Wake, UGA, or Tulane

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wake in a landslide

Yes, Wake.
Wake has a much more academic vibe, and is most similar to an elite/T15 (and was commonly T25 until USnews took all importnat metrics out of rankings). UGA and Tulane are not close to Wake considering outcomes(MD, Law, other grad placement, careers).

The fact you have to reference the rankings and somehow explain why they are wrong makes it plain that you care far too much about those exact rankings.

If Wake was similar to a T15…it would be ranked in the T15 which actually didn’t lose their rankings at all.

Everyone…stop crying about the rankings.

I am not the poster that you are referring to. But your post seems kinda internally inconsistent. You told the poster to not use the rankings, but you used the rankings (T15 which hasn’t changed as much) to make your own point.

His or her post about Wake having academics on par with the top schools (regardless of how ranked) is a much more accurate statement than Wake has no difference in academics than UGA.

The public’s didn’t all of sudden start attracting the top faculty members. Go check the credentials of the departments at UGA vs Tulane vs Wake to verify.

Not really...I actually am not telling anyone to use or not use the rankings. I am simply pointing out that you can't equate Wake with a T15 school "under the old rankings", but now somehow claim that it's new ranking of 47 is so incorrect when the T15 are still the T15 (with the deck chairs shuffled a bit).

There are now about 6+ posts of one or more people claiming they aren't crying over the new rankings...while they proceed to cry over the new rankings.

All sorts of schools have different rankings under different measures. Why can't someone prefer the old USNWR? No one I know is looking at the new one, though I'm sure there are people interested in that one. Most people I know at private schools are disregarding the new rankings because they are made for a very specific HS student.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wake in a landslide

Yes, Wake.
Wake has a much more academic vibe, and is most similar to an elite/T15 (and was commonly T25 until USnews took all importnat metrics out of rankings). UGA and Tulane are not close to Wake considering outcomes(MD, Law, other grad placement, careers).

The fact you have to reference the rankings and somehow explain why they are wrong makes it plain that you care far too much about those exact rankings.

If Wake was similar to a T15…it would be ranked in the T15 which actually didn’t lose their rankings at all.

Everyone…stop crying about the rankings.

No one is crying about the rankings; they just ignore them now because they actually care more about factors like how many kids from top of HS class and small class sizes, versus DEI outcomes.

It's really funny watching people cling to the "old" rankings, yet also trying to convince others to ignore the "new" rankings. You don't get to have it both ways. Either the rankings have always been a crapshoot, or you need to accept the new formula.

Actually no. The new are only relevant if you highly value performance and percentage of Pell grant eligible and first gen. If you care about factors like class size and who is teaching the class, the old are better.

People blindly trusted USNWR rankings when it was convenient. Let’s not pretend they were ever college experts.

Rankings were based on quantifiable measures of academic achievement and desirable aspects of a college experience for me before. I am not interested in how a child how is 1st Gen will do. I know others are interested in that.

This is stupid. A college that can graduate and support 1st gen students is likely doing amazing for your average student. You have to have on-campus resources that are reliable and helpful for students who are first gen to get through. So yes, you should care, because that stat means your child has more resources on campus. The ivies are undoubtedly one of the best places for a first-gen student to go to college. Berkeley, a massive state school, also happens to be one, because they invest heavily into supporting and recruiting first gen students and, oh yeah, Berkeley has world class resources for all students.

Not previous poster, but these resources are devoted to 1st Gen & Pell and not to the rest of the class.

[Anonymous]

These are all in very different towns. UGA has a small town vib and VERY southern students. I was surprised went I went to school there from NC! Wake has strong academic credentials and may trend conservative, but has liberals there as well. Beautiful campus. Tulane is in a large city, so very different from the other two schools. Have you taken your kid to any local schools to see if they like a big state Univ (UVa) in a college town similar to Athens, smaller town private school, or a school in a larger city?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wake in a landslide

Yes, Wake.
Wake has a much more academic vibe, and is most similar to an elite/T15 (and was commonly T25 until USnews took all importnat metrics out of rankings). UGA and Tulane are not close to Wake considering outcomes(MD, Law, other grad placement, careers).

The fact you have to reference the rankings and somehow explain why they are wrong makes it plain that you care far too much about those exact rankings.

If Wake was similar to a T15…it would be ranked in the T15 which actually didn’t lose their rankings at all.

