Top 10 public "ranking"?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:UCB, UMICH, UVA, UNC, UT, UF, UCLA, W&M, UIUC, GT

W&M? Not per USNWR 2026

This is a good list. Though if you include Florida should probably also include Georgia.

USNWR has a particular methodology that works against W&M (like no longer valuing small class size). W&M definitely belongs.

[Anonymous]

The criteria and methodology for these rankings is suspect as hell esp for USNWR. We are the ones paying the price for the nonsense. There are a ton of great colleges out there. Is a #100 rank the same as #6 rank, no. But. Use the "rank" for a ballpark and go from there. The madness of rank is creating this mess. Choose fit (including major, vibe, etc.) and price over arbitrary rankings. Read Jeff Selingo's new Dream Schools book too for some perspective.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:UCB, UMICH, UVA, UNC, UT, UF, UCLA, W&M, UIUC, GT

W&M? Not per USNWR 2026

This is a good list. Though if you include Florida should probably also include Georgia.

USNWR has a particular methodology that works against W&M (like no longer valuing small class size). W&M definitely belongs.

Here we go! The MMSU game just got started!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:UCB, UMICH, UVA, UNC, UT, UF, UCLA, W&M, UIUC, GT

W&M? Not per USNWR 2026

This is a good list. Though if you include Florida should probably also include Georgia.

USNWR has a particular methodology that works against W&M (like no longer valuing small class size). W&M definitely belongs.

Here we go! The MMSU game just got started!

The only thing Mickey Mouse here are your posts

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:UCB, UMICH, UVA, UNC, UT, UF, UCLA, W&M, UIUC, GT

W&M? Not per USNWR 2026

This is a good list. Though if you include Florida should probably also include Georgia.

USNWR has a particular methodology that works against W&M (like no longer valuing small class size). W&M definitely belongs.

UGA wouldn’t be the next up as UNWR has them at #19.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:UCB, UMICH, UVA, UNC, UT, UF, UCLA, W&M, UIUC, GT

I'd put Wis. over W&M

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is there really a rank? Aren't they all flagships which exist to educate predominantly the students of that state? When someone refers to a T10 public "ranking", is it for grad programs or for undergrad?

Such a weird question. "Is there really a rank" for a any college then? Also, "exist to educate predominantly the students of that state" is like 1950's logic. Some of these publics rank as some of the best in the country if not the world for some major areas of study and that is by no mistake. So guess what, thousands of applicants from around the country and world will apply to these schools because of this. Also, guess what, many are now extremely competitive for admissions because of this and because they do also have a certain obligation to in-state students.

But, what you also find, most of these top publics are also test required and do not play an early decision game like many top privates which makes admissions for out of staters even that much more competitive. My kid was admitted to a top 10 and 20 private and rejected from 2 top 10 publics.

If T10 publics includes 5 UCs, it's not "most" because those 5 do not require tests

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is there really a rank? Aren't they all flagships which exist to educate predominantly the students of that state? When someone refers to a T10 public "ranking", is it for grad programs or for undergrad?

Such a weird question. "Is there really a rank" for a any college then? Also, "exist to educate predominantly the students of that state" is like 1950's logic. Some of these publics rank as some of the best in the country if not the world for some major areas of study and that is by no mistake. So guess what, thousands of applicants from around the country and world will apply to these schools because of this. Also, guess what, many are now extremely competitive for admissions because of this and because they do also have a certain obligation to in-state students.

But, what you also find, most of these top publics are also test required and do not play an early decision game like many top privates which makes admissions for out of staters even that much more competitive. My kid was admitted to a top 10 and 20 private and rejected from 2 top 10 publics.

No it is not. When most states take 75% of students from in-state (e.g. NC, UVA both are listed as T10).

[Anonymous]

This thread is enlightening because it is such a stark reminder of how incapable people here are of evaluating universities. OP asks a rather strange question but then the discussion immediately descends into whether standardized tests are required and ED practices. Nothing on professor or department quality, unique programming, career and grad school outcomes, or the like. Nope. Entirely focused on admissions practices.

[Anonymous]

Ranked based on quality of the peer groups

UCB
UCLA
UMich
UVA
GT
UNC
W&M
UT
UIUC

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This thread is enlightening because it is such a stark reminder of how incapable people here are of evaluating universities. OP asks a rather strange question but then the discussion immediately descends into whether standardized tests are required and ED practices. Nothing on professor or department quality, unique programming, career and grad school outcomes, or the like. Nope. Entirely focused on admissions practices.

Because student quality matters the most. A Nobel laureate cannot teach a lottery student who needs remedial math.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is there really a rank? Aren't they all flagships which exist to educate predominantly the students of that state? When someone refers to a T10 public "ranking", is it for grad programs or for undergrad?

There are rankings. Five are in CA ….UCB, UCLA, UCSD, UCD and UCI. Are in the 1-9 spots.

Give me a huge break. UC schools are a total mess right now for undergraduate education. You can thank the Board of Regents for that. No school that is 100% test blind should be top anything. I know you are referring to the USNWR rankings, but do you realize they rely heavily on the social mobility score? This is why the UCs are in the top 10. They have more poor people and FGLI (Pell grant recipients) than most schools. Is that commendable? Yes, but it doesn’t make it a top public university. I say this as a proud graduate of the UC system. No way UCD or UCI belong in the top 10. Maybe UCSD?

I agree…I am in CA and I see some of these kids going to the UCs and I promise they are not Top 10 school material….

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This thread is enlightening because it is such a stark reminder of how incapable people here are of evaluating universities. OP asks a rather strange question but then the discussion immediately descends into whether standardized tests are required and ED practices. Nothing on professor or department quality, unique programming, career and grad school outcomes, or the like. Nope. Entirely focused on admissions practices.

If you are talking about institutional quality, I don’t see how admissions even enters the discussion.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread is enlightening because it is such a stark reminder of how incapable people here are of evaluating universities. OP asks a rather strange question but then the discussion immediately descends into whether standardized tests are required and ED practices. Nothing on professor or department quality, unique programming, career and grad school outcomes, or the like. Nope. Entirely focused on admissions practices.

Because student quality matters the most. A Nobel laureate cannot teach a lottery student who needs remedial math.

Did you even attend college? When I read things like this I wonder if the people here actually attended and took advantage of the things that existed at their schools. The “quality” of the other students wouldn’t have even been in my top 10 of things that mattered. And any school in a discussion of top 10 has more than its share of “quality” students. If you’re brilliant at math you’re in the 300 and 400 level classes with the other brilliant math kids, not sitting through remedial math.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is there really a rank? Aren't they all flagships which exist to educate predominantly the students of that state? When someone refers to a T10 public "ranking", is it for grad programs or for undergrad?

Such a weird question. "Is there really a rank" for a any college then? Also, "exist to educate predominantly the students of that state" is like 1950's logic. Some of these publics rank as some of the best in the country if not the world for some major areas of study and that is by no mistake. So guess what, thousands of applicants from around the country and world will apply to these schools because of this. Also, guess what, many are now extremely competitive for admissions because of this and because they do also have a certain obligation to in-state students.

But, what you also find, most of these top publics are also test required and do not play an early decision game like many top privates which makes admissions for out of staters even that much more competitive. My kid was admitted to a top 10 and 20 private and rejected from 2 top 10 publics.

No it is not. When most states take 75% of students from in-state (e.g. NC, UVA both are listed as T10).

Not the Top 10 Publics.