2024 US News rankings

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Idiots.

1 Princeton
2 MIT
3 (Tie) Harvard, Stanford
5 Yale
6 UPenn
7 (Tie) CalTech, Duke
9 (Tie) Brown, JHU, Northwestern
12 (Tie) Columbia, Cornell, UChicago
15 (Tie) UCLA, UCB
17 Rice
18 (Tie) Dartmouth, Vanderbilt
20 Notre Dame
21 UMich
22 Georgetown
23 UNC
24 (Tie) CMU, Emory, Virgina, WashU StL
28 UCD, UCSD, UF, USC

https://www.usnews.com/best-colleges/rankings/national-universities

I don't have a problem with the schools listed 1-24. I quibble about the order. Berkeley and UCLA are obviously good schools. But the only reason they're in the top 15 is because USNWR no longer cares about class size. Both schools have classes with more than a 1000 students, which is ridiculous. That's not happening at Rice, Dartmouth, Vanderbilt, Notre Dame and other schools they've displaced. And USNWR seems to think six years is a reasonable time to graduate, which again helps UCLA and Berkeley where a lot of students have a hard time getting into all their required classes within four years. Again, not a problem at Rice, Dartmouth, Vanderbilt, and Notre Dame.

And then there's the fixation on Pell Grant students. And a reminder, colleges have no idea if a potential student will get a Pell Grant at the time of admittance. Obviously, two schools from the most economically diverse state in the country with a collective 90,000 students are going to clean up with the Pell Grant boost. With the exception of UC Merced, nearly all the UCs are now top 35 schools. Irvine, San Diego, Santa Barbara. And UC Merced is now ranked 60.

60!

UC Merced!

Out of 4000 colleges and universities!

Also think Penn, JHU, and Brown are ranked too high. But whatever.

The real absurdities are everything that happens below 24.

I don't know what this list is supposed to measure, but it's definitely not the Best National Universities in America

Agree with all of this, well said.

Angry your kids' schools' rankings went down? Rankings aren't everything.

My kids' schools' ranking went up. I still think the new metrics are really dumb.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Idiots.

1 Princeton
2 MIT
3 (Tie) Harvard, Stanford
5 Yale
6 UPenn
7 (Tie) CalTech, Duke
9 (Tie) Brown, JHU, Northwestern
12 (Tie) Columbia, Cornell, UChicago
15 (Tie) UCLA, UCB
17 Rice
18 (Tie) Dartmouth, Vanderbilt
20 Notre Dame
21 UMich
22 Georgetown
23 UNC
24 (Tie) CMU, Emory, Virgina, WashU StL
28 UCD, UCSD, UF, USC

https://www.usnews.com/best-colleges/rankings/national-universities

As a UChicago parent, this is accurate. Most of our daughter's undecided UChicago classmates were weighing UCLA, Berkeley, Michigan, UVA and Northwestern. If they got off a wait list at Duke or a low Ivy, they went to Duke or the low Ivy. Northwestern and UChicago are more or less peers; one has rah-rah Big Ten sports, the other has more "intellectual" branding.

I find this doubtful as Chicago yield has always been higher even before ED recently

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Idiots.

1 Princeton
2 MIT
3 (Tie) Harvard, Stanford
5 Yale
6 UPenn
7 (Tie) CalTech, Duke
9 (Tie) Brown, JHU, Northwestern
12 (Tie) Columbia, Cornell, UChicago
15 (Tie) UCLA, UCB
17 Rice
18 (Tie) Dartmouth, Vanderbilt
20 Notre Dame
21 UMich
22 Georgetown
23 UNC
24 (Tie) CMU, Emory, Virgina, WashU StL
28 UCD, UCSD, UF, USC

https://www.usnews.com/best-colleges/rankings/national-universities

I don't have a problem with the schools listed 1-24. I quibble about the order. Berkeley and UCLA are obviously good schools. But the only reason they're in the top 15 is because USNWR no longer cares about class size. Both schools have classes with more than a 1000 students, which is ridiculous. That's not happening at Rice, Dartmouth, Vanderbilt, Notre Dame and other schools they've displaced. And USNWR seems to think six years is a reasonable time to graduate, which again helps UCLA and Berkeley where a lot of students have a hard time getting into all their required classes within four years. Again, not a problem at Rice, Dartmouth, Vanderbilt, and Notre Dame.

And then there's the fixation on Pell Grant students. And a reminder, colleges have no idea if a potential student will get a Pell Grant at the time of admittance. Obviously, two schools from the most economically diverse state in the country with a collective 90,000 students are going to clean up with the Pell Grant boost. With the exception of UC Merced, nearly all the UCs are now top 35 schools. Irvine, San Diego, Santa Barbara. And UC Merced is now ranked 60.

