WSJ 2022 College Ranking

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:UVA #55

Sounds about right!

How much does rank really matter after a certain point?

Someone was posting lists of students at law schools earlier, I assume for the purpose of saying that these law schools are taking kids from the most prestigious universities they can get. That misses the point. They generally take kids with the highest stats, all other things being equal. Law school rankings are dependent on stats, and the schools know it. They aren't going to take a Yale kid with low LSAT and GPA over an Ohio State kid with a stellar LSAT and GPA. Of course, Yale kids tend to get high LSATs and GPAs because they were smart enough to be accepted to Yale, but they would have done the same if they had gone somewhere else.

The only thing you are overlooking is Goldman Sachs and company don’t recruit at Ohio State or Ohio Community College.

Goldman Sachs isn't a law school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not a public university in the top 20.

Because real life != message boards full of circle-jerking striver moms who couldn't afford (or couldn't get their kid into) private college and do nothing but wax on and on about how amazing their kid's public U is. In real life, the smartest kids at Virginia, Berkeley, UCLA and Michigan are JEALOUS of their friends at elite private colleges.

Not true at all. I went to one of those public universities and majored in a department that was ranked #1 nationally. Many of us actually felt sorry for the fools who paid 10X for a lower ranked major at one of those overpriced private colleges.

But yes, I'm sure their dorms were fancier and the gym had a floating river...

Frankly, the only reason the privates rank higher is because of gimmicks like artificially pumping applications so they can reject a higher percentage of applicants.

Those private school students likely still had better placement after graduation.

Not true. The Forbes college list actually has the public universities at the top precisely because their ranking methodology gives greater weight to how many of a university's graduates become leaders in business and government. USNews and Forbes focus more on incoming stats you can manipulate like acceptance rate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not a public university in the top 20.

Because real life != message boards full of circle-jerking striver moms who couldn't afford (or couldn't get their kid into) private college and do nothing but wax on and on about how amazing their kid's public U is. In real life, the smartest kids at Virginia, Berkeley, UCLA and Michigan are JEALOUS of their friends at elite private colleges.

Not true at all. I went to one of those public universities and majored in a department that was ranked #1 nationally. Many of us actually felt sorry for the fools who paid 10X for a lower ranked major at one of those overpriced private colleges.

But yes, I'm sure their dorms were fancier and the gym had a floating river...

Frankly, the only reason the privates rank higher is because of gimmicks like artificially pumping applications so they can reject a higher percentage of applicants.

Those private school students likely still had better placement after graduation.

Not true. The Forbes college list actually has the public universities at the top precisely because their ranking methodology gives greater weight to how many of a university's graduates become leaders in business and government. USNews and Forbes focus more on incoming stats you can manipulate like acceptance rate.

That criteria included how many graduates won Oscars, Emmys and Tony awards as well as major sports all stars. In other words, you can manipulate this criteria as well.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not a public university in the top 20.

Because real life != message boards full of circle-jerking striver moms who couldn't afford (or couldn't get their kid into) private college and do nothing but wax on and on about how amazing their kid's public U is. In real life, the smartest kids at Virginia, Berkeley, UCLA and Michigan are JEALOUS of their friends at elite private colleges.

Not true at all. I went to one of those public universities and majored in a department that was ranked #1 nationally. Many of us actually felt sorry for the fools who paid 10X for a lower ranked major at one of those overpriced private colleges.

But yes, I'm sure their dorms were fancier and the gym had a floating river...

Frankly, the only reason the privates rank higher is because of gimmicks like artificially pumping applications so they can reject a higher percentage of applicants.

Those private school students likely still had better placement after graduation.

Not true. The Forbes college list actually has the public universities at the top precisely because their ranking methodology gives greater weight to how many of a university's graduates become leaders in business and government. USNews and Forbes focus more on incoming stats you can manipulate like acceptance rate.

Wrong, Forbes almost exclusively focuses on outcomes. It has never taken into account acceptance rates in any of its past rankings.

[Anonymous]

This is about WSJ not Forbes. Forbes having UCB at 1 and UCSD at 15 should be enough to disregard it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not a public university in the top 20.

