Yes, Wake.
Wake has a much more academic vibe, and is most similar to an elite/T15 (and was commonly T25 until USnews took all importnat metrics out of rankings). UGA and Tulane are not close to Wake considering outcomes(MD, Law, other grad placement, careers).
The fact you have to reference the rankings and somehow explain why they are wrong makes it plain that you care far too much about those exact rankings.
If Wake was similar to a T15…it would be ranked in the T15 which actually didn’t lose their rankings at all.
Everyone…stop crying about the rankings.
I am not the poster that you are referring to. But your post seems kinda internally inconsistent. You told the poster to not use the rankings, but you used the rankings (T15 which hasn’t changed as much) to make your own point.
His or her post about Wake having academics on par with the top schools (regardless of how ranked) is a much more accurate statement than Wake has no difference in academics than UGA.
The public’s didn’t all of sudden start attracting the top faculty members. Go check the credentials of the departments at UGA vs Tulane vs Wake to verify.
Not really...I actually am not telling anyone to use or not use the rankings. I am simply pointing out that you can't equate Wake with a T15 school "under the old rankings", but now somehow claim that it's new ranking of 47 is so incorrect when the T15 are still the T15 (with the deck chairs shuffled a bit).
There are now about 6+ posts of one or more people claiming they aren't crying over the new rankings...while they proceed to cry over the new rankings.
All sorts of schools have different rankings under different measures. Why can't someone prefer the old USNWR? No one I know is looking at the new one, though I'm sure there are people interested in that one. Most people I know at private schools are disregarding the new rankings because they are made for a very specific HS student.
Do you realize the old rankings were also made for a very specific HS student? The old rankings were made for the prestige obsessed and as a result, colleges catered to the rich. Things are different now. If your college no longer fares well, why are they not doing a better job serving first gen and Pell students?
So you don't believe rankings of college should promote (1) % of students from top of HS class, (2) being taught by a professor with a terminal degree rather than a TA, and (3) smaller class sizes? Instead I should focus on if the school has a large number of Pell grants?
I am not sure how much I care about the % of students from the top of the HS class (what does top mean anyway...top 10%)? Are you trying to imply the average Princeton student is not a really smart kid?
Also, on #2...is it literally taught by a professor vs. a TA...or taught by someone without a terminal degree? Reason I ask, is because as an example, Wharton will have guest professors who are Managing Directors and Partners from top Wall Street firms and they don't have a terminal degree...but hell yeah, I would rather be taught by those people who are actually out doing deals (and they hire a couple of kids from the class) vs. someone with a PhD in Finance
Yes, top 10%. So how the college attracts top students from HS should not be a ranking factor? Oh, and yeah, you're right, most classes in all these State schools that rose in rankings are taught by MDs from Wall Street in their spare time and not TAs.
How do you know who teaches at state schools compared to privates? Do you have any evidence?
Certain schools, like Wake and Tulane, literally have ZERO TAs. It is their policy. Ask State Schools on your tours how many classes are taught by TAs freshman year. It is just about all of them, most likely.
Do you have any evidence or just anecdotes?
This is true about Wake. They pride themselves on professors with PhDs teaching very small classes. Even intro business and science classes are around 50 students. My freshman had tons of contact with her professors.
What state school has a TA teaching a class...like the TA is the professor for the class?
Yes, Wake.
Wake has a much more academic vibe, and is most similar to an elite/T15 (and was commonly T25 until USnews took all importnat metrics out of rankings). UGA and Tulane are not close to Wake considering outcomes(MD, Law, other grad placement, careers).
The fact you have to reference the rankings and somehow explain why they are wrong makes it plain that you care far too much about those exact rankings.
If Wake was similar to a T15…it would be ranked in the T15 which actually didn’t lose their rankings at all.
Everyone…stop crying about the rankings.
I am not the poster that you are referring to. But your post seems kinda internally inconsistent. You told the poster to not use the rankings, but you used the rankings (T15 which hasn’t changed as much) to make your own point.
His or her post about Wake having academics on par with the top schools (regardless of how ranked) is a much more accurate statement than Wake has no difference in academics than UGA.
The public’s didn’t all of sudden start attracting the top faculty members. Go check the credentials of the departments at UGA vs Tulane vs Wake to verify.
Not really...I actually am not telling anyone to use or not use the rankings. I am simply pointing out that you can't equate Wake with a T15 school "under the old rankings", but now somehow claim that it's new ranking of 47 is so incorrect when the T15 are still the T15 (with the deck chairs shuffled a bit).
There are now about 6+ posts of one or more people claiming they aren't crying over the new rankings...while they proceed to cry over the new rankings.
All sorts of schools have different rankings under different measures. Why can't someone prefer the old USNWR? No one I know is looking at the new one, though I'm sure there are people interested in that one. Most people I know at private schools are disregarding the new rankings because they are made for a very specific HS student.
Do you realize the old rankings were also made for a very specific HS student? The old rankings were made for the prestige obsessed and as a result, colleges catered to the rich. Things are different now. If your college no longer fares well, why are they not doing a better job serving first gen and Pell students?