60!

UC Merced!

Out of 4000 colleges and universities!

Also think Penn, JHU, and Brown are ranked too high. But whatever.

The real absurdities are everything that happens below 24.

I don't know what this list is supposed to measure, but it's definitely not the Best National Universities in America

Agree with all of this, well said.

Angry your kids' schools' rankings went down? Rankings aren't everything.

My kids' schools' ranking went up. I still think the new metrics are really dumb.

They are valuing 'Diversity'. Aren't you into diversity and opportunity for poor kids or is that only if others are looking

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Idiots.

1 Princeton
2 MIT
3 (Tie) Harvard, Stanford
5 Yale
6 UPenn
7 (Tie) CalTech, Duke
9 (Tie) Brown, JHU, Northwestern
12 (Tie) Columbia, Cornell, UChicago
15 (Tie) UCLA, UCB
17 Rice
18 (Tie) Dartmouth, Vanderbilt
20 Notre Dame
21 UMich
22 Georgetown
23 UNC
24 (Tie) CMU, Emory, Virgina, WashU StL
28 UCD, UCSD, UF, USC

https://www.usnews.com/best-colleges/rankings/national-universities

I don't have a problem with the schools listed 1-24. I quibble about the order. Berkeley and UCLA are obviously good schools. But the only reason they're in the top 15 is because USNWR no longer cares about class size. Both schools have classes with more than a 1000 students, which is ridiculous. That's not happening at Rice, Dartmouth, Vanderbilt, Notre Dame and other schools they've displaced. And USNWR seems to think six years is a reasonable time to graduate, which again helps UCLA and Berkeley where a lot of students have a hard time getting into all their required classes within four years. Again, not a problem at Rice, Dartmouth, Vanderbilt, and Notre Dame.

And then there's the fixation on Pell Grant students. And a reminder, colleges have no idea if a potential student will get a Pell Grant at the time of admittance. Obviously, two schools from the most economically diverse state in the country with a collective 90,000 students are going to clean up with the Pell Grant boost. With the exception of UC Merced, nearly all the UCs are now top 35 schools. Irvine, San Diego, Santa Barbara. And UC Merced is now ranked 60.

60!

UC Merced!

Out of 4000 colleges and universities!

Also think Penn, JHU, and Brown are ranked too high. But whatever.

The real absurdities are everything that happens below 24.

I don't know what this list is supposed to measure, but it's definitely not the Best National Universities in America

Agree with all of this, well said.

Angry your kids' schools' rankings went down? Rankings aren't everything.

My kids' schools' ranking went up. I still think the new metrics are really dumb.

They are valuing 'Diversity'. Aren't you into diversity and opportunity for poor kids or is that only if others are looking

I assume you mean economic diversity

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Idiots.

1 Princeton
2 MIT
3 (Tie) Harvard, Stanford
5 Yale
6 UPenn
7 (Tie) CalTech, Duke
9 (Tie) Brown, JHU, Northwestern
12 (Tie) Columbia, Cornell, UChicago
15 (Tie) UCLA, UCB
17 Rice
18 (Tie) Dartmouth, Vanderbilt
20 Notre Dame
21 UMich
22 Georgetown
23 UNC
24 (Tie) CMU, Emory, Virgina, WashU StL
28 UCD, UCSD, UF, USC

https://www.usnews.com/best-colleges/rankings/national-universities

I knew that Florida has improved a ton since I was a kid, but who knew that the University of South Carolina has made such strides.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:LAC rankings out as well. Service academies all rose, general moderate shuffling among the others but maybe no giant leaps or drops.

Actually I just noticed one – Soka dropped fairly far. That shows that US News is maybe valuing endowments less this time around.

Also, right now they have Washington & Lee at both 11 and 21!

Washington improves their standing but Lee brings it down.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Vandy falling 5 spots, and WashU falling 10. That's crazy.

they're rich kid schools. almost all of the rich kid schools fell considerably (nyu, usc, dartmouth, washington and lee, etc)

Vanderbilt is (i) need blind and (ii) committed to providing aid (a) meeting 100% of demonstrated need and (b) without including loans in the aid package. I think the "rich kid school" reputation is a bit outdated, no?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:These rankings are becoming less relevant. UMC and wealthy families seem to be diverging from USNWR and towards some other source of information (network of private HS college counselors, secret book?). I think the increased focus on Pell grant recipients/first gen just exacerbates the pressures not to provide any support to UMC/ UC families outside the 1% --and UMC includes very much MC families in HCOLA. So instead, these families are going to institutions that provide merit aid or more robust financial aid for higher income families. So these institutions are attracting more strong UMC families--which is what many people want in terms of developing social networks etc. The rankings are diverging from reality--and with test optional there's less of a way to consistently judge merit.

