Is it not fair to say college rankings are basically just test score rankings?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The most highly ranked schools have the highest score profiles and it gradually declines as you go down the list. It’s all just a sorting mechanism based on test scores (outside of hooks). It seems nearly impossible that an unhooked student can get into a T15 type school without super high scores. Ironically TO may have made the emphasis on scores more pronounced because unhooked students essentially need great scores. For all the yapping about curating a class, they are really just filling their classes when the highest scoring kids they can get. This shouldn’t be interpreted as meaning a high score automatically gets you in anywhere.

I think USNWR is now kind of a mashup of two lists. The first is highly selective (high stat), wealthy schools (high resources) that are predominantly private. The second is high mobility (Pell grant), high research schools that are predominantly public. To boost schools in the second group, they dropped ranking criteria like class size, student-to-faculty ratio, and alumni giving %.

Yes, and rankings are better as a result. There are excellent private and public colleges out there.

Most of the DCUMers complaining are for their privates they attended 30 years ago "dropping" in USNWR ranking.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The most highly ranked schools have the highest score profiles and it gradually declines as you go down the list. It’s all just a sorting mechanism based on test scores (outside of hooks). It seems nearly impossible that an unhooked student can get into a T15 type school without super high scores. Ironically TO may have made the emphasis on scores more pronounced because unhooked students essentially need great scores. For all the yapping about curating a class, they are really just filling their classes when the highest scoring kids they can get. This shouldn’t be interpreted as meaning a high score automatically gets you in anywhere.

They have more to do with graduate schools and research dollars.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The most highly ranked schools have the highest score profiles and it gradually declines as you go down the list. It’s all just a sorting mechanism based on test scores (outside of hooks). It seems nearly impossible that an unhooked student can get into a T15 type school without super high scores. Ironically TO may have made the emphasis on scores more pronounced because unhooked students essentially need great scores. For all the yapping about curating a class, they are really just filling their classes when the highest scoring kids they can get. This shouldn’t be interpreted as meaning a high score automatically gets you in anywhere.

I think USNWR is now kind of a mashup of two lists. The first is highly selective (high stat), wealthy schools (high resources) that are predominantly private. The second is high mobility (Pell grant), high research schools that are predominantly public. To boost schools in the second group, they dropped ranking criteria like class size, student-to-faculty ratio, and alumni giving %.

Yes, and rankings are better as a result. There are excellent private and public colleges out there.

Most of the DCUMers complaining are for their privates they attended 30 years ago "dropping" in USNWR ranking.

"Better?" Schools with low average SATs rising doesn't seem "better" to me.

[Anonymous]

Agreed. USNWR is inflating the standing of public schools at the expense of private schools. Arguments can be made about the social merit of thinking highly of public schools, but the education large institutions with a broader mission provide (and the quality of the students) generally isn't on par with the schools they leapfrogged (again, speaking generally). There is lots of data to back that up, much of which was either disregarded or diminished by the new USNWR rankings.

It does however give more people a chance to say their public school (or school attended by their child) is just as good/better than X private school, which has to make a lot of people happy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The most highly ranked schools have the highest score profiles and it gradually declines as you go down the list. It’s all just a sorting mechanism based on test scores (outside of hooks). It seems nearly impossible that an unhooked student can get into a T15 type school without super high scores. Ironically TO may have made the emphasis on scores more pronounced because unhooked students essentially need great scores. For all the yapping about curating a class, they are really just filling their classes when the highest scoring kids they can get. This shouldn’t be interpreted as meaning a high score automatically gets you in anywhere.

I think USNWR is now kind of a mashup of two lists. The first is highly selective (high stat), wealthy schools (high resources) that are predominantly private. The second is high mobility (Pell grant), high research schools that are predominantly public. To boost schools in the second group, they dropped ranking criteria like class size, student-to-faculty ratio, and alumni giving %.

Yes, and rankings are better as a result. There are excellent private and public colleges out there.

Most of the DCUMers complaining are for their privates they attended 30 years ago "dropping" in USNWR ranking.

"Better?" Schools with low average SATs rising doesn't seem "better" to me.

The SAT is but one data point and with the exception of specific T25 schools, most colleges are test optional.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The most highly ranked schools have the highest score profiles and it gradually declines as you go down the list. It’s all just a sorting mechanism based on test scores (outside of hooks). It seems nearly impossible that an unhooked student can get into a T15 type school without super high scores. Ironically TO may have made the emphasis on scores more pronounced because unhooked students essentially need great scores. For all the yapping about curating a class, they are really just filling their classes when the highest scoring kids they can get. This shouldn’t be interpreted as meaning a high score automatically gets you in anywhere.