Because real life != message boards full of circle-jerking striver moms who couldn't afford (or couldn't get their kid into) private college and do nothing but wax on and on about how amazing their kid's public U is. In real life, the smartest kids at Virginia, Berkeley, UCLA and Michigan are JEALOUS of their friends at elite private colleges.

Not true at all. I went to one of those public universities and majored in a department that was ranked #1 nationally. Many of us actually felt sorry for the fools who paid 10X for a lower ranked major at one of those overpriced private colleges.

But yes, I'm sure their dorms were fancier and the gym had a floating river...

Frankly, the only reason the privates rank higher is because of gimmicks like artificially pumping applications so they can reject a higher percentage of applicants.

Those private school students likely still had better placement after graduation.

Not true. The Forbes college list actually has the public universities at the top precisely because their ranking methodology gives greater weight to how many of a university's graduates become leaders in business and government. USNews and Forbes focus more on incoming stats you can manipulate like acceptance rate.

This is dumb, the word leaders come mostly from HYP. For ed has a garbage methodology that uses cost of attendance divided by post grad salary, public schools are cheap for instate students thus public schools do better in the Forbes ranking.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not a public university in the top 20.

Because real life != message boards full of circle-jerking striver moms who couldn't afford (or couldn't get their kid into) private college and do nothing but wax on and on about how amazing their kid's public U is. In real life, the smartest kids at Virginia, Berkeley, UCLA and Michigan are JEALOUS of their friends at elite private colleges.

Not true at all. I went to one of those public universities and majored in a department that was ranked #1 nationally. Many of us actually felt sorry for the fools who paid 10X for a lower ranked major at one of those overpriced private colleges.

But yes, I'm sure their dorms were fancier and the gym had a floating river...

Frankly, the only reason the privates rank higher is because of gimmicks like artificially pumping applications so they can reject a higher percentage of applicants.

Those private school students likely still had better placement after graduation.

Not true. The Forbes college list actually has the public universities at the top precisely because their ranking methodology gives greater weight to how many of a university's graduates become leaders in business and government. USNews and Forbes focus more on incoming stats you can manipulate like acceptance rate.

This is dumb, the word leaders come mostly from HYP. For ed has a garbage methodology that uses cost of attendance divided by post grad salary, public schools are cheap for instate students thus public schools do better in the Forbes ranking.

HYP doesn’t collectively produce the most world leaders. When you have Yale with a mediocre business school and Princeton without any professional programs, it’s theoretically impossible. And even if they do, that speaks more upon the country’s incestuous transfer of power within WASPs by excluding others, than the actual quality of these schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not a public university in the top 20.

Because real life != message boards full of circle-jerking striver moms who couldn't afford (or couldn't get their kid into) private college and do nothing but wax on and on about how amazing their kid's public U is. In real life, the smartest kids at Virginia, Berkeley, UCLA and Michigan are JEALOUS of their friends at elite private colleges.

Not true at all. I went to one of those public universities and majored in a department that was ranked #1 nationally. Many of us actually felt sorry for the fools who paid 10X for a lower ranked major at one of those overpriced private colleges.

But yes, I'm sure their dorms were fancier and the gym had a floating river...

Frankly, the only reason the privates rank higher is because of gimmicks like artificially pumping applications so they can reject a higher percentage of applicants.

Those private school students likely still had better placement after graduation.

Not true. The Forbes college list actually has the public universities at the top precisely because their ranking methodology gives greater weight to how many of a university's graduates become leaders in business and government. USNews and Forbes focus more on incoming stats you can manipulate like acceptance rate.

Wrong, Forbes almost exclusively focuses on outcomes. It has never taken into account acceptance rates in any of its past rankings.

Isn't outcomes what you really want to focus on? Who cares if all your incoming classmates were fancy prep students with inflated stats? What matters is how much "value add" a college provides in terms of getting their students ahead in life. So Forbes is spot-on by focusing on actual outcomes as opposed to "prestige" and "peer reputation" scores.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not a public university in the top 20.