So you don't believe rankings of college should promote (1) % of students from top of HS class, (2) being taught by a professor with a terminal degree rather than a TA, and (3) smaller class sizes? Instead I should focus on if the school has a large number of Pell grants?
I am not sure how much I care about the % of students from the top of the HS class (what does top mean anyway...top 10%)? Are you trying to imply the average Princeton student is not a really smart kid?
Also, on #2...is it literally taught by a professor vs. a TA...or taught by someone without a terminal degree? Reason I ask, is because as an example, Wharton will have guest professors who are Managing Directors and Partners from top Wall Street firms and they don't have a terminal degree...but hell yeah, I would rather be taught by those people who are actually out doing deals (and they hire a couple of kids from the class) vs. someone with a PhD in Finance
Yes, top 10%. So how the college attracts top students from HS should not be a ranking factor? Oh, and yeah, you're right, most classes in all these State schools that rose in rankings are taught by MDs from Wall Street in their spare time and not TAs.
How do you know who teaches at state schools compared to privates? Do you have any evidence?
Certain schools, like Wake and Tulane, literally have ZERO TAs. It is their policy. Ask State Schools on your tours how many classes are taught by TAs freshman year. It is just about all of them, most likely.
Do you have any evidence or just anecdotes?
This is true about Wake. They pride themselves on professors with PhDs teaching very small classes. Even intro business and science classes are around 50 students. My freshman had tons of contact with her professors.
What state school has a TA teaching a class...like the TA is the professor for the class?
Like, 99%?
Literally, name just one...and the course. I just visited Berkeley and they mentioned that no TAs teach a class (but of course lead recitations which is what TAs do)...except there was a rare exception where a professor got ill right before the semester started.
Yes, Wake.
Wake has a much more academic vibe, and is most similar to an elite/T15 (and was commonly T25 until USnews took all importnat metrics out of rankings). UGA and Tulane are not close to Wake considering outcomes(MD, Law, other grad placement, careers).
The fact you have to reference the rankings and somehow explain why they are wrong makes it plain that you care far too much about those exact rankings.
If Wake was similar to a T15…it would be ranked in the T15 which actually didn’t lose their rankings at all.
Everyone…stop crying about the rankings.
I am not the poster that you are referring to. But your post seems kinda internally inconsistent. You told the poster to not use the rankings, but you used the rankings (T15 which hasn’t changed as much) to make your own point.
His or her post about Wake having academics on par with the top schools (regardless of how ranked) is a much more accurate statement than Wake has no difference in academics than UGA.
The public’s didn’t all of sudden start attracting the top faculty members. Go check the credentials of the departments at UGA vs Tulane vs Wake to verify.
Not really...I actually am not telling anyone to use or not use the rankings. I am simply pointing out that you can't equate Wake with a T15 school "under the old rankings", but now somehow claim that it's new ranking of 47 is so incorrect when the T15 are still the T15 (with the deck chairs shuffled a bit).
There are now about 6+ posts of one or more people claiming they aren't crying over the new rankings...while they proceed to cry over the new rankings.
All sorts of schools have different rankings under different measures. Why can't someone prefer the old USNWR? No one I know is looking at the new one, though I'm sure there are people interested in that one. Most people I know at private schools are disregarding the new rankings because they are made for a very specific HS student.
Do you realize the old rankings were also made for a very specific HS student? The old rankings were made for the prestige obsessed and as a result, colleges catered to the rich. Things are different now. If your college no longer fares well, why are they not doing a better job serving first gen and Pell students?
So you don't believe rankings of college should promote (1) % of students from top of HS class, (2) being taught by a professor with a terminal degree rather than a TA, and (3) smaller class sizes? Instead I should focus on if the school has a large number of Pell grants?
I am not sure how much I care about the % of students from the top of the HS class (what does top mean anyway...top 10%)? Are you trying to imply the average Princeton student is not a really smart kid?
Also, on #2...is it literally taught by a professor vs. a TA...or taught by someone without a terminal degree? Reason I ask, is because as an example, Wharton will have guest professors who are Managing Directors and Partners from top Wall Street firms and they don't have a terminal degree...but hell yeah, I would rather be taught by those people who are actually out doing deals (and they hire a couple of kids from the class) vs. someone with a PhD in Finance
Yes, top 10%. So how the college attracts top students from HS should not be a ranking factor? Oh, and yeah, you're right, most classes in all these State schools that rose in rankings are taught by MDs from Wall Street in their spare time and not TAs.
How do you know who teaches at state schools compared to privates? Do you have any evidence?
Certain schools, like Wake and Tulane, literally have ZERO TAs. It is their policy. Ask State Schools on your tours how many classes are taught by TAs freshman year. It is just about all of them, most likely.
Do you have any evidence or just anecdotes?
This is true about Wake. They pride themselves on professors with PhDs teaching very small classes. Even intro business and science classes are around 50 students. My freshman had tons of contact with her professors.
This is anecdotal.
