same for the past few years, the rankings this year perhaps might not be that off. penn could be moving up--it's been switching between 4 and 5 the past few years anyway. it would be extremely doubtful if penn was ranked like 10th and then moved up to 4th this year. i do think it would be better of leaving penn, mit, caltech, and stanford all tied at 4th :-D --because they all have strengths and "weaknesses."
|By Jonw222 (Jonw222) on Friday, August 20, 2004 - 02:05 pm: Edit|
I see roughly two kinds of schools with major research institutions. Those that the reputation of the university as a whole is better than the individual departments and those where the reputation of the individual departments are better than the school. When referring to "school" we can focus on the undergraduate academics and reputation. Of course, there are some schools with excellent departments in one or two areas, but I'm mostly referring to the school as a whole. This is not to take anything away from those other schools because reputation of the individual departments is much more important for graduate school than for undergraduate (notice the phrase more important not irrelevant.
Duke University and Washington University at St. Louis are two schools where the reputation of the undergraduate school is much better than the original departments. Which is why some people think that they might be underrated. To a lesser extent we might put UPenn, Brown, and Tufts which although they have some really excellent departments and is an excellent school, has a slightly better reputation on the undergraduate level (admissions officers spin this by saying that these schools "really focus on the undergraduate education.")
Of course there are also schools where the individual departments have a much better reputation than the overall school (in this case undergraduate school.) I would put University of Illinois Champaign Urbana, SUNY Stonybrook, University of Washington, Cornell, U. Michigan and to a lesser extent UCLA, Boston University, and NYU (although NYU's undergraduate divisions have improved markedly in recent years, the graduate departments and schools are still much better than the undergrad reputation (referring to CAS only.)
Do not misinterpret what I said above to imply that Michigan's undergrad reputation is bad for whatever reason. Just to say that the departments on the graduate level are more reputed than the undergrad division. I would put Harvard also into thei category as well and nobody would ever think that the undergrad at Harvard was ever given short shrift.
This might be why some people think that Duke and Washington St. Louis are overrated while other schools are underrated.
|By Sac (Sac) on Friday, August 20, 2004 - 02:34 pm: Edit|
There is always someone in these discussions who boils down rank to getting into Harvard law school and/or getting a job in investment banking, as if that is everybody's goal in college and in life.
I don't believe that Cal Tech and MIT even belong in this ranking. They are wonderful institutions, for a small group of students -- just as the military academies are. They are specialized. Adding them is like comparing apples and oranges.
I think these rankings are useful for their parts rather than for the whole. Seeing graduation rates, for example, is helpful. Seeing peer review is somewhat helpful -- though there is often a lag time in academia between changes and reputation. Alumni giving rate, which boosts some schools and kills others in this ranking, shouldn't even be included. Some colleges do a better job than others fund raising. Some colleges produce more successful investment bankers and corporate lawyers than successful teachers, social workers, musicians. or poets. Which is the minus, which is the plus?
|By Bellevueteen (Bellevueteen) on Friday, August 20, 2004 - 03:26 pm: Edit|
"People who think that Duke (and for the most part WUStl. too) are "way overrated" probably are just saying so because they don't know anything about the university and have never been there."
Or they're trolls like mysticwistful.
|By Mysticwistful (Mysticwistful) on Friday, August 20, 2004 - 03:31 pm: Edit|
Who here honestly believes that Duke and UPenn are in the same league as Stanford and MIT?
|By Bellevueteen (Bellevueteen) on Friday, August 20, 2004 - 03:37 pm: Edit|
Well, of course not! Duke is in the Atlantic Coast Conference. UPenn is in the Ivy League. Stanford is in the Pacific-10 Conference. MIT is in the New England Women's and Men's Athletic Conference. Not the same league at all...
|By Willothewisp (Willothewisp) on Friday, August 20, 2004 - 03:44 pm: Edit|
"I don't believe that Cal Tech and MIT even belong in this ranking. They are wonderful institutions, for a small group of students..."
Yeah, like 50% of students? I don't actually know what percentage major in sciences vs. humanities, but I'm sure it's not a "small group". That's like saying women's colleges shouldn't be included in the LAC ranking.
|By Fuzzzylogicc (Fuzzzylogicc) on Friday, August 20, 2004 - 03:44 pm: Edit|
The skinny on Penn (unfair tho it may be) is that they manipulate their numbers and have made institutional changes (heavy use of ED, for example) in no small part to influence their US News ranking. And WashU gives a distorted impression of high selectivity/low admission rate through heavy waitlisting.
