Ivy Caliber
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
|
The USNEWS ratings for the Ivy caliber schools haven't changed much, but it's clear that the Ivy caliber schools (all terrific, of course) are falling into tiers.
Top Tier IVY Princeton University Harvard University Yale University Columbia University Top Tier IVY Comparable Stanford University University of Chicago Massachusetts Institute of Technology Duke University Mid- Tier IVY University of Pennsylvania Dartmouth College Mid- Tier IVY Comparable California Institute of Technology Johns Hopkins Northwestern University Washington University in St. Louis Lower Tier IVY Cornell University Brown University Lower IVY Comparable University of Notre Dame Vanderbilt University |
Anonymous
|
And do you know that these rankings are meaningless because US News always puts the same universities on top of the list regardless of their actual results and the rest always fudge their numbers in an attempt to claw themselves up? It's well known. |
Anonymous
| Don't overthink it too much: ivy is ivy. |
Anonymous
| CalTech = mid tier? Hardly. |
Anonymous
| And you will use this "information" how? |
Anonymous
Pray tell...where are the Liberal Arts schools! |
Anonymous
| I disagree with those rankings, OP - in particular your bracketing of the Ivys. Which tells you right there how subjective this all is ... |
Anonymous
Exactly. US News is designed so the Ivies always come out on top. US News knows if the Ivies aren't on top no one will take their rankings seriously. Ranking these schools like this for real is a fool's errand, but it is fun. It's like ranking the top 25 NCAA football teams - done for fun and profit. |
Anonymous
SLACS are a different animal - you can't compare Amherst to Princeton. That would be like comparing Holton or STA to TJ OR Whitman. |
Anonymous
In other words, the metrics measured and compared are selected and weighed to give a result that is consistent with what many would expect based on subjective experience. That seems like a solid approach to ranking schools. The value is greater as you move away from the obvious (I,e, HYPS) and get into comparisons of other schools. The USNEWS rankings are far from meaningless to colleges who go through the effort of collecting and supplying the data to USNEWS. |
Anonymous
| Silly post - you are giving waaaaaaay too much credit to Duke. It belongs all the way down on your list, at best. |
Anonymous
|
The US News Rankings are a profit-making opportunity. They are designed to (1) play into people's preconceptions so they will invest in the product, (2) shake things up just enough each year to get people to pay for a new product.
The criteria is not entirely random, it is chosen to achieve those profit making goals. It is not chosen to determine which school is best for your child or anyone else's child. You could rearrange the criteria to emphasize metrics of an excellent education. (percentage of students who go on to get Phds? Cal Tech and Reed would be on top. Schools with the most direct professor-student interaction? Sarah Lawrence would be on top.) But this wouldn't sell magazine. It is sad that so many schools tailor their admissions process to the US News rankings (I'm talking to you, Wash. U.) I suppose it makes those schools hotter to students, but I sure wouldn't want my children picking a school based on some profit generating number. |
Anonymous
| Also, OP, you have way too much time on your hands. |
Anonymous
|
The US News rankings have many shortcomings, particularly the degree to which colleges can and do game the system and the extent to which the rankings can be interpreted to magnify statistically insignificant differences. This has certainly been reflected in the collective experience of several recent grads and current students in our family. This group includes a recent graduate of and a current student at a "top-tier Ivy" (per OP's taxonomy), a student at a "mid-tier Ivy", a student at a "lower-tier Ivy comparable", and a student at a school that ranks just a notch below the point at which OP's list ends. All are STEM students who have done very well academically in college. The student who has had the best experience overall is probably the one at the lowest-ranked school, where the commitment to and quality of undergraduate teaching seems to be strongest. Oh, and I might add that this student also seems to be having the most fun -- not just IMHO, but in the eyes of his sibs and cousins, all of whom are urging the youngest members of their generation, who are currently in HS, not to get suckered in by the ratings game. DCUM readers might take their advice to heart as well.
|
Anonymous
You have had too much kool-aid this am. |