Official US news 2023 thread

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Completely obvious HYPSM are the top 5. I assume cheating, if others crack into that top 5.

Ranked too high:
Chicago at 6 (should be 9 to 11)
Hopkins at 7 tie (should be 10 to 12)
Northwestern at 10 tie (should be 12 to 14)
Vanderbilt at 13 tie (should be 15 to 17)
Wash U at 15 tie (should be 17 to 19)

Ranked too low:
Columbia at 18 (should be 10 to 12)
Cornell at 17 (should be 14 to 16)

My take:
Princeton
MIT
Harvard, Stanford, Yale
UPenn
Caltech
Duke
Chicago
Hopkins
Columbia
Dartmouth
Brown
Northwestern
Cornell
Rice, Vanderbilt
WashU, Notre Dame
Berkley

You don't know anything, clearly.

Why resort to an Ad Hominem attack?
Please share your "wisdom" with the group.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You can't sell online ads or magazines if the rankings don't have some movement. It is helpful to look at the rankings data over time to get a sense of school tiers: https://andyreiter.com/datasets/

Colby hasn't historically been regularly ranked in the top 15. They've often been in the high teens and 20s so that drop isn't huge.

Shocker: Columbia's real stats don't equate to being regularly ranked with Stanford, Harvard, and Yale!

This was always clear to students, which is why Columbia was never able to attract HYPSM cross admits.

USNWR is influential, unfortunately, but there are limits. Princeton has been #1 for the past umpteen years, but it isn't winning cross-admit battles with Harvard, Stanford, and MIT.

Unless you want to be a D3 athlete, I don't see MIT winning too many cross-admit battles with those schools either. With MIT's limited excellence in eng, CS, and econ, their ranking always feels a little inflated.

Stanford would probably be better than MIT in all of those top areas too and is also great in just about every other discipline.

Not better in engineering and technology. Close, but not better.

Stanford would likely get the nod in CS and MIT in the other engineering disciplines. Even if it is just close in MIT's very strongest areas, I can see the point about Stanford pretty clearly being the better overall school. Most people who get into the two "Boston area" schools don't choose MIT either. With Harvard, I would give MIT the clear advantage in CS and engineering though.

For those who care about pure prestige and impressive name recognition (a lot of US News readers), Harvard and Yale can't be matched outside of Oxbridge, though Stanford and Princeton are getting there. Mass Tech and those perceived public universities in Chicago and Pennsylvania (Univ of __) aren't .

Stanford’s prestige is the same as Harvard’s—maybe greater.. Oxbridge is not at Harvard or Stanford’s level; it’s more like Columbia or UCLA. [/quote]



HAHAHA! Do you have any idea what it takes to get into Oxford? Do you know about the testing and the critical interviews? I do because DS went through it.

I know students at both Oxford and Cambridge, fed from DC's international school in London, they actually spent a lot of time at our house so I know them fairly well. While they were smart, they are not in the top 1-2%, AT ALL, nowhere near HYPSM level. They MIGHT have gotten into UCLA or Columbia levels, MIGHT. I agree with the previous poster that Oxbridge is like UCLA, maybe Emory. I also know a bunch of kids at LSE and despite the name recognition, I would tell you the caliber of the kids is the same. Nowhere near our tippy top

Spending time with a handful of kids and making broad generalizations about them and the schools isn't helpful.

In terms of international name recognition and prestige, Oxford and Cambridge would also be well above the schools you've listed. Ask people familiar with those schools abroad what MIT even stands for. Princeton, which the US News methodology loves, isn't there either.

From a US prestige perspective in higher ed, it doesn't get better than the Rhodes or Gates scholarships at Oxford and Cambridge.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My daughter's HS class of 2022 was such an example. Kids were so so so supportive of one another - no matter where they got in, no matter the aspirations their parents had for them, no matter the ranking of the college or the ranking of the student, no matter the numbers of acceptances or rejections or the many many MANY deferrals and waitlistings. I love that they understood on a deep level how hard this is for our seniors, and that maturity means celebrating everyone. Not to judge anyone at all. I understand. But my hope for this cycle (back to back kids) is the same level of caring for one another.

Great to hear about that type of support! Where did your daughter go to HS?

Thinking back to my time at a school that isn't in the DMV, I had a very different experience. Students really thought they were better than one another as applicants due to a combination of rank, GPA, standardized test scores, and perceived leadership. A few semi-openly talked about race, legacy status, and sports as the "only" reasons people were admitted to some schools and others were not leading to some uncomfortable tension at a time in life when celebration was in order. Remember as application season approaches that parents need to lead the way in modeling behavior!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My daughter's HS class of 2022 was such an example. Kids were so so so supportive of one another - no matter where they got in, no matter the aspirations their parents had for them, no matter the ranking of the college or the ranking of the student, no matter the numbers of acceptances or rejections or the many many MANY deferrals and waitlistings. I love that they understood on a deep level how hard this is for our seniors, and that maturity means celebrating everyone. Not to judge anyone at all. I understand. But my hope for this cycle (back to back kids) is the same level of caring for one another.