As for Duke, like most people I consider Stanford and MIT to be better if only because they have more impressive faculty and students. But the "overrated" charge is getting a little tired. Duke's been a mainstay in the US News top ten for twenty years (in 1985 it was #6); steady throughout all changes and tweaks in the mags methodology. The only other schools with the same top ten consistency are HYPSM.
|By Cloud1234 (Cloud1234) on Friday, August 20, 2004 - 04:08 pm: Edit|
Hey Mysticwistful. Which school do you go to?
|By 80drofnats (80drofnats) on Friday, August 20, 2004 - 04:23 pm: Edit|
though these rankings are based on numbers, the numbers are a bit shaky, and they use the wrong ones. Look at the selectivity ranks, for class of 2007 harvard was way, way harder to get into than yale but somehow yale is #1 in that and harvard #4. It's because they use the bs % of class in top 10 % of high school class, which colleges can legally lie about. Also what helps penn is the faculty resources rank, which colleges can butcher the data on legally, and freshman retention, which is so close among the top schools that little sense can be made of it. Little attention is paid to important things like rd yield and endowment. These rankings are useful in approximation, i.e. to find out if a school is a top 50, but the close comparisions of the top 10 make little sense.
|By Angryseniors (Angryseniors) on Friday, August 20, 2004 - 04:35 pm: Edit|
Can someone with a password post Penn's full stats.
|By Xanderman (Xanderman) on Friday, August 20, 2004 - 04:41 pm: Edit|
Can someone please post NYU's new SAT range please and I'll love you forever .
|By Yep (Yep) on Friday, August 20, 2004 - 05:03 pm: Edit|
these rankings use sat ranges and acceptance rates from '03....
|By Takeheart (Takeheart) on Friday, August 20, 2004 - 05:27 pm: Edit|
Something that you have to understand about these rankings is that if a university wanted, they could make certain improvements to raise their rankings. Penn for example, caters to the rankings so that their rank will increase, therefore allowing them to attract better students. Also, US News abitrarily assigns each school a predicted graduation rate (these are not given by the school), so when the actual graduation rate is much lower, the school's ranking suffers. This can be seen with Caltech. I don't have the numbers in front of me, but US News predicts that Caltech should have a high graduation rate because the top students go there However, even Caltech wouldn't give itself such a high prediction. Therefore, it's actual graduation rate vs. predicted kills it.
Also, there are plenty of useless statistics that go into the rankings. Alumni giving rate? What does that determine? Also, faculty resources has dubious criteria in it as well. It takes into account the salaries of the professors. Why does how much the teachers are being paid vs. the cost of living in the area make a school better? The fact that the cost of living in the area is considered allows Penn to easily move ahead of schools such as Columbia that are in an area with a higher cost of living. The top ten percent ranking is slowly being obsolete as well, as many competitive high schools refuse to calculate it, giving smaller percentage of students reporting rank.
A much better set of criteria would be SAT scores, Peer Assessment, Yield rate, student/faculty ratio, and possibly endowment.
|By Cornell06 (Cornell06) on Friday, August 20, 2004 - 06:01 pm: Edit|
I love this. Watching immature teenagers bicker over which university has more "worth" proves how obsessed this nation is with name-brand imagery and the inherently ambiguous "prestige" factor. Penn seems to be getting the blunt of all the criticism. Can you say bitter? If you are trying to claim that Penn is the only major university that tinkers with its numbers or does things intentionally to raise its ranking, it truly shows how naive you are. I'd say Harvard and Stanford are the two universities most concerned with their rankings, although they refuse to admit it. I got numerous calls from representatives of these universities begging me to apply. The two have been switching their early decision policies around for the better half of the last decade in order to maximize their yield. Harvard also accepts the common app. Furthermore, Harvard and Stanford, like many universities, throws extravagant admit parties to lure in potential students.
