Is NYU still Top 25?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The US News ranking jumped the shark with its latest manipulations. It doesn't change what NYU is, a decently prestigious but pricey school in the heart of Manhattan.

There is no need to decide whether it's 22 or 32 or whatever.

US News is more accurate now than in the past.

Absolutely.

[Anonymous]

‘Course

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NYU dropped ten full slots from 25 to 35 last year per USNWR

Yeah, but USNWR really dropped the ball last year.

Class size doesn't matter anymore. The academic qualifications of professors doesn't matter anymore. Graduating within five years doesn't matter anymore.

What matters are Pell Grant students.

USNWR isn't a great measurement of the academic quality of a school these days.

True top schools are good at everything, hence why only 2 schools dropped out of the top 25 ( NYU and USC) and only 1 Top 25 (WashU) dropped significantly.

NYU and USC are true top schools unless you think USNWR is bible

Some people here wonder why there isn’t a copy of the USNews rankings in a drawer in every hotel room.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do you REALLY think the quality of NYU relative to WUSTL/Emory changed by much from year to year based on what USNWR rankings say? Exh A as to why ranking colleges as a whole is worse than meaningless.

Most undergrads in the T100 are good. But I'm only willing to pay 300k for a name brand with strong ascending reputation. Is that NYU? That's what I'm asking.

Absolutely, schools like NYU, USC, and Northeastern will keep on rising.

USC is known as a school for those who couldn't get into its rival - UCLA. In terms of quality, location, and cost, many choose USC only after they were rejected by UCLA. I am inclined to think the same thing with NYU, US News ranked #35. It's an option for those who didn't make the cut at Stony Brook -- SUNY, US News ranked #58,

Not even funny.
Speaking of Sunny
https://www.timesunion.com/education/article/suny-deficit-hit-1-billion-future-aid-tuition-18580207.php

"SUNY warns of future $1B deficit without higher tuition or more aid"

Avoid.

UCLA is a top university.

USC would be behind, with NYU.

Sunny is not even close to any of those 3.

USC and UCLA are pretty much peer schools.

Only CA residents who couldn't pay USC insist that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NYU dropped ten full slots from 25 to 35 last year per USNWR

Yeah, but USNWR really dropped the ball last year.

Class size doesn't matter anymore. The academic qualifications of professors doesn't matter anymore. Graduating within five years doesn't matter anymore.

What matters are Pell Grant students.

USNWR isn't a great measurement of the academic quality of a school these days.

True top schools are good at everything, hence why only 2 schools dropped out of the top 25 ( NYU and USC) and only 1 Top 25 (WashU) dropped significantly.

NYU and USC are true top schools unless you think USNWR is bible

Some people here wonder why there isn’t a copy of the USNews rankings in a drawer in every hotel room.

To many insecure guests were ripping them up when their kid got deferred.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do you REALLY think the quality of NYU relative to WUSTL/Emory changed by much from year to year based on what USNWR rankings say? Exh A as to why ranking colleges as a whole is worse than meaningless.

Most undergrads in the T100 are good. But I'm only willing to pay 300k for a name brand with strong ascending reputation. Is that NYU? That's what I'm asking.

Absolutely, schools like NYU, USC, and Northeastern will keep on rising.

USC is known as a school for those who couldn't get into its rival - UCLA. In terms of quality, location, and cost, many choose USC only after they were rejected by UCLA. I am inclined to think the same thing with NYU, US News ranked #35. It's an option for those who didn't make the cut at Stony Brook -- SUNY, US News ranked #58,

Not even funny.
Speaking of Sunny
https://www.timesunion.com/education/article/suny-deficit-hit-1-billion-future-aid-tuition-18580207.php

"SUNY warns of future $1B deficit without higher tuition or more aid"

Avoid.

UCLA is a top university.

USC would be behind, with NYU.

Sunny is not even close to any of those 3.

USC and UCLA are pretty much peer schools.

Only CA residents who couldn't pay USC insist that.

The gap in peer reputation scores is too high for them to be peers. 3.8 vs 4.4

[Anonymous]

Can you google this or look it up ? Top 25 in what exactly? I hate these posts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do you REALLY think the quality of NYU relative to WUSTL/Emory changed by much from year to year based on what USNWR rankings say? Exh A as to why ranking colleges as a whole is worse than meaningless.

Most undergrads in the T100 are good. But I'm only willing to pay 300k for a name brand with strong ascending reputation. Is that NYU? That's what I'm asking.

Absolutely, schools like NYU, USC, and Northeastern will keep on rising.

