When you say t50...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Everyone agrees on which schools are in the T5. People mostly agree which which schools are in the T15. But people start to disagree on T25, disagree more on T50, etc.

Are Case and Tulane are solid schools. It's more about if the kid will thrive there than if they are T50.

Sorry, meant Case and Tulane are solid schools. Kid can thrive there if they fit in.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Whether we like it or not, the current version of U.S. News rankings is considered the gold standard. Period.

NP. Standard for who? DCUM parents?

Employers did not suddenly change their perception of universities when the universities' rankings changed dramatically in the last few years.

Families can use whatever rankings they want, or better yet, rank their preferences their own way. US News jumped the shark the last couple of years. I find it interesting that I'm not the only one referencing older editions of US News.

When I see a university I’ve never heard of on a resume and want to know a school is ranked, I look it up on the US News website, which provides the latest rankings. I don’t search for older rankings or alternative sources. Like most people, I’m not overly concerned with the methodology or minor changes. I simply rely on the most widely recognized resource. I'm much more of a connoisseur of old VCR rankings. There is nothing like a good VHS/Betamax debate.

Are you regularly seeing schools on resumes that you had never heard of that are in the (new or old) T50? Can you give an example?

[Anonymous]

Ranking isn’t everything.

I know current freshman at Wisconsin who also got into Wake and Davidson and regretting their choice immensely.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:T50 using USNWR 2018 - pre TO, pre pandemic, and not the current methodology that places mobility over academics. To be clear I do not disagree with the institutional policies that promote social mobility, I just disagree that it should be part of ranking methodology.

2018?

Nope.

2017, Which is the last year without Social Mobility and DEI policies included.

You can go back 8 years if you want.

Life goes on.

Keep up.

Nonsensically dim

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:T50 using USNWR 2018 - pre TO, pre pandemic, and not the current methodology that places mobility over academics. To be clear I do not disagree with the institutional policies that promote social mobility, I just disagree that it should be part of ranking methodology.

2018?

Nope.

NP. Why? I agree that 2018/2019 was right around the time that common sense ended. Anything from that time or prior is a useful instrument for ascertaining actual quality of the education

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:T50 using USNWR 2018 - pre TO, pre pandemic, and not the current methodology that places mobility over academics. To be clear I do not disagree with the institutional policies that promote social mobility, I just disagree that it should be part of ranking methodology.

2018?

Nope.

NP. Why? I agree that 2018/2019 was right around the time that common sense ended. Anything from that time or prior is a useful instrument for ascertaining actual quality of the education

We're in 2024. Any ranking in the T50 is a known/solid school.

If you don't like it that's on you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Ranking isn’t everything.

I know current freshman at Wisconsin who also got into Wake and Davidson and regretting their choice immensely.

why? can you please elaborate? Please share! thank you!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:T50 using USNWR 2018 - pre TO, pre pandemic, and not the current methodology that places mobility over academics. To be clear I do not disagree with the institutional policies that promote social mobility, I just disagree that it should be part of ranking methodology.

2018?

Nope.

NP. Why? I agree that 2018/2019 was right around the time that common sense ended. Anything from that time or prior is a useful instrument for ascertaining actual quality of the education

2018/2019 is the proper vintage? Wouldn't that be an actual snapshot from 2018/2019? I understand that you like the criteria from that era but it's out of date at this point. Meaning 2018 criteria has 2018 or older data?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are you also talking about schools like Case Western, Tulane that are not technically in US News's t50 anymore?

USNWR is what educators, parents, students look to first for a general sense before true research takes place.

Anyone can quibble with USNWR methodology, etc. ( funny how people complain when the methodology doesn't suit their preferred school), but any ranking in T75 covers any "slippage."

Well the USNWR methodology removed Class size from its process a few years ago. Which is shocking, as many of us (smartly) think that smaller class sizes does lead to better educational opportunities. Much easier to learn in a room with 30-40 students where you can actively ask questions than in a lecture hall with 200+.
So yes, I will complain when the most recent changes basically moved many smaller (under 8K) private schools down 5-10 spots and put large state schools in their place. Because I know the smaller private schools are actually still better schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's definitely flexible, since we're talking about US News here, which is crap to begin with. It would be nicer if DCUM could all use QS, THE or ARWU.

They are garbage rankings for undergraduate education. All of them.

The USNWR rankings have plenty of issues as well now that they include social mobility, FGLI, and Pell grants as weights. All things which have zero to do with instructional or student quality.