Just look at the facts and keep the blind, sweeping generalizations to a minimum. The fact of the matter is that these rankings mean very little. Apply to a school because you will thrive there, not to get the official thumbs up from the next-door neighbor you never talk to. The ego-boosts wear off quickly and before you know it you're in college.
|By Anxious_Mom (Anxious_Mom) on Friday, August 20, 2004 - 06:26 pm: Edit|
NYU SAT middle 50% 1300-1450 (from NYU web-site)
Note that you can get the most current % from the actual college websites- and they will be more current than the US news or PR rankings.
|By Ledyana (Ledyana) on Friday, August 20, 2004 - 07:04 pm: Edit|
4. University of Pennsylvania 95 4.6 12 97% 92% 92% None 1 74% 7% 6/1 89% 7 1330- 1510 93% 20% 6 8 39%
that's the stats
|By Axfeaver (Axfeaver) on Friday, August 20, 2004 - 07:36 pm: Edit|
If someone can, please e-mail me your password/e-mail for US news, thanks.
|By 80drofnats (80drofnats) on Friday, August 20, 2004 - 07:42 pm: Edit|
I agree, people smart enough to be interested in/attending these colleges shouldn't pay so much attention to these rankings, you can't rank a school based on how much the faculty makes and ridiculous measures like that, everyone knows that schools fall into mini-tiers, like hypmsc, cddpb, and for these to change over very little differences in numbers is just to attract attention.
Schools are the ones that need to be the first to stop worrying so much about this, it hurts the problem to have penn and wustl brag and post articles on their sites about their increases in the rankings.
|By Washu07 (Washu07) on Friday, August 20, 2004 - 07:47 pm: Edit|
can anyone email me a password/username for usnews? that would be sweet. thanks!!
|By Mysticwistful (Mysticwistful) on Friday, August 20, 2004 - 08:05 pm: Edit|
Just put the pass/ username combo in your profile.
|By Prophecy (Prophecy) on Friday, August 20, 2004 - 08:17 pm: Edit|
geez someone just post a valid username and password in your profile every single person seems to be asking.
It would such great help you couldn't even believe it.
|By Synapse (Synapse) on Friday, August 20, 2004 - 08:48 pm: Edit|
Prophecy, you cant give out your username and password.
To clarify why people could not log on with my name.. they suspended my account.
Sorry guys.. I gotta buy it again and Im not giving it out.
|By Synapse (Synapse) on Friday, August 20, 2004 - 08:53 pm: Edit|
Even if you send the account info to other ppl in an email if alot of ppl use it they will know. Just go ahead and buy it yourself.. The $15 is more than worth your while if you get into the college of your choice.
|By Synapse (Synapse) on Friday, August 20, 2004 - 08:58 pm: Edit|
I will post info but I wont give out my info, sorry.
|By Cornell06 (Cornell06) on Friday, August 20, 2004 - 11:14 pm: Edit|
"...it hurts the problem to have penn and wustl brag and post articles on their sites about their increases in the rankings." Again, what's with the Penn hating. Almost all top 20 schools have posted articles on their websites. Princeton (www.princeton.edu) is one of the few that happily posts it on their homepage.
|By Canadian_Idol (Canadian_Idol) on Friday, August 20, 2004 - 11:25 pm: Edit|
"Furthermore, Harvard and Stanford, like many universities, throws extravagant admit parties to lure in potential students."
ah...excuse me? All Harvard had was a normal prefrosh session where kids could independently look around the campus and the courses as we wanted. Nothing extravagant or pushy about the way they ran things. The most "extravagant" part of the weekend was an ice cream bash...with chocolate topping. If they're spendthrift, they sure know where to spend the money
|By Cornell06 (Cornell06) on Friday, August 20, 2004 - 11:38 pm: Edit|
If you live near any major city (San Francisco in my case) you will receive invites to such parties. I went to several, just ask around.
|By Par72 (Par72) on Saturday, August 21, 2004 - 12:31 am: Edit|
Duke and Stanford are relatively young schools compared to the Ivies. With their locations,school/athletic programs,and alumni networks, they are way ahead of the UPenn,Dart.,Brown,Columbia,Cornell crowd. Tough to overcome HYP.
|By Rtkysg (Rtkysg) on Saturday, August 21, 2004 - 01:38 am: Edit|
Stanford can't overcome HYP? what a BS !! Let's see if the big three can compare with Stanford for science and engineering
|By Cloud1234 (Cloud1234) on Saturday, August 21, 2004 - 10:06 am: Edit|
Stanford's current prestige is primarily due to its location. It's great weather and climate attract many top students from the nation.