No it isn’t. Go to the Wake web site if you want the exact numbers but the data is there. They have absurdly small class sizes and every professor both teaches and conducts research.
Here’s the link. 99 percent of classes have less than 50 students, and anecdotally, my freshman had only one class each semester with more than 20 students. 94 percent of faculty have the highest degree available in their field.
Anonymous wrote:Wake and UGA are tied for a better ranking than Tulane. UGA is bigger and public, but probably best positioned for the future. Which would you choose?
Wake or UGA depending on whether or not the student wants a large public school or a smaller private school. A lot of other factors would need to be considered like major, cost, etc., but I don't think rankings matter much in the case of these three schools.
Yes, Wake.
Wake has a much more academic vibe, and is most similar to an elite/T15 (and was commonly T25 until USnews took all importnat metrics out of rankings). UGA and Tulane are not close to Wake considering outcomes(MD, Law, other grad placement, careers).
The fact you have to reference the rankings and somehow explain why they are wrong makes it plain that you care far too much about those exact rankings.
If Wake was similar to a T15…it would be ranked in the T15 which actually didn’t lose their rankings at all.
Everyone…stop crying about the rankings.
I am not the poster that you are referring to. But your post seems kinda internally inconsistent. You told the poster to not use the rankings, but you used the rankings (T15 which hasn’t changed as much) to make your own point.
His or her post about Wake having academics on par with the top schools (regardless of how ranked) is a much more accurate statement than Wake has no difference in academics than UGA.
The public’s didn’t all of sudden start attracting the top faculty members. Go check the credentials of the departments at UGA vs Tulane vs Wake to verify.
Not really...I actually am not telling anyone to use or not use the rankings. I am simply pointing out that you can't equate Wake with a T15 school "under the old rankings", but now somehow claim that it's new ranking of 47 is so incorrect when the T15 are still the T15 (with the deck chairs shuffled a bit).
There are now about 6+ posts of one or more people claiming they aren't crying over the new rankings...while they proceed to cry over the new rankings.
All sorts of schools have different rankings under different measures. Why can't someone prefer the old USNWR? No one I know is looking at the new one, though I'm sure there are people interested in that one. Most people I know at private schools are disregarding the new rankings because they are made for a very specific HS student.
Do you realize the old rankings were also made for a very specific HS student? The old rankings were made for the prestige obsessed and as a result, colleges catered to the rich. Things are different now. If your college no longer fares well, why are they not doing a better job serving first gen and Pell students?
So you don't believe rankings of college should promote (1) % of students from top of HS class, (2) being taught by a professor with a terminal degree rather than a TA, and (3) smaller class sizes? Instead I should focus on if the school has a large number of Pell grants?
I am not sure how much I care about the % of students from the top of the HS class (what does top mean anyway...top 10%)? Are you trying to imply the average Princeton student is not a really smart kid?
Also, on #2...is it literally taught by a professor vs. a TA...or taught by someone without a terminal degree? Reason I ask, is because as an example, Wharton will have guest professors who are Managing Directors and Partners from top Wall Street firms and they don't have a terminal degree...but hell yeah, I would rather be taught by those people who are actually out doing deals (and they hire a couple of kids from the class) vs. someone with a PhD in Finance
Yes, top 10%. So how the college attracts top students from HS should not be a ranking factor? Oh, and yeah, you're right, most classes in all these State schools that rose in rankings are taught by MDs from Wall Street in their spare time and not TAs.
How do you know who teaches at state schools compared to privates? Do you have any evidence?
Certain schools, like Wake and Tulane, literally have ZERO TAs. It is their policy. Ask State Schools on your tours how many classes are taught by TAs freshman year. It is just about all of them, most likely.
Do you have any evidence or just anecdotes?
This is true about Wake. They pride themselves on professors with PhDs teaching very small classes. Even intro business and science classes are around 50 students. My freshman had tons of contact with her professors.
This is anecdotal.
No it isn’t. Go to the Wake web site if you want the exact numbers but the data is there. They have absurdly small class sizes and every professor both teaches and conducts research.
Here’s the link. 99 percent of classes have less than 50 students, and anecdotally, my freshman had only one class each semester with more than 20 students. 94 percent of faculty have the highest degree available in their field.
Why doesn’t this tell us if TA’s or professors teach at Wake?
TAs don’t teach classes at Wake. Call them and confirm if you refuse to accept the reports of parents who send their kids there. Nothing better than you hearing it directly from the horses’s mouth, right?
A parent on college confidential reviewed common data sets to identify the ten universities with the fewest classes over 50 students, both Wake Forest and Tulane were on their list, Wake had the absolute fewest:
Universities where less than 10% of classes have 50 or more students include:
0.8% Wake Forest
1.1% American
5.7% UChicago
6.1% Duke
6.2% Tulane
6.8% Northwestern
6.9% Georgetown
7% Tufts
7.7% Rice
7.7% Dartmouth
8.9% Yale
9% William & Mary
9.1% Columbia
9.1% Vanderbilt
9.4% Emory
9.5% Brandeis
9.9% Harvard
9.9% George Washington
Yes, Wake.
