USNWR Top 10 Leaked

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Seems like a normal list. You are always going to get debates about the t10, t20, t50. All these schools are top notch.

I would extend that sentiment to the Top 100 plus the top 50 or so LACs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They have 4 schools at the rank of 6 because if there were 3, that would spell out 6-6-6 and then people would be afraid to apply to them.

Srsly, what kind of ranking system ends up with 4 6s in a Top 10. It's like they didn't get the assignment OR there's practically no difference in the education on offer.

I don't find that strange at all. If they want to reflect reality, they should really be doing tiers rather than numerical rankings because it's silly to me that a school at no. 7 is somehow objectively better than a school at no. 6. But I think they rank in specific numbers rather than in tiers because most people like it that way.

Even tiers is useless and creates a false impression of the reality of college.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does anyone else think it is weird that Hopkins is tied with Caltech?

Hopkins offers so much opportunity, so I don't think it's weird. The US Gov backs a truck of research money into their yard every year.

And have you been on that campus lately? Thanks, Bloomberg.

I have. It’s so great it got my 2025 kid to forget about Princeton. Grateful for that!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:They have 4 schools at the rank of 6 because if there were 3, that would spell out 6-6-6 and then people would be afraid to apply to them.

Srsly, what kind of ranking system ends up with 4 6s in a Top 10. It's like they didn't get the assignment OR there's practically no difference in the education on offer.

There is no difference in the education on offer at these and dozens of other colleges. But the game of pretending is a fun sport.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Columbia is on their shitlist.

As it should be. Cheaters.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Columbia is on their shitlist.

As it should be. Cheaters.

Columbia should be lower than Brown and Cornell, just above Dartmouth at the bottom of the T20

[Anonymous]

CalTech should be on a different kind of list. Still tops but not tops along with "full service" schools the Hopkins, Chicago, Harvard

[Anonymous]

Embargoed means it's done, but not for public consumption until a specified date.

People in education have the full list beyond the top 10 and anyone with integrity will abide by the embargo.

[Anonymous]

Are we satisfied that US news is clearly a bit more stable and based in reality of what schools are prestigious.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Seems like a normal list. You are always going to get debates about the t10, t20, t50. All these schools are top notch.

+1 does anyone actually believe there are real quality distinctions between all these very wealthy private schools? These ranking debates are so pointless.

Agree.

100% agree

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Are we satisfied that US news is clearly a bit more stable and based in reality of what schools are prestigious.

Well, they certainly weren't last year. They got rid of class size, the qualifications of professors, the number of years it takes students to graduate, and so on. The financial aid that private universities offered didn't matter anymore. What mattered where the number of students on federal Pell grants, which are not needed when you go to high-endowment schools that offer grants that meet all need. And so on and so forth.

So it was chaos in the US News rankings last year. Public colleges moved up by 30,40,50 places in a single year. And private colleges took a heavy hit in last years rankings. It was obvious that the editors of US News had certain biases that they wished to see expressed in their rankings.

We will see what this year's list looks like and whether the editors continue to be ridiculous. If the leaked top 10 are true, I personally am not particularly bothered by the list so far. It seems fairly reasonable. We can all quibble about CalTech. It's such an unusual school for undergrad. There's less than 250 students per year that attend, and it's all STEM. What's the point of even comparing it to larger and more comprehensive universities? But no one would dispute that it's not a terrific school with some serious students.

And I would argue that Duke is overrated. But whatever. It's the rest of the list that I'm curious about.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Are we satisfied that US news is clearly a bit more stable and based in reality of what schools are prestigious.

It’s not a stable ranking at all. They deliberately change it every year.

[Anonymous]

Good list

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:CalTech should be on a different kind of list. Still tops but not tops along with "full service" schools the Hopkins, Chicago, Harvard

You could say the same about MIT

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Embargoed means it's done, but not for public consumption until a specified date.

People in education have the full list beyond the top 10 and anyone with integrity will abide by the embargo.

It's a news story and any newspaper not specifically subject to the embargo should publish the list if they have it.