On the other hand, Duke's strong basketball program and school spirit are strenghs that many schools do not have.
|By Thedad (Thedad) on Saturday, August 21, 2004 - 04:32 pm: Edit|
And I think it would be kind of sad for anyone other than an athlete to make a decision about where to attend college on the basis of either athletics or "school spirit." If it happens to be there, great. If it's not, no big deal. It's down there with the color of the carpets in the hallways as a criterion.
|By Barrons (Barrons) on Saturday, August 21, 2004 - 07:31 pm: Edit|
I think you are vastly underrating the impact of positive school spirit. It continues to bring people together many years after college. It is a common bond.
|By Thedad (Thedad) on Saturday, August 21, 2004 - 08:28 pm: Edit|
This may be true and it may give great comfort.
However, imho, the person who makes a decision on where to attend college based on same is some combination of "trivial" and "shallow."
If my D's school had a football team, I would have gladly added it to the list of teams I root for. But if she had made the decision of where to go to college based on that, I would have wondered where I had failed as a parent.
|By Jonw222 (Jonw222) on Saturday, August 21, 2004 - 09:20 pm: Edit|
Based on my college (and graduate school) choices, I obviously agree with Thedad. Somewhere down the line, people seem to have forgotten that college is about the academics and the social life is second. I actually sought out schools where life didn't revolve around athletics like in my high school. That's why I did choose a school which has about as much school spirit as on-line schools.
However (and this is where US News rankings come in), if students are having fun at college and believe they are part of a community with school spirit, they are less likely to leave an adversly affect their retention rate. With grade inflation rampant so there isn't much risk of failing out of school, colleges are trying to keep students there. A football team keeps the alumni donations coming in (which raises another important US News stat which is the alumni giving rate.)
But if that's the kind of environment that someone wants and they would be happier in that environment, then they should go there. It would be better to be happy at a school than miserable somewhere else, no matter what the reason.
|By Stanfordman99 (Stanfordman99) on Saturday, August 21, 2004 - 11:54 pm: Edit|
"Stanford's current prestige is primarily due to its location. It's great weather and climate attract many top students from the nation. On the other hand, Duke's strong basketball program and school spirit are strenghs that many schools do not have."
What do you have against Stanford? The main highlights of Stanford are not its location and climate, but its strength in the humanities (John Steinbeck, Ken Kesey, and other famous authors are alums), its clear lead in the sciences (there is a Linear Accelerator on campus and Stanford is reknowned for its engineering programs), the entrepreneurial spirit of its students (the founders of Yahoo and Google are recent Stanford grads), and there's also the fact that Stanford MADE the silicon valley what it is today.
In addition, Stanford has just as much, if not more school spirit than Duke. Obviously you haven't heard of the Stanford-Cal sports rivalry and it's rich history.
|By Par72 (Par72) on Sunday, August 22, 2004 - 12:23 am: Edit|
Academics combined with school spirit/athletics are a great combination for both students and alumni. Among the Ivies, HYP with the exception of Dartmouth football have the best sports programs and school spirit, while Brown,Columbia,and Cornell lag. Guess which Ivies have the higher alumni giving rates? (HYP) For students seeking the best of both worlds,Duke and Stanford are great choices. Among LAC's-Williams,Colgate,Holy Cross,Davidson offer good combinations.
|By Kinglin2 (Kinglin2) on Sunday, August 22, 2004 - 12:38 am: Edit|
Does any one know the top undergrad business ones; I mean beyond the top 3 they give you in the free edition?
|By Rtkysg (Rtkysg) on Sunday, August 22, 2004 - 12:41 am: Edit|
Outside US, people will choose Stanford over Yale or Princeton for sure ...
|By 08pride (08pride) on Sunday, August 22, 2004 - 01:18 am: Edit|
How the hell was UPenn ranked higher than Stanford?
|By Kk19131 (Kk19131) on Sunday, August 22, 2004 - 01:34 am: Edit|
Because I work there, and I'm just that cool
|By Bern700 (Bern700) on Sunday, August 22, 2004 - 02:46 am: Edit|
Par72: Penn definitely has the best sports program out of all the ivys.
|By Alexandre (Alexandre) on Sunday, August 22, 2004 - 02:53 am: Edit|
"Stanford's current prestige is primarily due to its location. It's great weather and climate attract many top students from the nation. On the other hand, Duke's strong basketball program and school spirit are strenghs that many schools do not have."