Wake has a much more academic vibe, and is most similar to an elite/T15 (and was commonly T25 until USnews took all importnat metrics out of rankings). UGA and Tulane are not close to Wake considering outcomes(MD, Law, other grad placement, careers).
The fact you have to reference the rankings and somehow explain why they are wrong makes it plain that you care far too much about those exact rankings.
If Wake was similar to a T15…it would be ranked in the T15 which actually didn’t lose their rankings at all.
Everyone…stop crying about the rankings.
I am not the poster that you are referring to. But your post seems kinda internally inconsistent. You told the poster to not use the rankings, but you used the rankings (T15 which hasn’t changed as much) to make your own point.
His or her post about Wake having academics on par with the top schools (regardless of how ranked) is a much more accurate statement than Wake has no difference in academics than UGA.
The public’s didn’t all of sudden start attracting the top faculty members. Go check the credentials of the departments at UGA vs Tulane vs Wake to verify.
Not really...I actually am not telling anyone to use or not use the rankings. I am simply pointing out that you can't equate Wake with a T15 school "under the old rankings", but now somehow claim that it's new ranking of 47 is so incorrect when the T15 are still the T15 (with the deck chairs shuffled a bit).
There are now about 6+ posts of one or more people claiming they aren't crying over the new rankings...while they proceed to cry over the new rankings.
All sorts of schools have different rankings under different measures. Why can't someone prefer the old USNWR? No one I know is looking at the new one, though I'm sure there are people interested in that one. Most people I know at private schools are disregarding the new rankings because they are made for a very specific HS student.
Don't post nonsense. Most people you know aren't using the old rankings...why would they since their top targets all are still top-ranked?
Why is the whining so bad on this thread?
You think people stopped applying to Dartmouth or Vanderbilt because their ranking plummeted on the new US News ranking? You are clueless.
Neither Dartmouth nor Vanderbilt plummeted...that's your problem (I think Vanderbilt went from like 14 to 18)...Dartmouth is also ranked #18 and maybe dropped 5 spots. I think people look at the rankings and see those schools are solidly Top 20.
It would appear that you are the clueless one. I also don't think Wake will suffer a drop in applications...but it's not because people have to justify that it's still #27 by clinging to old rankings.
Vanderbilt, Dartmouth, Wake, NYU, & Chicago all considered their ranking to have plummeted (so much so Vanderbilt's chancellor wrote a widely circulated letter complaining about the new rankings "U.S. News's change in methodology has led to dramatic movement in the rankings overall, disadvantaging many private research universities while privileging large public institutions.”). None of these schools will see a drop in applications (in fact they all got more than ever last year) because people view the characteristics that used to be used by USNWR as the actual useful ones and not your new ones.
The vast majority of Vanderbilt students and alums were embarrassed that their Chancellor felt the need to put out some statement to address a minimal change in their rankings. Nobody believes their ranking plummeted.
Did Dartmouth and Chicago put out statements similar to Vanderbilt? I don't recall seeing anything. Only DCUM people believe their rankings "plummeted"...even then, this is the first I am hearing of Dartmouth lumped into this group.
That's a student editorial...give me a break. That's not a statement from the Chancellor or the School.
You just said only DCUM people cared and Dartmouth was not part of this group. So Dartmouth students writing an editorial about it means they don't care? Dartmouth students pay keen attention to rankings as well. When U.S. News & World Report, the most prominent publisher of college rankings, released their annual list last September, Dartmouth dropped to number 18 in the National University category. The anonymous posting app Fizz provided a glimpse into student reactions. One post calling U.S. News “a bunch of f****** idiots” received over 1,400 upvotes. Another post calling the list “bs” received over 1,300 upvotes, and in an anonymous poll, 860 or 83% of students who took the poll stated that they disagreed with Dartmouth’s placement. It is clear that some Dartmouth students derive a sense of pride from the reputation of our institution and use rankings as a proxy for prestige.
You are really grasping at straws. If you were to go to any college that moved either up or down by even 1 spot, you will get students reacting.
I guess what you miss is the very last line. It says Dartmouth students care about the rankings...not the critera and how it changed...they care about the rankings period. So, I gather by that logic...all the Wake students now believe they go to a POS school. Is that what you are saying?
You clearly didn't read:
Furthermore, U.S. News’s methodologies are constantly changing. In 2023, U.S. News changed its criteria significantly, and as a result, 25% of schools in the National Universities rankings experienced changes in ranking of 30 places or more. This gives the impression that schools are rapidly improving or declining, when in reality, U.S. News’s own ever-changing criteria is responsible for the vast majority of movement. This is part of U.S. News’s business model: if the rankings never change, nobody would have any reason to engage their website. It must be understood that when a school’s ranking changes, it has nothing to do with the quality of education or experience. There is no reason to give these protean rankings any weight when changes in rankings only represent U.S. News’s profit strategy and do not reflect changes made by schools.
No, I did read dips**t. Again, this is a student editorial...nothing from Dartmouth university which actually doesn't care about such nonsense.