Great to hear about that type of support! Where did your daughter go to HS?

Thinking back to my time at a school that isn't in the DMV, I had a very different experience. Students really thought they were better than one another as applicants due to a combination of rank, GPA, standardized test scores, and perceived leadership. A few semi-openly talked about race, legacy status, and sports as the "only" reasons people were admitted to some schools and others were not leading to some uncomfortable tension at a time in life when celebration was in order. Remember as application season approaches that parents need to lead the way in modeling behavior!

Why? It is true - most admissions to top 15 are results of affirmative action, legacy and athletic recruits. We cannot change anything if cannot even discuss the issues.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My daughter's HS class of 2022 was such an example. Kids were so so so supportive of one another - no matter where they got in, no matter the aspirations their parents had for them, no matter the ranking of the college or the ranking of the student, no matter the numbers of acceptances or rejections or the many many MANY deferrals and waitlistings. I love that they understood on a deep level how hard this is for our seniors, and that maturity means celebrating everyone. Not to judge anyone at all. I understand. But my hope for this cycle (back to back kids) is the same level of caring for one another.

Great to hear about that type of support! Where did your daughter go to HS?

Thinking back to my time at a school that isn't in the DMV, I had a very different experience. Students really thought they were better than one another as applicants due to a combination of rank, GPA, standardized test scores, and perceived leadership. A few semi-openly talked about race, legacy status, and sports as the "only" reasons people were admitted to some schools and others were not leading to some uncomfortable tension at a time in life when celebration was in order. Remember as application season approaches that parents need to lead the way in modeling behavior!

Why? It is true - most admissions to top 15 are results of affirmative action, legacy and athletic recruits. We cannot change anything if cannot even discuss the issues.

The students that are not any of those things are also allowed to discuss how this process works for the applicants that are admitted from the pool of non legacy, non athletes, non affirmative action etc. It is a perfectly useful and legitimate discussion.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You can't sell online ads or magazines if the rankings don't have some movement. It is helpful to look at the rankings data over time to get a sense of school tiers: https://andyreiter.com/datasets/

Colby hasn't historically been regularly ranked in the top 15. They've often been in the high teens and 20s so that drop isn't huge.

Shocker: Columbia's real stats don't equate to being regularly ranked with Stanford, Harvard, and Yale!

This was always clear to students, which is why Columbia was never able to attract HYPSM cross admits.

USNWR is influential, unfortunately, but there are limits. Princeton has been #1 for the past umpteen years, but it isn't winning cross-admit battles with Harvard, Stanford, and MIT.

Unless you want to be a D3 athlete, I don't see MIT winning too many cross-admit battles with those schools either. With MIT's limited excellence in eng, CS, and econ, their ranking always feels a little inflated.

Stanford would probably be better than MIT in all of those top areas too and is also great in just about every other discipline.

Not better in engineering and technology. Close, but not better.

Stanford would likely get the nod in CS and MIT in the other engineering disciplines. Even if it is just close in MIT's very strongest areas, I can see the point about Stanford pretty clearly being the better overall school. Most people who get into the two "Boston area" schools don't choose MIT either. With Harvard, I would give MIT the clear advantage in CS and engineering though.

For those who care about pure prestige and impressive name recognition (a lot of US News readers), Harvard and Yale can't be matched outside of Oxbridge, though Stanford and Princeton are getting there. Mass Tech and those perceived public universities in Chicago and Pennsylvania (Univ of __) aren't .

Stanford’s prestige is the same as Harvard’s—maybe greater.. Oxbridge is not at Harvard or Stanford’s level; it’s more like Columbia or UCLA. [/quote]



HAHAHA! Do you have any idea what it takes to get into Oxford? Do you know about the testing and the critical interviews? I do because DS went through it.

I know students at both Oxford and Cambridge, fed from DC's international school in London, they actually spent a lot of time at our house so I know them fairly well. While they were smart, they are not in the top 1-2%, AT ALL, nowhere near HYPSM level. They MIGHT have gotten into UCLA or Columbia levels, MIGHT. I agree with the previous poster that Oxbridge is like UCLA, maybe Emory. I also know a bunch of kids at LSE and despite the name recognition, I would tell you the caliber of the kids is the same. Nowhere near our tippy top

Spending time with a handful of kids and making broad generalizations about them and the schools isn't helpful.

In terms of international name recognition and prestige, Oxford and Cambridge would also be well above the schools you've listed. Ask people familiar with those schools abroad what MIT even stands for. Princeton, which the US News methodology loves, isn't there either.