Everyone…stop crying about the rankings.

I am not the poster that you are referring to. But your post seems kinda internally inconsistent. You told the poster to not use the rankings, but you used the rankings (T15 which hasn’t changed as much) to make your own point.

His or her post about Wake having academics on par with the top schools (regardless of how ranked) is a much more accurate statement than Wake has no difference in academics than UGA.

The public’s didn’t all of sudden start attracting the top faculty members. Go check the credentials of the departments at UGA vs Tulane vs Wake to verify.

Not really...I actually am not telling anyone to use or not use the rankings. I am simply pointing out that you can't equate Wake with a T15 school "under the old rankings", but now somehow claim that it's new ranking of 47 is so incorrect when the T15 are still the T15 (with the deck chairs shuffled a bit).

There are now about 6+ posts of one or more people claiming they aren't crying over the new rankings...while they proceed to cry over the new rankings.

All sorts of schools have different rankings under different measures. Why can't someone prefer the old USNWR? No one I know is looking at the new one, though I'm sure there are people interested in that one. Most people I know at private schools are disregarding the new rankings because they are made for a very specific HS student.

Don't post nonsense. Most people you know aren't using the old rankings...why would they since their top targets all are still top-ranked?

Why is the whining so bad on this thread?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wake in a landslide

Yes, Wake.
Wake has a much more academic vibe, and is most similar to an elite/T15 (and was commonly T25 until USnews took all importnat metrics out of rankings). UGA and Tulane are not close to Wake considering outcomes(MD, Law, other grad placement, careers).

The fact you have to reference the rankings and somehow explain why they are wrong makes it plain that you care far too much about those exact rankings.

If Wake was similar to a T15…it would be ranked in the T15 which actually didn’t lose their rankings at all.

Everyone…stop crying about the rankings.

No one is crying about the rankings; they just ignore them now because they actually care more about factors like how many kids from top of HS class and small class sizes, versus DEI outcomes.

It's really funny watching people cling to the "old" rankings, yet also trying to convince others to ignore the "new" rankings. You don't get to have it both ways. Either the rankings have always been a crapshoot, or you need to accept the new formula.

Actually no. The new are only relevant if you highly value performance and percentage of Pell grant eligible and first gen. If you care about factors like class size and who is teaching the class, the old are better.

People blindly trusted USNWR rankings when it was convenient. Let’s not pretend they were ever college experts.

Rankings were based on quantifiable measures of academic achievement and desirable aspects of a college experience for me before. I am not interested in how a child how is 1st Gen will do. I know others are interested in that.

This is stupid. A college that can graduate and support 1st gen students is likely doing amazing for your average student. You have to have on-campus resources that are reliable and helpful for students who are first gen to get through. So yes, you should care, because that stat means your child has more resources on campus. The ivies are undoubtedly one of the best places for a first-gen student to go to college. Berkeley, a massive state school, also happens to be one, because they invest heavily into supporting and recruiting first gen students and, oh yeah, Berkeley has world class resources for all students.

Not previous poster, but these resources are devoted to 1st Gen & Pell and not to the rest of the class.

This is just not true. Some of the biggest contributions to college campuses due to the arrival of first gen students have been Writing programs, Tutor programs, and Quantitative skills center. They don't "appear" for first gen students, but these were created to increase the graduation rates of schools since the bottom were falling out, and now they have become the standard for colleges. Here's another example we just accept but dont critically think about how they were made to support fgli students: paying students to take up unpaid internships. Improving campus community so fgli students can succeed has many benefits for the whole campus, because it requires solutions that help all students.

Also last obvious way that more fgli students has improved most people in here's college search: financial aid has become much more substantial than the past.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wake in a landslide

Yes, Wake.
Wake has a much more academic vibe, and is most similar to an elite/T15 (and was commonly T25 until USnews took all importnat metrics out of rankings). UGA and Tulane are not close to Wake considering outcomes(MD, Law, other grad placement, careers).

The fact you have to reference the rankings and somehow explain why they are wrong makes it plain that you care far too much about those exact rankings.

If Wake was similar to a T15…it would be ranked in the T15 which actually didn’t lose their rankings at all.

Everyone…stop crying about the rankings.