However, the idiotic Fizz polling you mentioned was ONLY about the drop in the rankings. Dartmouth students are upset because their school dropped...they would have been happy as pigs in s**t if Dartmouth went up based on the new rankings.
Guess you went to Rutgers given your language and your love of the new rankings. You were the one who kept saying no one cares about it but DCUM and then that no one cares about the change in methodology. Just showing you that's not true. No need to get so angry or act up.
No, I went to a great school that was ranked Top 10 previously and is still ranked Top 10. Funny how that works.
Sorry, I didn't realize you were so simpleminded that I had to point out that every student at every school cares about their school ranking. What's more...you are now reinforcing by the nth degree how important these USNews rankings truly are in your mind. You care so much about it.
Not PP, but actually reading to learn about schools. Now, you went to your Top 10 school and have written about 100 posts all day in a thread called "Wake, UGA, or Tulane" arguing against everything someone says about any of these schools.
Yes, Wake.
Wake has a much more academic vibe, and is most similar to an elite/T15 (and was commonly T25 until USnews took all importnat metrics out of rankings). UGA and Tulane are not close to Wake considering outcomes(MD, Law, other grad placement, careers).
The fact you have to reference the rankings and somehow explain why they are wrong makes it plain that you care far too much about those exact rankings.
If Wake was similar to a T15…it would be ranked in the T15 which actually didn’t lose their rankings at all.
Everyone…stop crying about the rankings.
I am not the poster that you are referring to. But your post seems kinda internally inconsistent. You told the poster to not use the rankings, but you used the rankings (T15 which hasn’t changed as much) to make your own point.
His or her post about Wake having academics on par with the top schools (regardless of how ranked) is a much more accurate statement than Wake has no difference in academics than UGA.
The public’s didn’t all of sudden start attracting the top faculty members. Go check the credentials of the departments at UGA vs Tulane vs Wake to verify.
Not really...I actually am not telling anyone to use or not use the rankings. I am simply pointing out that you can't equate Wake with a T15 school "under the old rankings", but now somehow claim that it's new ranking of 47 is so incorrect when the T15 are still the T15 (with the deck chairs shuffled a bit).
There are now about 6+ posts of one or more people claiming they aren't crying over the new rankings...while they proceed to cry over the new rankings.
All sorts of schools have different rankings under different measures. Why can't someone prefer the old USNWR? No one I know is looking at the new one, though I'm sure there are people interested in that one. Most people I know at private schools are disregarding the new rankings because they are made for a very specific HS student.
Do you realize the old rankings were also made for a very specific HS student? The old rankings were made for the prestige obsessed and as a result, colleges catered to the rich. Things are different now. If your college no longer fares well, why are they not doing a better job serving first gen and Pell students?
So you don't believe rankings of college should promote (1) % of students from top of HS class, (2) being taught by a professor with a terminal degree rather than a TA, and (3) smaller class sizes? Instead I should focus on if the school has a large number of Pell grants?
I am not sure how much I care about the % of students from the top of the HS class (what does top mean anyway...top 10%)? Are you trying to imply the average Princeton student is not a really smart kid?
Also, on #2...is it literally taught by a professor vs. a TA...or taught by someone without a terminal degree? Reason I ask, is because as an example, Wharton will have guest professors who are Managing Directors and Partners from top Wall Street firms and they don't have a terminal degree...but hell yeah, I would rather be taught by those people who are actually out doing deals (and they hire a couple of kids from the class) vs. someone with a PhD in Finance
Yes, top 10%. So how the college attracts top students from HS should not be a ranking factor? Oh, and yeah, you're right, most classes in all these State schools that rose in rankings are taught by MDs from Wall Street in their spare time and not TAs.
How do you know who teaches at state schools compared to privates? Do you have any evidence?
Certain schools, like Wake and Tulane, literally have ZERO TAs. It is their policy. Ask State Schools on your tours how many classes are taught by TAs freshman year. It is just about all of them, most likely.
Do you have any evidence or just anecdotes?
This is true about Wake. They pride themselves on professors with PhDs teaching very small classes. Even intro business and science classes are around 50 students. My freshman had tons of contact with her professors.
This is anecdotal.
No it isn’t. Go to the Wake web site if you want the exact numbers but the data is there. They have absurdly small class sizes and every professor both teaches and conducts research.
Here’s the link. 99 percent of classes have less than 50 students, and anecdotally, my freshman had only one class each semester with more than 20 students. 94 percent of faculty have the highest degree available in their field.
Why doesn’t this tell us if TA’s or professors teach at Wake?
TAs don’t teach classes at Wake. Call them and confirm if you refuse to accept the reports of parents who send their kids there. Nothing better than you hearing it directly from the horses’s mouth, right?
Don’t (incorrectly) assume TA’s teach at state schools when Wake fails to mention who teaches on their website.
Yes, Wake.
Wake has a much more academic vibe, and is most similar to an elite/T15 (and was commonly T25 until USnews took all importnat metrics out of rankings). UGA and Tulane are not close to Wake considering outcomes(MD, Law, other grad placement, careers).