I think USNWR is now kind of a mashup of two lists. The first is highly selective (high stat), wealthy schools (high resources) that are predominantly private. The second is high mobility (Pell grant), high research schools that are predominantly public. To boost schools in the second group, they dropped ranking criteria like class size, student-to-faculty ratio, and alumni giving %.

Yes, and rankings are better as a result. There are excellent private and public colleges out there.

Most of the DCUMers complaining are for their privates they attended 30 years ago "dropping" in USNWR ranking.

"Better?" Schools with low average SATs rising doesn't seem "better" to me.

The SAT is but one data point and with the exception of specific T25 schools, most colleges are test optional.

All the more reason there should be zero (0) schools with SAT medians below 1400, yet here we are.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The most highly ranked schools have the highest score profiles and it gradually declines as you go down the list. It’s all just a sorting mechanism based on test scores (outside of hooks). It seems nearly impossible that an unhooked student can get into a T15 type school without super high scores. Ironically TO may have made the emphasis on scores more pronounced because unhooked students essentially need great scores. For all the yapping about curating a class, they are really just filling their classes when the highest scoring kids they can get. This shouldn’t be interpreted as meaning a high score automatically gets you in anywhere.

I think USNWR is now kind of a mashup of two lists. The first is highly selective (high stat), wealthy schools (high resources) that are predominantly private. The second is high mobility (Pell grant), high research schools that are predominantly public. To boost schools in the second group, they dropped ranking criteria like class size, student-to-faculty ratio, and alumni giving %.

Yes, and rankings are better as a result. There are excellent private and public colleges out there.

Most of the DCUMers complaining are for their privates they attended 30 years ago "dropping" in USNWR ranking.

"Better?" Schools with low average SATs rising doesn't seem "better" to me.

The SAT is but one data point and with the exception of specific T25 schools, most colleges are test optional.

All the more reason there should be zero (0) schools with SAT medians below 1400, yet here we are.

95th percentile test scores are fair game for a decent ranking. Also, weighting wise, the USNWR rankings preserved test scores as 5% of the methodology.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The most highly ranked schools have the highest score profiles and it gradually declines as you go down the list. It’s all just a sorting mechanism based on test scores (outside of hooks). It seems nearly impossible that an unhooked student can get into a T15 type school without super high scores. Ironically TO may have made the emphasis on scores more pronounced because unhooked students essentially need great scores. For all the yapping about curating a class, they are really just filling their classes when the highest scoring kids they can get. This shouldn’t be interpreted as meaning a high score automatically gets you in anywhere.

I think USNWR is now kind of a mashup of two lists. The first is highly selective (high stat), wealthy schools (high resources) that are predominantly private. The second is high mobility (Pell grant), high research schools that are predominantly public. To boost schools in the second group, they dropped ranking criteria like class size, student-to-faculty ratio, and alumni giving %.

Yes, and rankings are better as a result. There are excellent private and public colleges out there.

Most of the DCUMers complaining are for their privates they attended 30 years ago "dropping" in USNWR ranking.

"Better?" Schools with low average SATs rising doesn't seem "better" to me.

The SAT is but one data point and with the exception of specific T25 schools, most colleges are test optional.

All the more reason there should be zero (0) schools with SAT medians below 1400, yet here we are.

95th percentile test scores are fair game for a decent ranking. Also, weighting wise, the USNWR rankings preserved test scores as 5% of the methodology.

Should be like 50%

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The most highly ranked schools have the highest score profiles and it gradually declines as you go down the list. It’s all just a sorting mechanism based on test scores (outside of hooks). It seems nearly impossible that an unhooked student can get into a T15 type school without super high scores. Ironically TO may have made the emphasis on scores more pronounced because unhooked students essentially need great scores. For all the yapping about curating a class, they are really just filling their classes when the highest scoring kids they can get. This shouldn’t be interpreted as meaning a high score automatically gets you in anywhere.

I think USNWR is now kind of a mashup of two lists. The first is highly selective (high stat), wealthy schools (high resources) that are predominantly private. The second is high mobility (Pell grant), high research schools that are predominantly public. To boost schools in the second group, they dropped ranking criteria like class size, student-to-faculty ratio, and alumni giving %.

Yes, and rankings are better as a result. There are excellent private and public colleges out there.

Most of the DCUMers complaining are for their privates they attended 30 years ago "dropping" in USNWR ranking.