Because real life != message boards full of circle-jerking striver moms who couldn't afford (or couldn't get their kid into) private college and do nothing but wax on and on about how amazing their kid's public U is. In real life, the smartest kids at Virginia, Berkeley, UCLA and Michigan are JEALOUS of their friends at elite private colleges.

Not true at all. I went to one of those public universities and majored in a department that was ranked #1 nationally. Many of us actually felt sorry for the fools who paid 10X for a lower ranked major at one of those overpriced private colleges.

But yes, I'm sure their dorms were fancier and the gym had a floating river...

Frankly, the only reason the privates rank higher is because of gimmicks like artificially pumping applications so they can reject a higher percentage of applicants.

Those private school students likely still had better placement after graduation.

Not true. The Forbes college list actually has the public universities at the top precisely because their ranking methodology gives greater weight to how many of a university's graduates become leaders in business and government. USNews and Forbes focus more on incoming stats you can manipulate like acceptance rate.

Wrong, Forbes almost exclusively focuses on outcomes. It has never taken into account acceptance rates in any of its past rankings.

Isn't outcomes what you really want to focus on? Who cares if all your incoming classmates were fancy prep students with inflated stats? What matters is how much "value add" a college provides in terms of getting their students ahead in life. So Forbes is spot-on by focusing on actual outcomes as opposed to "prestige" and "peer reputation" scores.

Value add is a fair comparison, when the students at those public schools were pathetically low to begin with, they could only go up with a college degree. The absolute best students want to go to the best schools, they shouldn't be punished for that.

[Anonymous]

*isn't, ( the above comment)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not a public university in the top 20.

Because real life != message boards full of circle-jerking striver moms who couldn't afford (or couldn't get their kid into) private college and do nothing but wax on and on about how amazing their kid's public U is. In real life, the smartest kids at Virginia, Berkeley, UCLA and Michigan are JEALOUS of their friends at elite private colleges.

Not true at all. I went to one of those public universities and majored in a department that was ranked #1 nationally. Many of us actually felt sorry for the fools who paid 10X for a lower ranked major at one of those overpriced private colleges.

But yes, I'm sure their dorms were fancier and the gym had a floating river...

Frankly, the only reason the privates rank higher is because of gimmicks like artificially pumping applications so they can reject a higher percentage of applicants.

Those private school students likely still had better placement after graduation.

Not true. The Forbes college list actually has the public universities at the top precisely because their ranking methodology gives greater weight to how many of a university's graduates become leaders in business and government. USNews and Forbes focus more on incoming stats you can manipulate like acceptance rate.

This is dumb, the word leaders come mostly from HYP. For ed has a garbage methodology that uses cost of attendance divided by post grad salary, public schools are cheap for instate students thus public schools do better in the Forbes ranking.

"come mostly" - Penn, Stanford, Columbia, MIT have all produced more billionaires, high net-worth individuals, startup founders in tech, or Forbes 30 under 30 than either Yale or Princeton. The past two presidents went to Columbia and Wharton. Princeton hasn't graduated a single cabinet member since Donald Rumsfeld. So-called leaders like Tom Cotton went to Havard, Ron DeSantis went to Yale, and Ted Cruz to Princeton.

Maybe except for Rhodes, HYP grads have never dominated the top three of any awards outlined in the Forbes methodology at the same time: "MacArthur Fellowship, Nobel Prize, Breakthrough Prize, Lasker Prize, Fields Prize, Academy Awards, Oscars, Tony’s, NAACP Awards, Guggenheim Fellowship, major sport all-stars, Presidential Medals and Pulitzer Prizes."

The HYP prestige defense squad can't really hold on to their facts right? You do realize that there are tons of schools out there whose graduate outcomes are on par, if not better than HYP? What kind of world are you really living in?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not a public university in the top 20.

Because real life != message boards full of circle-jerking striver moms who couldn't afford (or couldn't get their kid into) private college and do nothing but wax on and on about how amazing their kid's public U is. In real life, the smartest kids at Virginia, Berkeley, UCLA and Michigan are JEALOUS of their friends at elite private colleges.

Not true at all. I went to one of those public universities and majored in a department that was ranked #1 nationally. Many of us actually felt sorry for the fools who paid 10X for a lower ranked major at one of those overpriced private colleges.