The fact you have to reference the rankings and somehow explain why they are wrong makes it plain that you care far too much about those exact rankings.
If Wake was similar to a T15…it would be ranked in the T15 which actually didn’t lose their rankings at all.
Everyone…stop crying about the rankings.
I am not the poster that you are referring to. But your post seems kinda internally inconsistent. You told the poster to not use the rankings, but you used the rankings (T15 which hasn’t changed as much) to make your own point.
His or her post about Wake having academics on par with the top schools (regardless of how ranked) is a much more accurate statement than Wake has no difference in academics than UGA.
The public’s didn’t all of sudden start attracting the top faculty members. Go check the credentials of the departments at UGA vs Tulane vs Wake to verify.
Not really...I actually am not telling anyone to use or not use the rankings. I am simply pointing out that you can't equate Wake with a T15 school "under the old rankings", but now somehow claim that it's new ranking of 47 is so incorrect when the T15 are still the T15 (with the deck chairs shuffled a bit).
There are now about 6+ posts of one or more people claiming they aren't crying over the new rankings...while they proceed to cry over the new rankings.
All sorts of schools have different rankings under different measures. Why can't someone prefer the old USNWR? No one I know is looking at the new one, though I'm sure there are people interested in that one. Most people I know at private schools are disregarding the new rankings because they are made for a very specific HS student.
Do you realize the old rankings were also made for a very specific HS student? The old rankings were made for the prestige obsessed and as a result, colleges catered to the rich. Things are different now. If your college no longer fares well, why are they not doing a better job serving first gen and Pell students?
So you don't believe rankings of college should promote (1) % of students from top of HS class, (2) being taught by a professor with a terminal degree rather than a TA, and (3) smaller class sizes? Instead I should focus on if the school has a large number of Pell grants?
I am not sure how much I care about the % of students from the top of the HS class (what does top mean anyway...top 10%)? Are you trying to imply the average Princeton student is not a really smart kid?
Also, on #2...is it literally taught by a professor vs. a TA...or taught by someone without a terminal degree? Reason I ask, is because as an example, Wharton will have guest professors who are Managing Directors and Partners from top Wall Street firms and they don't have a terminal degree...but hell yeah, I would rather be taught by those people who are actually out doing deals (and they hire a couple of kids from the class) vs. someone with a PhD in Finance
Yes, top 10%. So how the college attracts top students from HS should not be a ranking factor? Oh, and yeah, you're right, most classes in all these State schools that rose in rankings are taught by MDs from Wall Street in their spare time and not TAs.
How do you know who teaches at state schools compared to privates? Do you have any evidence?
Certain schools, like Wake and Tulane, literally have ZERO TAs. It is their policy. Ask State Schools on your tours how many classes are taught by TAs freshman year. It is just about all of them, most likely.
Do you have any evidence or just anecdotes?
This is true about Wake. They pride themselves on professors with PhDs teaching very small classes. Even intro business and science classes are around 50 students. My freshman had tons of contact with her professors.
This is anecdotal.
No it isn’t. Go to the Wake web site if you want the exact numbers but the data is there. They have absurdly small class sizes and every professor both teaches and conducts research.
Here’s the link. 99 percent of classes have less than 50 students, and anecdotally, my freshman had only one class each semester with more than 20 students. 94 percent of faculty have the highest degree available in their field.
Why doesn’t this tell us if TA’s or professors teach at Wake?
TAs don’t teach classes at Wake. Call them and confirm if you refuse to accept the reports of parents who send their kids there. Nothing better than you hearing it directly from the horses’s mouth, right?
Don’t (incorrectly) assume TA’s teach at state schools when Wake fails to mention who teaches on their website.
Yes, Wake.
Wake has a much more academic vibe, and is most similar to an elite/T15 (and was commonly T25 until USnews took all importnat metrics out of rankings). UGA and Tulane are not close to Wake considering outcomes(MD, Law, other grad placement, careers).
The fact you have to reference the rankings and somehow explain why they are wrong makes it plain that you care far too much about those exact rankings.
If Wake was similar to a T15…it would be ranked in the T15 which actually didn’t lose their rankings at all.
Everyone…stop crying about the rankings.
I am not the poster that you are referring to. But your post seems kinda internally inconsistent. You told the poster to not use the rankings, but you used the rankings (T15 which hasn’t changed as much) to make your own point.
His or her post about Wake having academics on par with the top schools (regardless of how ranked) is a much more accurate statement than Wake has no difference in academics than UGA.
The public’s didn’t all of sudden start attracting the top faculty members. Go check the credentials of the departments at UGA vs Tulane vs Wake to verify.
Not really...I actually am not telling anyone to use or not use the rankings. I am simply pointing out that you can't equate Wake with a T15 school "under the old rankings", but now somehow claim that it's new ranking of 47 is so incorrect when the T15 are still the T15 (with the deck chairs shuffled a bit).
There are now about 6+ posts of one or more people claiming they aren't crying over the new rankings...while they proceed to cry over the new rankings.