Exactly! While I"m happy schools focus on social mobility and FGLI and Pell grants (it's good for society), it does not affect my kid at all

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Actually the 2020 list is the best - right before the world went insane: https://www.collegekickstart.com/blog/item/u-s-news-world-report-posts-2020-college-rankings

This is the correct ranking

Wow. That’s it. Didn’t realize it was 2020. But makes sense.

Well 2020 is before USNWR removed class size from criteria and moved to focus on Pell grants, FGLI, etc. So before they fell completely apart

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are you also talking about schools like Case Western, Tulane that are not technically in US News's t50 anymore?

USNWR is what educators, parents, students look to first for a general sense before true research takes place.

Anyone can quibble with USNWR methodology, etc. ( funny how people complain when the methodology doesn't suit their preferred school), but any ranking in T75 covers any "slippage."

Well the USNWR methodology removed Class size from its process a few years ago. Which is shocking, as many of us (smartly) think that smaller class sizes does lead to better educational opportunities. Much easier to learn in a room with 30-40 students where you can actively ask questions than in a lecture hall with 200+.
So yes, I will complain when the most recent changes basically moved many smaller (under 8K) private schools down 5-10 spots and put large state schools in their place. Because I know the smaller private schools are actually still better schools.

Facts. For example I think BC is a better school than a lot of the massive publics currently ranked above it. And Rutgers is a solid state flagship. But Top 50? Please.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are you also talking about schools like Case Western, Tulane that are not technically in US News's t50 anymore?

USNWR is what educators, parents, students look to first for a general sense before true research takes place.

Anyone can quibble with USNWR methodology, etc. ( funny how people complain when the methodology doesn't suit their preferred school), but any ranking in T75 covers any "slippage."

Well the USNWR methodology removed Class size from its process a few years ago. Which is shocking, as many of us (smartly) think that smaller class sizes does lead to better educational opportunities. Much easier to learn in a room with 30-40 students where you can actively ask questions than in a lecture hall with 200+.
So yes, I will complain when the most recent changes basically moved many smaller (under 8K) private schools down 5-10 spots and put large state schools in their place. Because I know the smaller private schools are actually still better schools.

Facts. For example I think BC is a better school than a lot of the massive publics currently ranked above it. And Rutgers is a solid state flagship. But Top 50? Please.

You think BC is better than Cal or UCLA or Michigan? At the end of the day if a school is not currently ranked in the top 50, then it is not a top 50 ranked school. It's pretty simple.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It doesn't matter because if you fall outside of the Ivies and non-Ivy top 10, you're the loser when playing the eliteness game.

Exactly. Although I would say T12-T15, with schools like UChicago, Duke, Vanderbilt, Georgetown, ND, Hopkins added to the Ivies.

I like the tier ideas. Does anyone really see that major of a difference in terms of "prestige" between WashU and Emory? Or BU and NEU? BC and Tufts? GWU and American? Miami and Wake? Tulane and SMU? USC and UCLA, etc.

None of what you said is consistent. How is Notre Dame and Georgetown different than Emory and WashU? Nortre Dame and Georgetown are the weakest T25 schools actually they have the lowest global ranking of 378 and 310 respectively compared to 67 and 30.

Global rankings are nonsense in the realmworld

Less nonsense than national rankings? Georgetown and Notre Dame are only respected in the American context. The others have international cashe. They all have the same reputation scores for the undergrad ranking as well.

This is the most important factor by far unless you plan to immigrate to other countries.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are you also talking about schools like Case Western, Tulane that are not technically in US News's t50 anymore?

USNWR is what educators, parents, students look to first for a general sense before true research takes place.

Anyone can quibble with USNWR methodology, etc. ( funny how people complain when the methodology doesn't suit their preferred school), but any ranking in T75 covers any "slippage."

Well the USNWR methodology removed Class size from its process a few years ago. Which is shocking, as many of us (smartly) think that smaller class sizes does lead to better educational opportunities. Much easier to learn in a room with 30-40 students where you can actively ask questions than in a lecture hall with 200+.
So yes, I will complain when the most recent changes basically moved many smaller (under 8K) private schools down 5-10 spots and put large state schools in their place. Because I know the smaller private schools are actually still better schools.

Facts. For example I think BC is a better school than a lot of the massive publics currently ranked above it. And Rutgers is a solid state flagship. But Top 50? Please.

+1