But yes, I'm sure their dorms were fancier and the gym had a floating river...

Frankly, the only reason the privates rank higher is because of gimmicks like artificially pumping applications so they can reject a higher percentage of applicants.

Those private school students likely still had better placement after graduation.

Not true. The Forbes college list actually has the public universities at the top precisely because their ranking methodology gives greater weight to how many of a university's graduates become leaders in business and government. USNews and Forbes focus more on incoming stats you can manipulate like acceptance rate.

This is dumb, the word leaders come mostly from HYP. For ed has a garbage methodology that uses cost of attendance divided by post grad salary, public schools are cheap for instate students thus public schools do better in the Forbes ranking.

HYP doesn’t collectively produce the most world leaders. When you have Yale with a mediocre business school and Princeton without any professional programs, it’s theoretically impossible. And even if they do, that speaks more upon the country’s incestuous transfer of power within WASPs by excluding others, than the actual quality of these schools.

Love this! Keep'em coming!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not a public university in the top 20.

Because real life != message boards full of circle-jerking striver moms who couldn't afford (or couldn't get their kid into) private college and do nothing but wax on and on about how amazing their kid's public U is. In real life, the smartest kids at Virginia, Berkeley, UCLA and Michigan are JEALOUS of their friends at elite private colleges.

Not true at all. I went to one of those public universities and majored in a department that was ranked #1 nationally. Many of us actually felt sorry for the fools who paid 10X for a lower ranked major at one of those overpriced private colleges.

But yes, I'm sure their dorms were fancier and the gym had a floating river...

Frankly, the only reason the privates rank higher is because of gimmicks like artificially pumping applications so they can reject a higher percentage of applicants.

Those private school students likely still had better placement after graduation.

Not true. The Forbes college list actually has the public universities at the top precisely because their ranking methodology gives greater weight to how many of a university's graduates become leaders in business and government. USNews and Forbes focus more on incoming stats you can manipulate like acceptance rate.

This is dumb, the word leaders come mostly from HYP. For ed has a garbage methodology that uses cost of attendance divided by post grad salary, public schools are cheap for instate students thus public schools do better in the Forbes ranking.

"come mostly" - Penn, Stanford, Columbia, MIT have all produced more billionaires, high net-worth individuals, startup founders in tech, or Forbes 30 under 30 than either Yale or Princeton. The past two presidents went to Columbia and Wharton. Princeton hasn't graduated a single cabinet member since Donald Rumsfeld. So-called leaders like Tom Cotton went to Havard, Ron DeSantis went to Yale, and Ted Cruz to Princeton.

Maybe except for Rhodes, HYP grads have never dominated the top three of any awards outlined in the Forbes methodology at the same time: "MacArthur Fellowship, Nobel Prize, Breakthrough Prize, Lasker Prize, Fields Prize, Academy Awards, Oscars, Tony’s, NAACP Awards, Guggenheim Fellowship, major sport all-stars, Presidential Medals and Pulitzer Prizes."

The HYP prestige defense squad can't really hold on to their facts right? You do realize that there are tons of schools out there whose graduate outcomes are on par, if not better than HYP? What kind of world are you really living in?

+1. The squad is really incapable of either reasoning, or fact-finding.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not a public university in the top 20.

Because real life != message boards full of circle-jerking striver moms who couldn't afford (or couldn't get their kid into) private college and do nothing but wax on and on about how amazing their kid's public U is. In real life, the smartest kids at Virginia, Berkeley, UCLA and Michigan are JEALOUS of their friends at elite private colleges.

Not true at all. I went to one of those public universities and majored in a department that was ranked #1 nationally. Many of us actually felt sorry for the fools who paid 10X for a lower ranked major at one of those overpriced private colleges.

But yes, I'm sure their dorms were fancier and the gym had a floating river...

Frankly, the only reason the privates rank higher is because of gimmicks like artificially pumping applications so they can reject a higher percentage of applicants.

Those private school students likely still had better placement after graduation.