All sorts of schools have different rankings under different measures. Why can't someone prefer the old USNWR? No one I know is looking at the new one, though I'm sure there are people interested in that one. Most people I know at private schools are disregarding the new rankings because they are made for a very specific HS student.
Do you realize the old rankings were also made for a very specific HS student? The old rankings were made for the prestige obsessed and as a result, colleges catered to the rich. Things are different now. If your college no longer fares well, why are they not doing a better job serving first gen and Pell students?
So you don't believe rankings of college should promote (1) % of students from top of HS class, (2) being taught by a professor with a terminal degree rather than a TA, and (3) smaller class sizes? Instead I should focus on if the school has a large number of Pell grants?
I am not sure how much I care about the % of students from the top of the HS class (what does top mean anyway...top 10%)? Are you trying to imply the average Princeton student is not a really smart kid?
Also, on #2...is it literally taught by a professor vs. a TA...or taught by someone without a terminal degree? Reason I ask, is because as an example, Wharton will have guest professors who are Managing Directors and Partners from top Wall Street firms and they don't have a terminal degree...but hell yeah, I would rather be taught by those people who are actually out doing deals (and they hire a couple of kids from the class) vs. someone with a PhD in Finance
Yes, top 10%. So how the college attracts top students from HS should not be a ranking factor? Oh, and yeah, you're right, most classes in all these State schools that rose in rankings are taught by MDs from Wall Street in their spare time and not TAs.
How do you know who teaches at state schools compared to privates? Do you have any evidence?
Certain schools, like Wake and Tulane, literally have ZERO TAs. It is their policy. Ask State Schools on your tours how many classes are taught by TAs freshman year. It is just about all of them, most likely.
Do you have any evidence or just anecdotes?
This is true about Wake. They pride themselves on professors with PhDs teaching very small classes. Even intro business and science classes are around 50 students. My freshman had tons of contact with her professors.
This is anecdotal.
No it isn’t. Go to the Wake web site if you want the exact numbers but the data is there. They have absurdly small class sizes and every professor both teaches and conducts research.
Here’s the link. 99 percent of classes have less than 50 students, and anecdotally, my freshman had only one class each semester with more than 20 students. 94 percent of faculty have the highest degree available in their field.
Why doesn’t this tell us if TA’s or professors teach at Wake?
TAs don’t teach classes at Wake. Call them and confirm if you refuse to accept the reports of parents who send their kids there. Nothing better than you hearing it directly from the horses’s mouth, right?
Don’t (incorrectly) assume TA’s teach at state schools when Wake fails to mention who teaches on their website.
Yes, Wake.
Wake has a much more academic vibe, and is most similar to an elite/T15 (and was commonly T25 until USnews took all importnat metrics out of rankings). UGA and Tulane are not close to Wake considering outcomes(MD, Law, other grad placement, careers).
The fact you have to reference the rankings and somehow explain why they are wrong makes it plain that you care far too much about those exact rankings.
If Wake was similar to a T15…it would be ranked in the T15 which actually didn’t lose their rankings at all.
Everyone…stop crying about the rankings.
I am not the poster that you are referring to. But your post seems kinda internally inconsistent. You told the poster to not use the rankings, but you used the rankings (T15 which hasn’t changed as much) to make your own point.
His or her post about Wake having academics on par with the top schools (regardless of how ranked) is a much more accurate statement than Wake has no difference in academics than UGA.
The public’s didn’t all of sudden start attracting the top faculty members. Go check the credentials of the departments at UGA vs Tulane vs Wake to verify.
Not really...I actually am not telling anyone to use or not use the rankings. I am simply pointing out that you can't equate Wake with a T15 school "under the old rankings", but now somehow claim that it's new ranking of 47 is so incorrect when the T15 are still the T15 (with the deck chairs shuffled a bit).
There are now about 6+ posts of one or more people claiming they aren't crying over the new rankings...while they proceed to cry over the new rankings.
All sorts of schools have different rankings under different measures. Why can't someone prefer the old USNWR? No one I know is looking at the new one, though I'm sure there are people interested in that one. Most people I know at private schools are disregarding the new rankings because they are made for a very specific HS student.
Do you realize the old rankings were also made for a very specific HS student? The old rankings were made for the prestige obsessed and as a result, colleges catered to the rich. Things are different now. If your college no longer fares well, why are they not doing a better job serving first gen and Pell students?
So you don't believe rankings of college should promote (1) % of students from top of HS class, (2) being taught by a professor with a terminal degree rather than a TA, and (3) smaller class sizes? Instead I should focus on if the school has a large number of Pell grants?
I am not sure how much I care about the % of students from the top of the HS class (what does top mean anyway...top 10%)? Are you trying to imply the average Princeton student is not a really smart kid?
Also, on #2...is it literally taught by a professor vs. a TA...or taught by someone without a terminal degree? Reason I ask, is because as an example, Wharton will have guest professors who are Managing Directors and Partners from top Wall Street firms and they don't have a terminal degree...but hell yeah, I would rather be taught by those people who are actually out doing deals (and they hire a couple of kids from the class) vs. someone with a PhD in Finance
Yes, top 10%. So how the college attracts top students from HS should not be a ranking factor? Oh, and yeah, you're right, most classes in all these State schools that rose in rankings are taught by MDs from Wall Street in their spare time and not TAs.
