US News 2020 rankings

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does anyone even care about any of the schools ranked outside the Top 25?

Yes. And is there a sudden invisible cutoff between 25 and 26?

I really think a good consistent list of top schools is to look at is how College Confidential organizes it. There are the ivies in one category, top universities in another, and then top liberal arts colleges. This is consistent and is not ranked.

Ivies:
Brown
Columbia
Cornell
Dartmouth
Harvard
Penn
Princeton
Yale

Top universities:
Berkekely
UCLA
Cal Tech
Carnegie Mellon
Chicago
Duke
Emory
Georgetown
Hopkins
MIT
Michigan
Chapel Hill
Northwestern
Notre Dame
Rice
Stanford
Tulane
UVA
Vanderbilt
Wash U

Top Liberal Arts Colleges:
Amherst
Barnard
Bates
Bowdoin
Bryn Mayr
Carleton
Claremont
Colby
Colgate
Davidson
Grinnell
Hamilton
Harvey Mudd
Haverford
Kenyon
Macalester
Middlebury
Mount Holyoke
Oberlin
Pomona
Reed
Smith
Swarthmore
Trinity
Vassar
Washington & Lee
Wellesley
Wesleyan
Whitman
Williams

All other schools in one separate batch alphabetically.

Simple, clean.

Huh? The Ivies are not necessarily better than other top schools.

Nobody is saying that. It is just a way to organize top schools. They are all top schools, just not ranked. Ivy League is what it is.

It’s an athletic league. That’s what it is. Like the Big Ten. It was established in 1954, so the concept isn’t even that old.

God I'm so tired of this canard.

I am not saying the Ivy League colleges are better than any other. I am saying words and phrases have meanings, and when you say "Ivy League" to most people they don't think of sports the way they do when you say "Big Ten". Stop saying this, you sound like a petulant or bitter person. You're not persuading anyone.

And to repeat, this is not an endorsement of Ivy League schools, simply a rage against stupidity.

And for the last time, Cornell is not a real Ivy!!! Please, folks, why does this need to be repeated?

Troll or embarrassing moron....either way it’s pathetic little loser.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Statistically it is wrong to to assign a numerical store to its school because the margin of error of its data sources is greater than the difference of the scores.

They should rank schools in tiers:

1. Super elite tier: HYPMS

2. Elite tier (6 - 15): Columbia, Penn, Chicago, Duke, Brown, Dartmouth, Cornell, ...

3. Top tier (16 - 30): These schools are equals in terms of prestige and rankings -- UVA, Michigan, UCLA, Cal, CMU, Emory, Georgetown, NYU, USC, Georgia Tech ...

4. Wake Forest, W&M ...

Except, Tier Person, Wake Forest now outranks UVA.

At your "Top Tier" schools like Cal, UCLA, you can live on campus for about 1 year out of 4+ years. At Michigan, perhaps 1.3 out of 4+ years.. At Yale, Harvard, and Princeton, you will live on campus for all 4 years. These aren't even remotely the same type of schools.

Idiot, you can live on campus all 4 years at Michigan. In fact, seniors who have lived on campus for 3 years have top pick for housing their senior year.

If you’re going to criticize schools at least learn basic facts about them.

Also, are you trying to say they don’t have the money to provide housing? Michigan’s endowment is 12 billion—9th highest in the country.

I'm saying it is a completely different experience. It isn't residential like the other schools.

Huh? Where do you get that idea?

Michigan isn’t a commuter school or something ...

70% of students are "commuting" from off campus housing. At Harvard is 3%. At Princeton, it is 6%. They are different experiences.

[Anonymous]

Michigan is not a "commuter school" the way George Mason or Fordham are.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Crickets. Where are the UVA boosters? Congrats to Michigan pushing UVA out.

UVA and W&M really dropped. Big change in just one year.

Meh. I wouldn't call UVA's drop to 28th from 25th as big. There are nine schools (counting ties) ranked between 25th and 29th. The overall score for the 25th ranked is 75 and for the 29th it's 72. Pretty negligible difference.

William and Mary on the other hand is now at 40th, a new low for them. Then there's Maryland, at 64th. Not THAT's the embarrassing ranking.

W&M is now behind schools like UC Davis, UC Irvine, UC Santa Barbara, and Florida. For undergraduate, I think it is much, much better than those schools, but maybe I'm just out of date.

Yes you are. Florida grad here. “

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Michigan is not a "commuter school" the way George Mason or Fordham are.

It is compared to Harvard.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Michigan is not a "commuter school" the way George Mason or Fordham are.

PP is desperate to paint Michigan as mediocre. It's pathetic.

Hey PP -- at Georgetown, most upperclassmen live off-campus. Is Georgetown a commuter school too?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Michigan is not a "commuter school" the way George Mason or Fordham are.

It is compared to Harvard.

It's not a commuter school in the sense most people think of the phrase, and you know it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Crickets. Where are the UVA boosters? Congrats to Michigan pushing UVA out.

UVA and W&M really dropped. Big change in just one year.

Meh. I wouldn't call UVA's drop to 28th from 25th as big. There are nine schools (counting ties) ranked between 25th and 29th. The overall score for the 25th ranked is 75 and for the 29th it's 72. Pretty negligible difference.

William and Mary on the other hand is now at 40th, a new low for them. Then there's Maryland, at 64th. Not THAT's the embarrassing ranking.