Not true. The Forbes college list actually has the public universities at the top precisely because their ranking methodology gives greater weight to how many of a university's graduates become leaders in business and government. USNews and Forbes focus more on incoming stats you can manipulate like acceptance rate.

This is dumb, the word leaders come mostly from HYP. For ed has a garbage methodology that uses cost of attendance divided by post grad salary, public schools are cheap for instate students thus public schools do better in the Forbes ranking.

"come mostly" - Penn, Stanford, Columbia, MIT have all produced more billionaires, high net-worth individuals, startup founders in tech, or Forbes 30 under 30 than either Yale or Princeton. The past two presidents went to Columbia and Wharton. Princeton hasn't graduated a single cabinet member since Donald Rumsfeld. So-called leaders like Tom Cotton went to Havard, Ron DeSantis went to Yale, and Ted Cruz to Princeton.

Maybe except for Rhodes, HYP grads have never dominated the top three of any awards outlined in the Forbes methodology at the same time: "MacArthur Fellowship, Nobel Prize, Breakthrough Prize, Lasker Prize, Fields Prize, Academy Awards, Oscars, Tony’s, NAACP Awards, Guggenheim Fellowship, major sport all-stars, Presidential Medals and Pulitzer Prizes."

The HYP prestige defense squad can't really hold on to their facts right? You do realize that there are tons of schools out there whose graduate outcomes are on par, if not better than HYP? What kind of world are you really living in?

+1. The squad is really incapable of either reasoning, or fact-finding.

I don’t think anyone from cares but why are you all trumpeting how the Forbes rankings show that Yale and Princeton are terrible when they are 2 and 3?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not a public university in the top 20.

Because real life != message boards full of circle-jerking striver moms who couldn't afford (or couldn't get their kid into) private college and do nothing but wax on and on about how amazing their kid's public U is. In real life, the smartest kids at Virginia, Berkeley, UCLA and Michigan are JEALOUS of their friends at elite private colleges.

Not true at all. I went to one of those public universities and majored in a department that was ranked #1 nationally. Many of us actually felt sorry for the fools who paid 10X for a lower ranked major at one of those overpriced private colleges.

But yes, I'm sure their dorms were fancier and the gym had a floating river...

Frankly, the only reason the privates rank higher is because of gimmicks like artificially pumping applications so they can reject a higher percentage of applicants.

Those private school students likely still had better placement after graduation.

Not true. The Forbes college list actually has the public universities at the top precisely because their ranking methodology gives greater weight to how many of a university's graduates become leaders in business and government. USNews and Forbes focus more on incoming stats you can manipulate like acceptance rate.

This is dumb, the word leaders come mostly from HYP. For ed has a garbage methodology that uses cost of attendance divided by post grad salary, public schools are cheap for instate students thus public schools do better in the Forbes ranking.

"come mostly" - Penn, Stanford, Columbia, MIT have all produced more billionaires, high net-worth individuals, startup founders in tech, or Forbes 30 under 30 than either Yale or Princeton. The past two presidents went to Columbia and Wharton. Princeton hasn't graduated a single cabinet member since Donald Rumsfeld. So-called leaders like Tom Cotton went to Havard, Ron DeSantis went to Yale, and Ted Cruz to Princeton.

Maybe except for Rhodes, HYP grads have never dominated the top three of any awards outlined in the Forbes methodology at the same time: "MacArthur Fellowship, Nobel Prize, Breakthrough Prize, Lasker Prize, Fields Prize, Academy Awards, Oscars, Tony’s, NAACP Awards, Guggenheim Fellowship, major sport all-stars, Presidential Medals and Pulitzer Prizes."

The HYP prestige defense squad can't really hold on to their facts right? You do realize that there are tons of schools out there whose graduate outcomes are on par, if not better than HYP? What kind of world are you really living in?

+1. The squad is really incapable of either reasoning, or fact-finding.

I don’t think anyone from cares but why are you all trumpeting how the Forbes rankings show that Yale and Princeton are terrible when they are 2 and 3?

Classic HYP prestige defense squad move. You make a bold baseless claim and when facts don't work in your favor, you call them irrelevant or just "oh we don't care." Sounds very much like QAnon!