I am not the poster that you are referring to. But your post seems kinda internally inconsistent. You told the poster to not use the rankings, but you used the rankings (T15 which hasn’t changed as much) to make your own point.

His or her post about Wake having academics on par with the top schools (regardless of how ranked) is a much more accurate statement than Wake has no difference in academics than UGA.

The public’s didn’t all of sudden start attracting the top faculty members. Go check the credentials of the departments at UGA vs Tulane vs Wake to verify.

Not really...I actually am not telling anyone to use or not use the rankings. I am simply pointing out that you can't equate Wake with a T15 school "under the old rankings", but now somehow claim that it's new ranking of 47 is so incorrect when the T15 are still the T15 (with the deck chairs shuffled a bit).

There are now about 6+ posts of one or more people claiming they aren't crying over the new rankings...while they proceed to cry over the new rankings.

All sorts of schools have different rankings under different measures. Why can't someone prefer the old USNWR? No one I know is looking at the new one, though I'm sure there are people interested in that one. Most people I know at private schools are disregarding the new rankings because they are made for a very specific HS student.

Do you realize the old rankings were also made for a very specific HS student? The old rankings were made for the prestige obsessed and as a result, colleges catered to the rich. Things are different now. If your college no longer fares well, why are they not doing a better job serving first gen and Pell students?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wake in a landslide

Yes, Wake.
Wake has a much more academic vibe, and is most similar to an elite/T15 (and was commonly T25 until USnews took all importnat metrics out of rankings). UGA and Tulane are not close to Wake considering outcomes(MD, Law, other grad placement, careers).

The fact you have to reference the rankings and somehow explain why they are wrong makes it plain that you care far too much about those exact rankings.

If Wake was similar to a T15…it would be ranked in the T15 which actually didn’t lose their rankings at all.

Everyone…stop crying about the rankings.

I am not the poster that you are referring to. But your post seems kinda internally inconsistent. You told the poster to not use the rankings, but you used the rankings (T15 which hasn’t changed as much) to make your own point.

His or her post about Wake having academics on par with the top schools (regardless of how ranked) is a much more accurate statement than Wake has no difference in academics than UGA.

The public’s didn’t all of sudden start attracting the top faculty members. Go check the credentials of the departments at UGA vs Tulane vs Wake to verify.

Not really...I actually am not telling anyone to use or not use the rankings. I am simply pointing out that you can't equate Wake with a T15 school "under the old rankings", but now somehow claim that it's new ranking of 47 is so incorrect when the T15 are still the T15 (with the deck chairs shuffled a bit).

There are now about 6+ posts of one or more people claiming they aren't crying over the new rankings...while they proceed to cry over the new rankings.

All sorts of schools have different rankings under different measures. Why can't someone prefer the old USNWR? No one I know is looking at the new one, though I'm sure there are people interested in that one. Most people I know at private schools are disregarding the new rankings because they are made for a very specific HS student.

Do you realize the old rankings were also made for a very specific HS student? The old rankings were made for the prestige obsessed and as a result, colleges catered to the rich. Things are different now. If your college no longer fares well, why are they not doing a better job serving first gen and Pell students?

So you don't believe rankings of college should promote (1) % of students from top of HS class, (2) being taught by a professor with a terminal degree rather than a TA, and (3) smaller class sizes? Instead I should focus on if the school has a large number of Pell grants?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wake in a landslide

Yes, Wake.
Wake has a much more academic vibe, and is most similar to an elite/T15 (and was commonly T25 until USnews took all importnat metrics out of rankings). UGA and Tulane are not close to Wake considering outcomes(MD, Law, other grad placement, careers).

The fact you have to reference the rankings and somehow explain why they are wrong makes it plain that you care far too much about those exact rankings.

If Wake was similar to a T15…it would be ranked in the T15 which actually didn’t lose their rankings at all.

Everyone…stop crying about the rankings.

No one is crying about the rankings; they just ignore them now because they actually care more about factors like how many kids from top of HS class and small class sizes, versus DEI outcomes.

It's really funny watching people cling to the "old" rankings, yet also trying to convince others to ignore the "new" rankings. You don't get to have it both ways. Either the rankings have always been a crapshoot, or you need to accept the new formula.

Actually no. The new are only relevant if you highly value performance and percentage of Pell grant eligible and first gen. If you care about factors like class size and who is teaching the class, the old are better.