USC is known as a school for those who couldn't get into its rival - UCLA. In terms of quality, location, and cost, many choose USC only after they were rejected by UCLA. I am inclined to think the same thing with NYU, US News ranked #35. It's an option for those who didn't make the cut at Stony Brook -- SUNY, US News ranked #58,

Not even funny.
Speaking of Sunny
https://www.timesunion.com/education/article/suny-deficit-hit-1-billion-future-aid-tuition-18580207.php

"SUNY warns of future $1B deficit without higher tuition or more aid"

Avoid.

UCLA is a top university.

USC would be behind, with NYU.

Sunny is not even close to any of those 3.

USC and UCLA are pretty much peer schools.

Only CA residents who couldn't pay USC insist that.

The gap in peer reputation scores is too high for them to be peers. 3.8 vs 4.4

USC has better outcomes.
I trust the industry more than the peer reputation scores by whomever.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The US News ranking jumped the shark with its latest manipulations. It doesn't change what NYU is, a decently prestigious but pricey school in the heart of Manhattan.

There is no need to decide whether it's 22 or 32 or whatever.

US News is more accurate now than in the past.

No, it give more points to schools with more poorer students.
That's not accurate and a way to evaluate schools.

I don't care if students are poor or rich. I care quality of the students.

Define "quality of the students". If you mean high stats, the top universities don't only take students with the highest stats. Otherwise, my very high stats kid would be at a T10, but instead, DC is at a state flagship (and they are happy there).

The high quality sought after students are not always the one with high stats, meaning perfect score, tutors, the same extracurriculars that they all take. They want to see beyond that. What the student has done outside of high school independently, some unconventional pursuits that show what matters to them. Character, morals, the ability to work with people from all types of backgrounds.

I think these kids who get into the top Ivy schools are naturals. They are naturally intellectually curious and will go out of their way to satisfy that curiosity. They see something that needs fixing and they figure out how to help fix it. They aren’t having their parents decide everything for them, arranging tutors and activities that the parents think will get them in.

A lot of students had the very best education where everything was given to them, nothing in the way of them getting high stats. But it’s the kids with the “it” factor that are admitted. Intelligent but also there’s just something about them.

Wow. My experience with recent Ivy alumni is that they are incredibly insecure, having been told for so many years that they are the best of the best but can't understand why they have to work under people who graduated from ::gasp:: state schools. They are a nightmare to work with because they think by virtue of having attended HYP they have had special access to unlocking the secrets of the universe, when in fact they have been attending the same classes as everyone else but with richer classmates. So they act like everyone else is beneath them. And if they are legacies/athletes they are often less competent than others as they are getting by on the HYP name with no substance behind it.

While I wouldn't go this far, I don't necessarily buy that students there are all that special. I work with too many Ivy alums to believe that now. And I have a number of friends from high school who went to Ivies and they all reported back that they had to work harder in high school than in college. Even though they were happy to be there and, presumably, like having the schools on their resumes, they all admitted that the hardest part was getting in. No sour grapes here. I wasn't interested and neither was my kid. Just an observation that many of us are not starry-eyed about Ivies. I don't doubt that there are some extraordinary kids there. I just don't believe that it's the majority.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do you REALLY think the quality of NYU relative to WUSTL/Emory changed by much from year to year based on what USNWR rankings say? Exh A as to why ranking colleges as a whole is worse than meaningless.

Most undergrads in the T100 are good. But I'm only willing to pay 300k for a name brand with strong ascending reputation. Is that NYU? That's what I'm asking.

Absolutely, schools like NYU, USC, and Northeastern will keep on rising.

USC is known as a school for those who couldn't get into its rival - UCLA. In terms of quality, location, and cost, many choose USC only after they were rejected by UCLA. I am inclined to think the same thing with NYU, US News ranked #35. It's an option for those who didn't make the cut at Stony Brook -- SUNY, US News ranked #58,

Not even funny.
Speaking of Sunny
https://www.timesunion.com/education/article/suny-deficit-hit-1-billion-future-aid-tuition-18580207.php

"SUNY warns of future $1B deficit without higher tuition or more aid"

Avoid.

UCLA is a top university.

USC would be behind, with NYU.

Sunny is not even close to any of those 3.

USC and UCLA are pretty much peer schools.

Only CA residents who couldn't pay USC insist that.

No Berkeley is a peer school to UCLA.

NYU is a peer school to USC.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The US News ranking jumped the shark with its latest manipulations. It doesn't change what NYU is, a decently prestigious but pricey school in the heart of Manhattan.

There is no need to decide whether it's 22 or 32 or whatever.

US News is more accurate now than in the past.

LOL:

William and Mary #53
UC Merced #60
George Mason #105
CU Boulder #105

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do you REALLY think the quality of NYU relative to WUSTL/Emory changed by much from year to year based on what USNWR rankings say? Exh A as to why ranking colleges as a whole is worse than meaningless.

Most undergrads in the T100 are good. But I'm only willing to pay 300k for a name brand with strong ascending reputation. Is that NYU? That's what I'm asking.

