WSJ Rankings 2025
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
Doesn't work. Still behind a paywall. |
Anonymous
And it's so awesome they're ahead of UC Merced. Great achievement. Go Hokies! |
Anonymous
A farce. No UCLA ahead of Merced. It’s the Onion. |
Anonymous
| It's all in the criteria they choose. We've seen several rankings this week, all drastically different. Would be better for families to be able to choose the criteria that are the most important to them, and then have rankings list colleges based on what that family needs. |
Anonymous
Can someone post the specific statements about methodology? How do they define these things? |
Anonymous
Student outcomes (70%): Salary impact (33%): This measures the extent to which a college boosts its graduates’ salaries beyond what they would be expected to earn regardless of which college they attended. We used statistical modeling to estimate what we would expect the median earnings of a college’s graduates to be on the basis of the exam results of its students prior to attending the college and the cost of living in the state in which the college is based. We then scored the college on its performance against that estimate. These scores were then combined with scores for raw graduate salaries to factor in absolute performance alongside performance relative to our estimates. Our analysis for this metric used research on this topic by the policy-research think tank the Brookings Institution as a guide. Years to pay off net price (17%): This measure combines two figures—the average net price of attending the college, and the value added to graduates’ median salary attributable to attending the college. The value added to graduates’ median salary by a college was estimated on the basis of the difference between the median earnings of the school’s graduates and the median earnings of high-school graduates in the state where the college is located and across the U.S. in proportion to the ratio of students who are in-state versus out-of-state. We then took the average annual net price of attending the college—including costs like tuition and fees, room and board, and books and supplies, taking into account any grants and scholarships, for students who received federal financial aid—and multiplied it by four to reflect an estimated cost of a four-year program. We then divided this overall net-price figure by the value added to a graduate’s salary, to provide an estimate of how quickly an education at the college pays for itself through the salary boost it provides. Our analysis for this metric used research on this topic by the policy-research think tank Third Way as a guide. Graduation rate impact (20%): This is a measure of a college’s performance in ensuring that its students graduate, beyond what would have been expected of the students regardless of which college they attended. We used statistical modeling to estimate what we would expect a college’s graduation rate to be on the basis of the exam results of its students prior to attending the college and the proportion of their students whose family income is $110,000 per year or higher. We then scored the college on its performance against that estimate. These scores were then combined with scores for raw graduation rates to factor in absolute performance alongside performance relative to our estimates. Learning environment (20%): Learning opportunities (4%): The quality and frequency of learning opportunities at the college, based on our student survey. This includes questions about interactions with faculty, feedback and the overall quality of teaching. Preparation for career (4%): The quality and frequency of opportunities for students to prepare for their future careers, based on our student survey. This includes questions about networking opportunities, career advice and support, and applied learning. Learning facilities (4%): Student satisfaction with the college’s learning-related facilities, based on our student survey. This includes questions about library facilities, internet reliability, and classrooms and teaching facilities. Recommendation score (4%): The extent to which students would recommend their college, based on our student survey. This includes questions about whether students would recommend the college to a friend, whether students would choose the same college again if they could start over, and satisfaction with the value for money their college provides. Character score (4%): New this year, this measures the extent to which students feel the college has developed character strengths that will help them to make a meaningful contribution to society, including moral courage, hopefulness, resilience, wisdom and a sense of justice, based on our student survey. The questions for this score were developed in collaboration with the Oxford Character Project. Diversity (10%) Opportunities to interact with students from different backgrounds (5%): Student satisfaction with, and frequency of, opportunities to interact with people from different backgrounds, based on our student survey. Ethnic diversity (1.7%): The probability that, were you to choose two students or two members of faculty at random, they would be of a different ethnicity from one another; the higher the probability, the higher the score. Inclusion of students with lower family earnings (1.7%): The proportion of students receiving Pell Grants; the higher the percentage, the higher the score. Inclusion of students with disabilities (1.7%): The proportion of students who are disabled; the higher the percentage, the higher the score. |
Anonymous
|
How are pricey regional SLACs making the list? How is Merced above Michigan? Were they hacked? |
Anonymous
Back in 2000ish, WSJ supposedly hired a monkey to throw darts at a board of stocks to pick stocks to invest in. A jokey way to show the list doesn't matter in an irrational market. Always wondered what happened to that monkey.. Looks like he still works for WSJ! |
Anonymous
| I do like the criteria though.. Limited fluff/BS factors, not based on hoity-toity professorial 'reputation' opinions (like we care). It's all about the money. |
Anonymous
VA Tech is finally a T20 
|
Anonymous
Exists: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2023/opinion/build-your-own-college-rankings.html |
Anonymous
Though it is a weird methodology that they actually use. It's not just raw salary data for the schools. Salary impact (33%): This measures the extent to which a college boosts its graduates’ salaries beyond what they would be expected to earn regardless of which college they attended. We used statistical modeling to estimate what we would expect the median earnings of a college’s graduates to be on the basis of the exam results of its students prior to attending the college and the cost of living in the state in which the college is based. We then scored the college on its performance against that estimate. These scores were then combined with scores for raw graduate salaries to factor in absolute performance alongside performance relative to our estimates. Our analysis for this metric used research on this topic by the policy-research think tank the Brookings Institution as a guide. |
Anonymous
That list is hysterical!!! Definitely Onion material |
Anonymous
+1 Even the raw salary data that some institutions collect raises questions, but this puzzles me even more. What exactly are they using, and how reliable is it? |
Anonymous
| Can someone please post the top 50. or at least #21 through #50 as the top 20 have already been posted ? |