It’s the turning point. It may or may not change the ranking immediately, but it’s back on track. Each year there will be more and more schools requiring test scores. |
Look, your lying last time got so out of hand that they locked the thread. I'm not invested in Middlebury but I'm definitely invested in the NESCAC having had two kids attend NESCAC schools. |
You point a lot of fingers for someone who’s wrong. |
Keep telling yourself that kiddo. |
Columbia, Chicago, Northwestern, Duke? |
On Tuesday, June 17, U.S. News will release the 2025-2026 Best Global Universities rankings, focusing on academic research and reputation. This ranking allows students to see how universities stack up against the global competition. Students can use these rankings to compare universities – including U.S. colleges – globally, regionally and within their own country, as well as by field of study. |
I’m a grown adult, please leave me alone if all you’re going to do is belittle me across the thread. I see why you tend to have threads locked on you. This is ridiculous behavior. |
I just wish they broke them down by Carnegie size, rather than "are they LACs or National Universities or Regional Universities?" Also, have a special unranked section for the service academies. It's never made sense that they've lumped them in with the LACs. |
Same question. Anyone? |
Magazine rankings are getting less relevant.
We have real ranking/evaluation by the people every year. It's reflected in the combination of acceptance rate + yield rate + cohort quality + retention rate + graduation rate. They are real data. If you want to see how schools really ranked, look at those data. |
Based on acceptance rate, one would think Oxford is on par with U of Miami…. |
Hopkins and Princeton too- TO. Though they are finally converting test required. |
Yes. Selectivity traditionally was by the test score average (based on test score required—100% need scores) and GPA+rigor of courses. Somewhere along the way the dummies— to move up rankings made it about drumming up a huge Applicant pool by going test optional and reducing essays (or not having any). They use %accepted which is really a false equivalency sine the Applicant pool is mostly crap. It used to be that certain schools were out of range so people didn’t apply. Taking away the test requirement opened up to so many that really didn’t have the academic chops. The generation of “everyone deserves a trophy”. |
And that’s why this approach is dumb and you should evaluate a school on what it offers and not on things like acceptance rate and yield. |
All these “rates” can be manipulated. Colby and Chicago are the biggest offenders. |