W&M is now behind schools like UC Davis, UC Irvine, UC Santa Barbara, and Florida. For undergraduate, I think it is much, much better than those schools, but maybe I'm just out of date.

Yes you are. Florida grad here. “

No you’re not out of date. Signed, reality.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Michigan is not a "commuter school" the way George Mason or Fordham are.

It is compared to Harvard.

It's not a commuter school in the sense most people think of the phrase, and you know it.

I know it doesn't provide the same residential experience and you know that. Or you should know that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Statistically it is wrong to to assign a numerical store to individual schools because the margin of error of its data sources is greater than the difference of the scores.

They should rank schools in tiers:

1. Super elite tier (1 - 5): HYPMS

2. Elite tier (6 - 14): Caltech, Columbia, Penn, Chicago, Duke, Brown, Dartmouth, Cornell, Northwestern

3. Top tier (15 - 30): These schools are equals in terms of prestige and rankings -- Rice, Hopkins, Vandy, Notre Dame, UVA, Michigan, UCLA, Cal, CMU, Emory, Georgetown, NYU, USC, Georgia Tech, UNC Chapel Hill, Tulane

Except, Tier Person, Wake Forest now outranks UVA.

OK, See the definitive list above for the top three tiers.

Tulane?????

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Does anyone even care about any of the schools ranked outside the Top 25?

Yeah. We care about UVA.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Michigan is not a "commuter school" the way George Mason or Fordham are.

PP is desperate to paint Michigan as mediocre. It's pathetic.

Hey PP -- at Georgetown, most upperclassmen live off-campus. Is Georgetown a commuter school too?

It is another school that can't come close to creating a similar residential environment to most of the Ivy League and many other schools including LACs. If you look at Georgetown, although it is a fine school, it has a relatively low alumni giving rate and endowment compared to the schools that are more residential. I think there is a correlation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Michigan is not a "commuter school" the way George Mason or Fordham are.

PP is desperate to paint Michigan as mediocre. It's pathetic.

Hey PP -- at Georgetown, most upperclassmen live off-campus. Is Georgetown a commuter school too?

It is another school that can't come close to creating a similar residential environment to most of the Ivy League and many other schools including LACs. If you look at Georgetown, although it is a fine school, it has a relatively low alumni giving rate and endowment compared to the schools that are more residential. I think there is a correlation.

Yet Michigan has massive alumni loyalty. I'm married to a Michigan alum and the loyalty is almost cultish. Michigan's endowment is $12 billion, the 9th highest in the country. Residential housing doesn't have the impact you think it does.

Your argument is specious. Just stop trying to make Michigan mediocre. It's not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Michigan is not a "commuter school" the way George Mason or Fordham are.

PP is desperate to paint Michigan as mediocre. It's pathetic.

Hey PP -- at Georgetown, most upperclassmen live off-campus. Is Georgetown a commuter school too?

It is another school that can't come close to creating a similar residential environment to most of the Ivy League and many other schools including LACs. If you look at Georgetown, although it is a fine school, it has a relatively low alumni giving rate and endowment compared to the schools that are more residential. I think there is a correlation.

Yet Michigan has massive alumni loyalty. I'm married to a Michigan alum and the loyalty is almost cultish. Michigan's endowment is $12 billion, the 9th highest in the country. Residential housing doesn't have the impact you think it does.

Your argument is specious. Just stop trying to make Michigan mediocre. It's not.

It is a huge school that does have a large endowment. It is way behind a lot of schools on a per capita basis. What percentage of Michigan's cultishly loyal alumni actually give back to the school vs. root for Big Blue vs Army? How does that percentage compare to other schools? Is it anywhere remotely close?

And what is the breakdown of that massive endowment? How much belongs to the medical center and benefits no undergraduates? How much to the Law School? Graduate Business? Athletics?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why is Stanford not ranked top 5?

Because it’s 6.

What makes you think Stanford should be in the top tier with Princeton, Harvard, or Yale? Look at their endowment.
School. Enrollment. Endowment
Princeton. 8,000. 25 billion
Harvard. 20,000. 39 billion
Yale. 13,000. 29 billion
Stanford. 17,000. 26 billion

Less money means less resources. By that, Stanford belongs in where it is.

Put that way, it's an interesting point. That said--most gen Y and Zs consider Stanford and Harvard #1 peers.

But here's a counterpoint: In annual fundraising, over the last 12 years, Stanford has been tops 9 and Harvard 3. Stanford professors and associate professors are the highest paid, and assistant professors are the second highest paid.

That bit of higher pay is completely offset by the super high cost of living in silicon valley. That's the reason the pay at Stanford is higher, not because it attracts larger caliber of professors than the three top ivies.

Stanford faculty have produced more Nobel Prize winners than all but Harvard and Chicago. Since 2000, more than any other school. Stanford faculty can also get income from outside sources like consultancy.

Remember that we are talking about the rankings for undergraduate experience. Having more Nobel prize laureates mostly results from the fact that Standford is more STEM oriented and having larger professional schools. Princeton does not have any professional schools. Feeding tons of supreme court justices or top US and foreign government decision makers or wide range of business leaders to the society will not be reflected in Nobel prizes.

The success of students are primarily made possible when fueled by the vast resources afforded by the schools like the top Ivies (the endowment per student at Princeton is twice as much as that of Stanford). Stanford is a top school too, of course. But its influence in the world stage has still a long way to go to match that of the three top ivies. Stanford's influence is much narrower compared with the Ivies.