What the?! Stanford's "current presitge" is primarily due to the fact that it is the best university in the USA. Let us compare the Big 5 shall we?
Princeton does not have a Business program
MIT and Princeton do not have Law schools
MIT and Princeton do not have Medical Schools.
#2 Harvard and MIT
#9 Princeton and Yale
#2 Harvard and MIT
#14 Princeton and Yale
#1 MIT and Stanford
#2 Harvard, Princeton and Stanford
#2 Harvard, Princeton and Stanford
#2 Harvard, Princeton and Stanford
#1 Harvard, Stanford and Yale
MIT does not have an English Department
#1 Princeton and Yale
MIT does not have a History Department
MIT does not have a Sociology Department
I don't know, I think Stanford's current prestige has something to do with the fact that it is the only university among the big 10 that is ranked in the top 10 in all 4 Professional fields and in the top 5 in all 12 Academic Disciplines. Actually, Havard does not even come close. They are ranked in the top 5 in just 7 of the 12 Disciplines. Forget the others, they are even paler in comparison.
|By Savedbythebell7 (Savedbythebell7) on Sunday, August 22, 2004 - 06:39 am: Edit|
You guys are funny. HYPS are all in a league of thier own. The top 10 are tied in my opinion. Those rankings are so trivial in the bigger picture. 1,2,3,4 who gives a hoot.
|By Rtkysg (Rtkysg) on Sunday, August 22, 2004 - 09:54 am: Edit|
It's not totally accurate, if HYPS are all in their own league, so are MIT and Caltech.
|By Jonw222 (Jonw222) on Sunday, August 22, 2004 - 11:27 am: Edit|
I'm assuming you took these rankings from the US News and World Report Website. Just to point out there are definitely more than 12 Academic disciplines and at the grad level the rankings don't matter as much as having a specific subdiscipline at the school. However, from your previous posts, I'm assuming you know all of this already. :-)
In the field of musicology for instance, Harvard, Yale, and Princeton's departments (not to mention a lot of other departments) are infinitely better than Stanford's department, with faculty more known in the field and graduates who are hired for tenure track positions with more regularity. I was also once told that Yale is the first, second, and third best law school (because it was that good.) And from everyone I have heard from, they have acknowledged this to be true. So even though the law rankings are Yale, Harvard, Stanford, Yale probably should be in a "league of its own."
Stanford has very good departments but we can't make a blanket statement and say it's better than Harvard, Yale, and Princeton. No school can be everything to everybody.
|By Oldman (Oldman) on Sunday, August 22, 2004 - 12:39 pm: Edit|
Par 72 has a good point re: academics + spirit/athletics makes a great combination for kids and alumni....other schools with such an experience include Michigan, Virginia, Notre Dame, Chapel Hill,etc.
|By Alexandre (Alexandre) on Sunday, August 22, 2004 - 12:54 pm: Edit|
Oldman, I too agree. I got into 9 of the nation's top 20 universities. All of them were pretty much equal academically. In the end, I picked the one that I felt was the best all around...the one I believed was the best fit for me. I too into consideration location, campus beauty, school spirit, alumni success, alumni loyalty, city life, academic excellence, international prestige etc...
|By Collegeparent (Collegeparent) on Monday, August 23, 2004 - 10:18 am: Edit|
Something to think about regarding the USN&WR rankings: the direct correlation between a college and university's ranking with the amount of its endowment. Anyone care to do the research?
|By Deferreddude (Deferreddude) on Monday, August 23, 2004 - 10:26 am: Edit|
Stanford and MIT have much bigger endowments than Duke and Upenn. So no....there is no direct correlation.
|By Jonw222 (Jonw222) on Monday, August 23, 2004 - 11:32 am: Edit|
I think we'd after to do a more scientific study than choosing two schools that might be exceptions to a general trend.
|By Slipper2002 (Slipper2002) on Monday, August 23, 2004 - 11:40 am: Edit|
Agreed, pretty high correlation. Endowment makes a number of criteria points improve, such as "faulty resources," which I believe are a little unfair given emphasis (research oriented will be higher). For example, Brown is continually given the low end of the stick largely due to endowment compared to the rest of the Ivy schools...
|By Collegeparent (Collegeparent) on Monday, August 23, 2004 - 02:06 pm: Edit|
The following is offered FYI:
The Chronicle of Higher Education just published its Alamanc which includes the Top Colleges and Universities with endowments over $120 million. The following 25 universities (including state systems) and 25 LACs are numbered in order of endowment; the number following them is its USN&WR rankings. While there are exceptions to every rule, generally speaking, there is a one-to-three point difference in the rankings. Draw your own conclusions as to the significance of money versus USN&WR ranking.