"Better?" Schools with low average SATs rising doesn't seem "better" to me.

The SAT is but one data point and with the exception of specific T25 schools, most colleges are test optional.

All the more reason there should be zero (0) schools with SAT medians below 1400, yet here we are.

95th percentile test scores are fair game for a decent ranking. Also, weighting wise, the USNWR rankings preserved test scores as 5% of the methodology.

Should be like 50%

Your ignorance is evident. Thanks.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The most highly ranked schools have the highest score profiles and it gradually declines as you go down the list. It’s all just a sorting mechanism based on test scores (outside of hooks). It seems nearly impossible that an unhooked student can get into a T15 type school without super high scores. Ironically TO may have made the emphasis on scores more pronounced because unhooked students essentially need great scores. For all the yapping about curating a class, they are really just filling their classes when the highest scoring kids they can get. This shouldn’t be interpreted as meaning a high score automatically gets you in anywhere.

I think USNWR is now kind of a mashup of two lists. The first is highly selective (high stat), wealthy schools (high resources) that are predominantly private. The second is high mobility (Pell grant), high research schools that are predominantly public. To boost schools in the second group, they dropped ranking criteria like class size, student-to-faculty ratio, and alumni giving %.

Yes, and rankings are better as a result. There are excellent private and public colleges out there.

Most of the DCUMers complaining are for their privates they attended 30 years ago "dropping" in USNWR ranking.

"Better?" Schools with low average SATs rising doesn't seem "better" to me.

The SAT is but one data point and with the exception of specific T25 schools, most colleges are test optional.

All the more reason there should be zero (0) schools with SAT medians below 1400, yet here we are.

95th percentile test scores are fair game for a decent ranking. Also, weighting wise, the USNWR rankings preserved test scores as 5% of the methodology.

Should be like 50%

Your ignorance is evident. Thanks.

No ignorance over here. Must be some kind of reflective mirage.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The most highly ranked schools have the highest score profiles and it gradually declines as you go down the list. It’s all just a sorting mechanism based on test scores (outside of hooks). It seems nearly impossible that an unhooked student can get into a T15 type school without super high scores. Ironically TO may have made the emphasis on scores more pronounced because unhooked students essentially need great scores. For all the yapping about curating a class, they are really just filling their classes when the highest scoring kids they can get. This shouldn’t be interpreted as meaning a high score automatically gets you in anywhere.

I think USNWR is now kind of a mashup of two lists. The first is highly selective (high stat), wealthy schools (high resources) that are predominantly private. The second is high mobility (Pell grant), high research schools that are predominantly public. To boost schools in the second group, they dropped ranking criteria like class size, student-to-faculty ratio, and alumni giving %.

Yes, and rankings are better as a result. There are excellent private and public colleges out there.

Most of the DCUMers complaining are for their privates they attended 30 years ago "dropping" in USNWR ranking.

"Better?" Schools with low average SATs rising doesn't seem "better" to me.

The SAT is but one data point and with the exception of specific T25 schools, most colleges are test optional.

All the more reason there should be zero (0) schools with SAT medians below 1400, yet here we are.

95th percentile test scores are fair game for a decent ranking. Also, weighting wise, the USNWR rankings preserved test scores as 5% of the methodology.

Should be like 50%

Your ignorance is evident. Thanks.

No ignorance over here. Must be some kind of reflective mirage.

Ok Mr. 50% 🤣

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The most highly ranked schools have the highest score profiles and it gradually declines as you go down the list. It’s all just a sorting mechanism based on test scores (outside of hooks). It seems nearly impossible that an unhooked student can get into a T15 type school without super high scores. Ironically TO may have made the emphasis on scores more pronounced because unhooked students essentially need great scores. For all the yapping about curating a class, they are really just filling their classes when the highest scoring kids they can get. This shouldn’t be interpreted as meaning a high score automatically gets you in anywhere.

For T15 you need the relatively high scores to pass the initial funnel. After that, the ECs, essays, recommendations come into play. And don't be mistaken, they DO shape or "curate" the incoming class based on institutional priorities.

you need 1520+ and 3.95. the funnel is not trivial

No you dont….1380 DS unhooked here at Princeton. Only got in due to ECs and Essays….

What ECs?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The most highly ranked schools have the highest score profiles and it gradually declines as you go down the list. It’s all just a sorting mechanism based on test scores (outside of hooks). It seems nearly impossible that an unhooked student can get into a T15 type school without super high scores. Ironically TO may have made the emphasis on scores more pronounced because unhooked students essentially need great scores. For all the yapping about curating a class, they are really just filling their classes when the highest scoring kids they can get. This shouldn’t be interpreted as meaning a high score automatically gets you in anywhere.

