USNWR Top 10 Leaked

[Anonymous]

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

The Top 10 schools have been the same for the last 20+ years, with maybe the deck chairs shuffled a bit.

Not sure how you conclude much of anything by just looking at the Top 10.

[Anonymous]

"leaked" BWAHAHAHAHA

[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.

+ 100

The difference may be minimal, or I would like to see the data they used.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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

I agree. MIT and Caltech are sort of on an island on their own. However, they are academically oriented schools, and not really as different from the traditional universities Juilliard or Curtis.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So apparently someone at the Daily Pennsylvanian (the undergrad newspaper at Penn) was able to get their hands on the embargoed U.S. News & World Report college rankings for 2025. They posted a story about it, listing the top 10 schools:

https://www.thedp.com/article/2024/09/penn-princeton-mit-us-news-rankings-drop

1. Princeton
2. MIT
3. Harvard
4. Yale
5. Stanford
6. Caltech
6. Duke
6. Johns Hopkins
6. Northwestern
10. Penn

Thoughts?

So they got rid of 7-9?

You know why 6 is afraid of 7, right?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Not useless but perhaps there can be many tier systems based on the various qualities that different kids are looking for. E.g., nerdy scientist, ambitious overachiever, party animal, armchair philosopher, etc.

[Anonymous]

I don't see the point. The top 20 never change much. They rank the schools to sell magazines.

Why else do they continue to rank them every year? So, people can see Princeton moved up to 1 or slipped to 3?

Some you all are a little obsessed with this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don't see the point. The top 20 never change much. They rank the schools to sell magazines.

Why else do they continue to rank them every year? So, people can see Princeton moved up to 1 or slipped to 3?

Some you all are a little obsessed with this.

As are you--or else you wouldn't be reading & posting in this thread. Nonetheless, we do recognize your moral superiority.

[Anonymous]

My kid didn't let the list change his mind. If he had, he would have been at Hopkins this year. Hopkins would NOT have been a good fit. A parent is an alum and just nothing about Hopkins is this kid.

People that go solely by highest ranking are doing it wrong. Lots of mental health issues and bad fit because people don't do their due diligence in looking at type of fit/environment, etc.

And, yes, for some Hopkins is a great match. When you get up into the 20s it really doesn't matter points here and there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My kid didn't let the list change his mind. If he had, he would have been at Hopkins this year. Hopkins would NOT have been a good fit. A parent is an alum and just nothing about Hopkins is this kid.

People that go solely by highest ranking are doing it wrong. Lots of mental health issues and bad fit because people don't do their due diligence in looking at type of fit/environment, etc.

And, yes, for some Hopkins is a great match. When you get up into the 20s it really doesn't matter points here and there.

Can you elaborate on this comment? What type of kid would not be a good fit for Hopkins? We are visiting soon, but I've heard great things so far and I don't know of anyone who has a current student there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Embargoed means it still has time to change right? I think a more reasonable list would go:

1. Princeton
2. MIT
3. Harvard
3. Stanford
5. Yale
6. Caltech
6. Duke
8. Johns Hopkins
8. Northwestern
10. Penn

Well sheeit, if we're going to do that then I'd say:

1. MIT
2. Stanford
3. Harvard
3. Cal Tech
5. Princeton
6. Duke
6. Johns Hopkins
8. Yale
8. Penn
10. Brown

[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.

It's like the NFL draft. Your ranking is really going to depend a lot on what you are looking for.
This is just the sportswriters ranking the draft picks if they didn't know the draft order of the teams.

[Anonymous]

Where’s UVA?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Not useless but perhaps there can be many tier systems based on the various qualities that different kids are looking for. E.g., nerdy scientist, ambitious overachiever, party animal, armchair philosopher, etc.

Many of the top20 if not all have all of the 4 categories in some form or another

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

I think what they are saying is that someone at Penn who was given an advanced copy sent the list to the student newspaper even though they knew it was embargoed.