And what exactly might that be??

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Princeton puts its endowment to work. I mean, I think they should make tuition 20k and get out of the college financing industry full stop, but at least they try more than most. And the word has gotten out that they're the most generous. So I get why they remain on top.

Princeton's endowment is going on $5M per student. The payout from that at 5% is $250K per student per year. It could be free in perpetuity with more than enough to cover the cost of attendance.

this is true for a lot of top schools - and they dont have the robust FA for middle class families that Princeton does

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Because so many colleges are TO, test scores are a flawed measure of peer quality. Getting rid of a second measure (also flawed to be sure) dilutes one measure of quality. Then they get rid of class size, which matters, faculty with PhDs, and the amount of spending per student. What that means is that schools that rely on adjuncts and TAs and big lecture-hall classes will rise in the rankings, and those that invest in small classes and quality instruction get short shrift. But hey, cram more Pell grant students into those lecture halls and all will be well. Oy. Maybe this will break everyone’s addiction to these ridiculous rankings.

+1
It's as if the rankings have taken out everything that matters to a good education.

+1: these rankings have little regard for actual education.

[Anonymous]

Harvey Mudd at #16 for LACs is a crime. WTF?

Good to see service academies in the top 10 for LACs. They truly are elite.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Thoughts about W&M dropping?

Doubt it means anything significant. So many top privates outside of the Ivies dropped

W&M is neither top nor private.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's baffling that Michigan and UNC are ranked so high compared to UVA. In Virginia, Michigan is regarded as a safety school and UVA is much better. UVA has a much lower acceptance rate and the SAT scores are much higher, this ranking is a joke.

In Virginia (VA resident for 26 years), Michigan is regarded as a better school in general than UVA and UVA has a higher acceptance rate than Michigan. UVA should be ranked around 30.

Nope. It's much harder for a VA kid from NoVA to get into UVA than UMich. Half our neighborhood is attending UMich currently and the parents would have much rather have saved a ton of $$$ if they could have gotten into UVA and have said as much.

And, my friends from AA say it's the EXACT SAME there re getting into UMich. Your point....

Overall, there is a bigger gap in gpa/test scores between in state and out of state students in Michigan than Virginia. You can look it up if you like.

That is quite true. It's much easier to get in in-state to Michigan. They need top students. Which is why it has 50% OOS and no (?) other state flagship does. Michigan needs those high stat kids from OOS and international

If only Michigan would shrink its student population in half to be marginally more selective than UVA. The funny thing is even without ED, Michigan’s yield rate is still higher than UVA’s. Acceptance rates haven’t been used at USNWR for a long time. Even they know they are far from the most important criterion when evaluating the quality of a school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Princeton puts its endowment to work. I mean, I think they should make tuition 20k and get out of the college financing industry full stop, but at least they try more than most. And the word has gotten out that they're the most generous. So I get why they remain on top.

1000% if more colleges reduced their coa, then they wouldn't need legacy and rely on donors. You'd see more UMC/MC class students applying. Right now, a lot of high stats UMC/MC students don't even bother applying to those expensive colleges because of cost.

Which was great bc both of my mc/umc kids got into top 15... checks new list... top 20 schools with outstanding financial aid that made it a lot cheaper than Maryland. Don't think most middle-class-ish people realize that if Northwestern, Rice, Brown, Dartmouth, Duke, Chicago, Vanderbilt, Notre Dame and similar accept someone, it's generally going to work.

Berkeley, Michigan, UCLA, UNC, UVA, Georgia Tech are completely out of reach for OOS families that earn a salary. But those higher tier, high endowment private schools are very often much more affordable than state flagships.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Thoughts about W&M dropping?

It’s the most expensive public college in the nation for in state students. 60k for OOS as a public with minimal OOS aid. And it’s not particularly diverse or socially mobile (I mean, #280 in social mobility for a public). And it doesn’t have a lot of pell grant kids. IOW, it may be public, but it’s still a rich kids school (or UMC DCUM school). Wonky rich kids from wealthier areas of VA. But, affluent all the same. It was never going to do well under the new DEI formulation.

It’s ranked 6th in undergrad teaching, which is what I care about.

—parent of a WM kid.

Hard to have much upward mobility when most of the student body started out at the top.