I think USNWR is now kind of a mashup of two lists. The first is highly selective (high stat), wealthy schools (high resources) that are predominantly private. The second is high mobility (Pell grant), high research schools that are predominantly public. To boost schools in the second group, they dropped ranking criteria like class size, student-to-faculty ratio, and alumni giving %.

Yes, and rankings are better as a result. There are excellent private and public colleges out there.

Most of the DCUMers complaining are for their privates they attended 30 years ago "dropping" in USNWR ranking.

"Better?" Schools with low average SATs rising doesn't seem "better" to me.

The SAT is but one data point and with the exception of specific T25 schools, most colleges are test optional.

All the more reason there should be zero (0) schools with SAT medians below 1400, yet here we are.

95th percentile test scores are fair game for a decent ranking. Also, weighting wise, the USNWR rankings preserved test scores as 5% of the methodology.

Should be like 50%

Your ignorance is evident. Thanks.

No ignorance over here. Must be some kind of reflective mirage.

Ok Mr. 50% 🤣

What's wrong with 50%? I'd be fine with up to 80%.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The most highly ranked schools have the highest score profiles and it gradually declines as you go down the list. It’s all just a sorting mechanism based on test scores (outside of hooks). It seems nearly impossible that an unhooked student can get into a T15 type school without super high scores. Ironically TO may have made the emphasis on scores more pronounced because unhooked students essentially need great scores. For all the yapping about curating a class, they are really just filling their classes when the highest scoring kids they can get. This shouldn’t be interpreted as meaning a high score automatically gets you in anywhere.

I think USNWR is now kind of a mashup of two lists. The first is highly selective (high stat), wealthy schools (high resources) that are predominantly private. The second is high mobility (Pell grant), high research schools that are predominantly public. To boost schools in the second group, they dropped ranking criteria like class size, student-to-faculty ratio, and alumni giving %.

Yes, and rankings are better as a result. There are excellent private and public colleges out there.

Most of the DCUMers complaining are for their privates they attended 30 years ago "dropping" in USNWR ranking.

"Better?" Schools with low average SATs rising doesn't seem "better" to me.

The SAT is but one data point and with the exception of specific T25 schools, most colleges are test optional.

All the more reason there should be zero (0) schools with SAT medians below 1400, yet here we are.

95th percentile test scores are fair game for a decent ranking. Also, weighting wise, the USNWR rankings preserved test scores as 5% of the methodology.

Should be like 50%

Your ignorance is evident. Thanks.

No ignorance over here. Must be some kind of reflective mirage.

Ok Mr. 50% 🤣

What's wrong with 50%? I'd be fine with up to 80%.

Then move overseas. India would love you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The most highly ranked schools have the highest score profiles and it gradually declines as you go down the list. It’s all just a sorting mechanism based on test scores (outside of hooks). It seems nearly impossible that an unhooked student can get into a T15 type school without super high scores. Ironically TO may have made the emphasis on scores more pronounced because unhooked students essentially need great scores. For all the yapping about curating a class, they are really just filling their classes when the highest scoring kids they can get. This shouldn’t be interpreted as meaning a high score automatically gets you in anywhere.

I think USNWR is now kind of a mashup of two lists. The first is highly selective (high stat), wealthy schools (high resources) that are predominantly private. The second is high mobility (Pell grant), high research schools that are predominantly public. To boost schools in the second group, they dropped ranking criteria like class size, student-to-faculty ratio, and alumni giving %.

Yes, and rankings are better as a result. There are excellent private and public colleges out there.

Most of the DCUMers complaining are for their privates they attended 30 years ago "dropping" in USNWR ranking.

"Better?" Schools with low average SATs rising doesn't seem "better" to me.

The SAT is but one data point and with the exception of specific T25 schools, most colleges are test optional.

All the more reason there should be zero (0) schools with SAT medians below 1400, yet here we are.

95th percentile test scores are fair game for a decent ranking. Also, weighting wise, the USNWR rankings preserved test scores as 5% of the methodology.

Should be like 50%

Your ignorance is evident. Thanks.

No ignorance over here. Must be some kind of reflective mirage.

Ok Mr. 50% 🤣

What's wrong with 50%? I'd be fine with up to 80%.

Then move overseas. India would love you.

South Korea, Japan, and China definitely would. All high-performing nations that prioritise standardised tests. Same with Europe and Canada.