From a US prestige perspective in higher ed, it doesn't get better than the Rhodes or Gates scholarships at Oxford and Cambridge.

+1. Also the PP claims these unimpressive kids came from “DC’s International School in London” which doesn’t exist. If they meant “DCS International School” that is in Jaipur, India, so most of those Oxbridge headed students would be speaking English as a second language and the girls are socially pressured not to talk or give opinions as strongly as American women do - hence perhaps the PP thought that these students weren’t that impressive from which he then somehow interpolates that ALL students at Oxbridge are unimpressive ergo Oxbridge is equivalent to a second tier school in the US. Whatever. FWIW I went to Harvard undergrad and Harvard Law and one of my children is at Oxford now. I was fortunate to meet some of the most brilliant people I’ve ever known at Harvard and while visiting DC at Oxford

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:They just came out. The other thread was a guessing game. This is the real one. A few notes.

UVA 25, tied with Michigan and NYU

William & Mary at 42

UMD at 55

VT at 62

VT engineering ranked 16, above UMD’s 22

UVA undergrad business ranked 8

If Princeton is #1, these rankings have no credibility.

Trash.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You can't sell online ads or magazines if the rankings don't have some movement. It is helpful to look at the rankings data over time to get a sense of school tiers: https://andyreiter.com/datasets/

Colby hasn't historically been regularly ranked in the top 15. They've often been in the high teens and 20s so that drop isn't huge.

Shocker: Columbia's real stats don't equate to being regularly ranked with Stanford, Harvard, and Yale!

This was always clear to students, which is why Columbia was never able to attract HYPSM cross admits.

USNWR is influential, unfortunately, but there are limits. Princeton has been #1 for the past umpteen years, but it isn't winning cross-admit battles with Harvard, Stanford, and MIT.

Unless you want to be a D3 athlete, I don't see MIT winning too many cross-admit battles with those schools either. With MIT's limited excellence in eng, CS, and econ, their ranking always feels a little inflated.

Stanford would probably be better than MIT in all of those top areas too and is also great in just about every other discipline.

Not better in engineering and technology. Close, but not better.

Stanford would likely get the nod in CS and MIT in the other engineering disciplines. Even if it is just close in MIT's very strongest areas, I can see the point about Stanford pretty clearly being the better overall school. Most people who get into the two "Boston area" schools don't choose MIT either. With Harvard, I would give MIT the clear advantage in CS and engineering though.

For those who care about pure prestige and impressive name recognition (a lot of US News readers), Harvard and Yale can't be matched outside of Oxbridge, though Stanford and Princeton are getting there. Mass Tech and those perceived public universities in Chicago and Pennsylvania (Univ of __) aren't .

Stanford’s prestige is the same as Harvard’s—maybe greater.. Oxbridge is not at Harvard or Stanford’s level; it’s more like Columbia or UCLA. [/quote]



HAHAHA! Do you have any idea what it takes to get into Oxford? Do you know about the testing and the critical interviews? I do because DS went through it.

I know students at both Oxford and Cambridge, fed from DC's international school in London, they actually spent a lot of time at our house so I know them fairly well. While they were smart, they are not in the top 1-2%, AT ALL, nowhere near HYPSM level. They MIGHT have gotten into UCLA or Columbia levels, MIGHT. I agree with the previous poster that Oxbridge is like UCLA, maybe Emory. I also know a bunch of kids at LSE and despite the name recognition, I would tell you the caliber of the kids is the same. Nowhere near our tippy top

Spending time with a handful of kids and making broad generalizations about them and the schools isn't helpful.

In terms of international name recognition and prestige, Oxford and Cambridge would also be well above the schools you've listed. Ask people familiar with those schools abroad what MIT even stands for. Princeton, which the US News methodology loves, isn't there either.

From a US prestige perspective in higher ed, it doesn't get better than the Rhodes or Gates scholarships at Oxford and Cambridge.

+1. Also the PP claims these unimpressive kids came from “DC’s International School in London” which doesn’t exist. If they meant “DCS International School” that is in Jaipur, India, so most of those Oxbridge headed students would be speaking English as a second language and the girls are socially pressured not to talk or give opinions as strongly as American women do - hence perhaps the PP thought that these students weren’t that impressive from which he then somehow interpolates that ALL students at Oxbridge are unimpressive ergo Oxbridge is equivalent to a second tier school in the US. Whatever. FWIW I went to Harvard undergrad and Harvard Law and one of my children is at Oxford now. I was fortunate to meet some of the most brilliant people I’ve ever known at Harvard and while visiting DC at Oxford

For almost all subjects, Oxbridge is a comparatively very easy admit compared to at least a dozen American schools — maybe two dozen. There’s no way around that: a typical high stats Brit (top 20% A-Levels) has a 20-40% chance of an Oxford or Cambridge admit. (Interviews are really not so grueling in many subjects, where 1/2 the kids get interviewed and at least 1/2 of those interviewed are admitted. This info is freely available on their websites.)