How do you know who teaches at state schools compared to privates? Do you have any evidence?
Certain schools, like Wake and Tulane, literally have ZERO TAs. It is their policy. Ask State Schools on your tours how many classes are taught by TAs freshman year. It is just about all of them, most likely.
Do you have any evidence or just anecdotes?
This is true about Wake. They pride themselves on professors with PhDs teaching very small classes. Even intro business and science classes are around 50 students. My freshman had tons of contact with her professors.
This is anecdotal.
No it isn’t. Go to the Wake web site if you want the exact numbers but the data is there. They have absurdly small class sizes and every professor both teaches and conducts research.
Here’s the link. 99 percent of classes have less than 50 students, and anecdotally, my freshman had only one class each semester with more than 20 students. 94 percent of faculty have the highest degree available in their field.
Why doesn’t this tell us if TA’s or professors teach at Wake?
TAs don’t teach classes at Wake. Call them and confirm if you refuse to accept the reports of parents who send their kids there. Nothing better than you hearing it directly from the horses’s mouth, right?
Don’t (incorrectly) assume TA’s teach at state schools when Wake fails to mention who teaches on their website.
My DC’s final choice included these three schools and chose Tulane. I think you can’t go wrong with any of the three. Go visit and see which feels right.
Yes, Wake.
Wake has a much more academic vibe, and is most similar to an elite/T15 (and was commonly T25 until USnews took all importnat metrics out of rankings). UGA and Tulane are not close to Wake considering outcomes(MD, Law, other grad placement, careers).
The fact you have to reference the rankings and somehow explain why they are wrong makes it plain that you care far too much about those exact rankings.
If Wake was similar to a T15…it would be ranked in the T15 which actually didn’t lose their rankings at all.
Everyone…stop crying about the rankings.
I am not the poster that you are referring to. But your post seems kinda internally inconsistent. You told the poster to not use the rankings, but you used the rankings (T15 which hasn’t changed as much) to make your own point.
His or her post about Wake having academics on par with the top schools (regardless of how ranked) is a much more accurate statement than Wake has no difference in academics than UGA.
The public’s didn’t all of sudden start attracting the top faculty members. Go check the credentials of the departments at UGA vs Tulane vs Wake to verify.
Not really...I actually am not telling anyone to use or not use the rankings. I am simply pointing out that you can't equate Wake with a T15 school "under the old rankings", but now somehow claim that it's new ranking of 47 is so incorrect when the T15 are still the T15 (with the deck chairs shuffled a bit).
There are now about 6+ posts of one or more people claiming they aren't crying over the new rankings...while they proceed to cry over the new rankings.
All sorts of schools have different rankings under different measures. Why can't someone prefer the old USNWR? No one I know is looking at the new one, though I'm sure there are people interested in that one. Most people I know at private schools are disregarding the new rankings because they are made for a very specific HS student.
Do you realize the old rankings were also made for a very specific HS student? The old rankings were made for the prestige obsessed and as a result, colleges catered to the rich. Things are different now. If your college no longer fares well, why are they not doing a better job serving first gen and Pell students?
So you don't believe rankings of college should promote (1) % of students from top of HS class, (2) being taught by a professor with a terminal degree rather than a TA, and (3) smaller class sizes? Instead I should focus on if the school has a large number of Pell grants?
I am not sure how much I care about the % of students from the top of the HS class (what does top mean anyway...top 10%)? Are you trying to imply the average Princeton student is not a really smart kid?
Also, on #2...is it literally taught by a professor vs. a TA...or taught by someone without a terminal degree? Reason I ask, is because as an example, Wharton will have guest professors who are Managing Directors and Partners from top Wall Street firms and they don't have a terminal degree...but hell yeah, I would rather be taught by those people who are actually out doing deals (and they hire a couple of kids from the class) vs. someone with a PhD in Finance
Yes, top 10%. So how the college attracts top students from HS should not be a ranking factor? Oh, and yeah, you're right, most classes in all these State schools that rose in rankings are taught by MDs from Wall Street in their spare time and not TAs.
How do you know who teaches at state schools compared to privates? Do you have any evidence?
Certain schools, like Wake and Tulane, literally have ZERO TAs. It is their policy. Ask State Schools on your tours how many classes are taught by TAs freshman year. It is just about all of them, most likely.
Do you have any evidence or just anecdotes?
This is true about Wake. They pride themselves on professors with PhDs teaching very small classes. Even intro business and science classes are around 50 students. My freshman had tons of contact with her professors.
What state school has a TA teaching a class...like the TA is the professor for the class?
College students: Don't expect to always see a professor standing at the front of your classroom.
At some research universities, a teaching assistant – usually a graduate student – might either serve as the main instructor for an undergraduate course or provide support to the professor. There were 121,120 graduate teaching assistants employed at colleges, universities and professional schools in 2015, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