You are an idiot.

$300K could be a lot of money for you, but some people can handle that relatively easier.
If money is not much of an object, NYU is a great brand and choice.
Don't think everything at your level.

I personally think the system is wrong to charge significantly more for middle class.
It doesn't matter to rich people.

My comment has nothing at all to do with money. Thinking of U.S. colleges as "brand name" trinkets is idiotic and pedestrian.

I think you are backward.
Unlike many European leveled systems, US system is built as such.
Some colleges are considered much more elite, some schools have much better brand power(NYU Stern for example), etc. out of 3000+ 4 year schools.

Agree. Harvard’s president’s resignation was big news because the brand.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do you REALLY think the quality of NYU relative to WUSTL/Emory changed by much from year to year based on what USNWR rankings say? Exh A as to why ranking colleges as a whole is worse than meaningless.

Most undergrads in the T100 are good. But I'm only willing to pay 300k for a name brand with strong ascending reputation. Is that NYU? That's what I'm asking.

Absolutely, schools like NYU, USC, and Northeastern will keep on rising.

USC is known as a school for those who couldn't get into its rival - UCLA. In terms of quality, location, and cost, many choose USC only after they were rejected by UCLA. I am inclined to think the same thing with NYU, US News ranked #35. It's an option for those who didn't make the cut at Stony Brook -- SUNY, US News ranked #58,

Not even funny.
Speaking of Sunny
https://www.timesunion.com/education/article/suny-deficit-hit-1-billion-future-aid-tuition-18580207.php

"SUNY warns of future $1B deficit without higher tuition or more aid"

Avoid.

UCLA is a top university.

USC would be behind, with NYU.

Sunny is not even close to any of those 3.

USC and UCLA are pretty much peer schools.

Only CA residents who couldn't pay USC insist that.

No Berkeley is a peer school to UCLA.

NYU is a peer school to USC.

They are all similar in prestige.

Again USC outcome is better than UCLA which can translate to better brand and prestige in the real world.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do you REALLY think the quality of NYU relative to WUSTL/Emory changed by much from year to year based on what USNWR rankings say? Exh A as to why ranking colleges as a whole is worse than meaningless.

Most undergrads in the T100 are good. But I'm only willing to pay 300k for a name brand with strong ascending reputation. Is that NYU? That's what I'm asking.

Absolutely, schools like NYU, USC, and Northeastern will keep on rising.

USC is known as a school for those who couldn't get into its rival - UCLA. In terms of quality, location, and cost, many choose USC only after they were rejected by UCLA. I am inclined to think the same thing with NYU, US News ranked #35. It's an option for those who didn't make the cut at Stony Brook -- SUNY, US News ranked #58,

Not even funny.
Speaking of Sunny
https://www.timesunion.com/education/article/suny-deficit-hit-1-billion-future-aid-tuition-18580207.php

"SUNY warns of future $1B deficit without higher tuition or more aid"

Avoid.

UCLA is a top university.

USC would be behind, with NYU.

Sunny is not even close to any of those 3.

USC and UCLA are pretty much peer schools.

Only CA residents who couldn't pay USC insist that.

UCLA is harder to get in simply because of the competition. For 2023, UCLA received 170,047 applications while USC received 80,808. Cal State Long Beach received more than USC. For those who couldn't make the cut at UCLA or Cal State at mere $35,000 per year, USC is the next best thing at $90,000 per year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do you REALLY think the quality of NYU relative to WUSTL/Emory changed by much from year to year based on what USNWR rankings say? Exh A as to why ranking colleges as a whole is worse than meaningless.

Most undergrads in the T100 are good. But I'm only willing to pay 300k for a name brand with strong ascending reputation. Is that NYU? That's what I'm asking.

Absolutely, schools like NYU, USC, and Northeastern will keep on rising.

USC is known as a school for those who couldn't get into its rival - UCLA. In terms of quality, location, and cost, many choose USC only after they were rejected by UCLA. I am inclined to think the same thing with NYU, US News ranked #35. It's an option for those who didn't make the cut at Stony Brook -- SUNY, US News ranked #58,

Not even funny.
Speaking of Sunny
https://www.timesunion.com/education/article/suny-deficit-hit-1-billion-future-aid-tuition-18580207.php

"SUNY warns of future $1B deficit without higher tuition or more aid"

Avoid.

UCLA is a top university.

USC would be behind, with NYU.

Sunny is not even close to any of those 3.

USC and UCLA are pretty much peer schools.

Only CA residents who couldn't pay USC insist that.

No Berkeley is a peer school to UCLA.

NYU is a peer school to USC.

They are all similar in prestige.

Again USC outcome is better than UCLA which can translate to better brand and prestige in the real world.

+1. Real world outcomes are what families are looking for. Employers aren't splitting hairs between USC and UCLA.