In contrast, American high-stats kids have nowhere near the same chance of getting into a top American school, even if all are applied for (yes, I am taking into account that you can apply to only one Oxbridge school for undergrad — grad admissions at Oxbridge are even easier). Stated differently, if a non-hooked, high stats American with clearly-defined academic interests was admitted to Emory, he or she could probably have gotten into Oxbridge.

Emory is no slouch, so congrats are in order. But that does not mean that people who went to Harvard should pretend their kid at Oxford is attending an equivalent school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They just came out. The other thread was a guessing game. This is the real one. A few notes.

UVA 25, tied with Michigan and NYU

William & Mary at 42

UMD at 55

VT at 62

VT engineering ranked 16, above UMD’s 22

UVA undergrad business ranked 8

If Princeton is #1, these rankings have no credibility.

Trash.

Sounds like you’re hoping to discredit USNWR. Be honest: which school’s ranking are you upset about? .

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They just came out. The other thread was a guessing game. This is the real one. A few notes.

UVA 25, tied with Michigan and NYU

William & Mary at 42

UMD at 55

VT at 62

VT engineering ranked 16, above UMD’s 22

UVA undergrad business ranked 8

If Princeton is #1, these rankings have no credibility.

Trash.

It’s the best undergraduate education in the country.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They just came out. The other thread was a guessing game. This is the real one. A few notes.

UVA 25, tied with Michigan and NYU

William & Mary at 42

UMD at 55

VT at 62

VT engineering ranked 16, above UMD’s 22

UVA undergrad business ranked 8

If Princeton is #1, these rankings have no credibility.

Trash.

It’s the best undergraduate education in the country.

Harvard and Stanford have separated themselves as overall universities over the last 20+ years (basically every department and grad school they have is elite).

If you want the best undergraduate education, attend a top LAC. Princeton is still a pretty good to great research university depending on the subject area, so graduate students will likely be getting the best newly developed classes and be most involved in the important research. I agree that Princeton has the #1 eating clubs though!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:[
For almost all subjects, Oxbridge is a comparatively very easy admit compared to at least a dozen American schools — maybe two dozen. There’s no way around that: a typical high stats Brit (top 20% A-Levels) has a 20-40% chance of an Oxford or Cambridge admit. (Interviews are really not so grueling in many subjects, where 1/2 the kids get interviewed and at least 1/2 of those interviewed are admitted. This info is freely available on their websites.)

In contrast, American high-stats kids have nowhere near the same chance of getting into a top American school, even if all are applied for (yes, I am taking into account that you can apply to only one Oxbridge school for undergrad — grad admissions at Oxbridge are even easier). Stated differently, if a non-hooked, high stats American with clearly-defined academic interests was admitted to Emory, he or she could probably have gotten into Oxbridge.

Emory is no slouch, so congrats are in order. But that does not mean that people who went to Harvard should pretend their kid at Oxford is attending an equivalent school.

This is an exaggeration. The balanced take is that Oxford’s selectivity is about the same as that of Columbia, Cornell, or Northwestern — selective, but not equivalent to the very top tier schools like Harvard, Yale, Princeton, and Stanford.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They just came out. The other thread was a guessing game. This is the real one. A few notes.

UVA 25, tied with Michigan and NYU

William & Mary at 42

UMD at 55

VT at 62

VT engineering ranked 16, above UMD’s 22

UVA undergrad business ranked 8

If Princeton is #1, these rankings have no credibility.

Trash.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They just came out. The other thread was a guessing game. This is the real one. A few notes.

UVA 25, tied with Michigan and NYU

William & Mary at 42

UMD at 55

VT at 62

VT engineering ranked 16, above UMD’s 22

UVA undergrad business ranked 8

If Princeton is #1, these rankings have no credibility.

Trash.

Why would you say this?

Everyone knows that it's one of the top 5 best schools in the country, and that that will never change no matter what stupid nonsense USNWR prints. Who really cares that it's #1 this year?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They just came out. The other thread was a guessing game. This is the real one. A few notes.

UVA 25, tied with Michigan and NYU

William & Mary at 42

UMD at 55

VT at 62

VT engineering ranked 16, above UMD’s 22

UVA undergrad business ranked 8

If Princeton is #1, these rankings have no credibility.

Trash.

Why would you say this?

Everyone knows that it's one of the top 5 best schools in the country, and that that will never change no matter what stupid nonsense USNWR prints. Who really cares that it's #1 this year?

Saying Princeton at #1 is trash seems like a deliberate provocation (troll, if you will), but asserting that "Everyone knows that it's one of the top 5 best schools in the country" is no closer to the truth.