It’s not that. It’s because USNWR values Pell grant recipients, which California has a lot of. It’s an unfair qualifier though because schools have no idea who the Pell grant recipients might be when they accept them. So the UC schools will always rise, and always will until USNWR changes it’s method to something that the schools can actually be in charge of. California’s Pell grant population will continue to rise so the UC schools will continue so |
| Why did UChicago drop? |
| Rutgers rose 15 slots to 40 from 55! |
Haverford is currently at both #18 and #21. Because these rankings weren't set to come out until tomorrow, I wouldn't imagine any number here is guaranteed to be the same once the bleary-eyed proofreaders go through the list again (even though it's partially updated). |
| Four of the UCs T30 and six T35. That’s impressive. |
terrible performance on social mobility. #293 overall. everything else was among the best. |
Not too surprised by WashU. The new methodology very much favors publics. I think most of them moved up considerably, so Berkeley and UCLA are now ranked above Vanderbilt. Michigan is just behind it now. Looking further down the list, it seems like a bloodbath for privates. |
It is done this way every year. The difference above isn't about proofreading, it's the update process. |
| He new rankings are a joke. Every state flagship is now a top 50. UC Davis at 28. |
NYU went from 25 to 35. Ouch. |
Or down to 27. It all depends on your POV.
|
Read beyond the top 15, it’s basically all public universities. |
| seems about right, caltech is a bit lower than i'd have put it and USC is still a bit too high. |
Lehigh climbed so apparently some rich kid schools did well. |
I agree academically, but Michigan also has about 50% of its undergrads paying full freight to attend. The vast majority of all the UC schools are instate |