1. Harvard - 1
2. Yale - 3
3. Princeton - 1
4. U Texas system - 46 (based on U Texas Austin)
5. Stanford - 5
6. MIT - 5
7. U California system - 21 (based on Berkeley)
8. Columbia - 9
9. Emory - 20
10. Penn - 4
11. U Michigan - 22
12. WUSTL - 11
13. Chicago - 14
14. Northwestern - 11
15. Duke - 5
16. Rice - 17
17. Cornell - 14
18. Notre Dame - 18
19. Dartmouth - 9
20. USC - 30
21. Vanderbilt - 18
22. U Virginia - 22
23. JHU - 14
24. Brown - 13
25. U Minnesota system - 66 (based on Twin Cities)
1. Grinnell - 16
2. Williams - 1
3. Wellesley -4
4. Pomona - 5
5. Swarthmore - 2
6. Amherst - 2
7. Smith - 13
8. Berea - N/A (1 on Comp LACs in South)
9. Berry - N/A (2 on Comp LACs in South)
10. Vassar - 12
11. Oberlin - 23
12. Middlebury - 11
13. Lafayette - 31
14. Wesleyan - 9
15. Bowdoin - 7
16. Carleton - 5
17. Macalester - 26
18. Colgate - 16
19. Bryn Mawr - 21
20. Washington & Lee - 13
21. Hamilton - 19
22. Denison - 50
23. Colorado College - 33
24. Bucknell - 26
25. Holy Cross - 31
|By Alexandre (Alexandre) on Monday, August 23, 2004 - 04:58 pm: Edit|
It should be noted that in the case of Texas and California, they are talking about the entire system... all the campuses. Texas has 12 campuses, 150,000 students and 9,000 professors. The UC system has 8 campuses with over 200,000 students and 11,000 professors.
|By Slipper2002 (Slipper2002) on Monday, August 23, 2004 - 05:14 pm: Edit|
One thing that might skew this is how much the endowment is oriented towards undergrad, as opposed to grad, i.e. Columbia is rich, but has numerous grad programs. Brown doesnt
|By Par72 (Par72) on Monday, August 23, 2004 - 11:11 pm: Edit|
Of note among LAC's,only 4 schools support Division 1 sports-Colgate,Holy Cross,Lafayette, and Bucknell. Although Williams does support great Div 3 program.
|By Hubbellgardner (Hubbellgardner) on Tuesday, August 24, 2004 - 07:13 am: Edit|
Davidson supports DIV 1 sports;
|By Collegeparent (Collegeparent) on Tuesday, August 24, 2004 - 10:38 am: Edit|
Hubbellgardner (named after Redford character in The Way We Were?): Par72 was referring to the LACs in the above list; Davidson is not among the Top 25 most endowed LACs.
|By Hubbellgardner (Hubbellgardner) on Tuesday, August 24, 2004 - 01:08 pm: Edit|
you are very perceptive Collegeparent; sorry, I had missed the point of the LAC's listed; nevertheless, it is amazing what Davidson manages to accomplish with its relatively limited resources; as fas as the pseudonym, it did seem to come all 'too easily' :-)
|By Par72 (Par72) on Tuesday, August 24, 2004 - 11:30 pm: Edit|
Not sure but isn't Davidson football Div.3. Also, Holy Cross and Colgate support Div.1 hockey-safe to assume Davidson can't match that. But as far as basketball would put Davidson's hoop tradition right after Holy Cross's program.
|By Knightmare (Knightmare) on Wednesday, August 25, 2004 - 10:01 pm: Edit|
Could someone with a USNEWS account please post USNWR's description of Penn? Not the numerical stats, but the written explanation. I'm just curious - thanks.
Report an offensive message on this page E-mail this page to a friend
|Posting is currently disabled in this topic. Contact your discussion moderator for more information.|
|Administrator's Control Panel -- Board Moderators Only|