People blindly trusted USNWR rankings when it was convenient. Let’s not pretend they were ever college experts.

Rankings were based on quantifiable measures of academic achievement and desirable aspects of a college experience for me before. I am not interested in how a child how is 1st Gen will do. I know others are interested in that.

This is stupid. A college that can graduate and support 1st gen students is likely doing amazing for your average student. You have to have on-campus resources that are reliable and helpful for students who are first gen to get through. So yes, you should care, because that stat means your child has more resources on campus. The ivies are undoubtedly one of the best places for a first-gen student to go to college. Berkeley, a massive state school, also happens to be one, because they invest heavily into supporting and recruiting first gen students and, oh yeah, Berkeley has world class resources for all students.

Not previous poster, but these resources are devoted to 1st Gen & Pell and not to the rest of the class.

This is just not true. Some of the biggest contributions to college campuses due to the arrival of first gen students have been Writing programs, Tutor programs, and Quantitative skills center. They don't "appear" for first gen students, but these were created to increase the graduation rates of schools since the bottom were falling out, and now they have become the standard for colleges. Here's another example we just accept but dont critically think about how they were made to support fgli students: paying students to take up unpaid internships. Improving campus community so fgli students can succeed has many benefits for the whole campus, because it requires solutions that help all students.

Also last obvious way that more fgli students has improved most people in here's college search: financial aid has become much more substantial than the past.[/qu

So the private schools that dropped in the rankings (like a Vanderbilt and Dartmouth) have fewer resources than the State Schools that rose up? These things may have been added at State schools, but they have always existed at private schools. And just because the rankings changed this one year, doesn't mean that the schools have changed. A TA teaching a class of 100+ kids vs. a PhD teaching a class of 15-25 is and enormous difference in resources. How does this square with your argument? It doesn't.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wake in a landslide

Yes, Wake.
Wake has a much more academic vibe, and is most similar to an elite/T15 (and was commonly T25 until USnews took all importnat metrics out of rankings). UGA and Tulane are not close to Wake considering outcomes(MD, Law, other grad placement, careers).

The fact you have to reference the rankings and somehow explain why they are wrong makes it plain that you care far too much about those exact rankings.

If Wake was similar to a T15…it would be ranked in the T15 which actually didn’t lose their rankings at all.

Everyone…stop crying about the rankings.

I am not the poster that you are referring to. But your post seems kinda internally inconsistent. You told the poster to not use the rankings, but you used the rankings (T15 which hasn’t changed as much) to make your own point.

His or her post about Wake having academics on par with the top schools (regardless of how ranked) is a much more accurate statement than Wake has no difference in academics than UGA.

The public’s didn’t all of sudden start attracting the top faculty members. Go check the credentials of the departments at UGA vs Tulane vs Wake to verify.

Not really...I actually am not telling anyone to use or not use the rankings. I am simply pointing out that you can't equate Wake with a T15 school "under the old rankings", but now somehow claim that it's new ranking of 47 is so incorrect when the T15 are still the T15 (with the deck chairs shuffled a bit).

There are now about 6+ posts of one or more people claiming they aren't crying over the new rankings...while they proceed to cry over the new rankings.

All sorts of schools have different rankings under different measures. Why can't someone prefer the old USNWR? No one I know is looking at the new one, though I'm sure there are people interested in that one. Most people I know at private schools are disregarding the new rankings because they are made for a very specific HS student.

Don't post nonsense. Most people you know aren't using the old rankings...why would they since their top targets all are still top-ranked?

Why is the whining so bad on this thread?

You think people stopped applying to Dartmouth or Vanderbilt because their ranking plummeted on the new US News ranking? You are clueless.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wake in a landslide

Yes, Wake.
Wake has a much more academic vibe, and is most similar to an elite/T15 (and was commonly T25 until USnews took all importnat metrics out of rankings). UGA and Tulane are not close to Wake considering outcomes(MD, Law, other grad placement, careers).

The fact you have to reference the rankings and somehow explain why they are wrong makes it plain that you care far too much about those exact rankings.

If Wake was similar to a T15…it would be ranked in the T15 which actually didn’t lose their rankings at all.

Everyone…stop crying about the rankings.

I am not the poster that you are referring to. But your post seems kinda internally inconsistent. You told the poster to not use the rankings, but you used the rankings (T15 which hasn’t changed as much) to make your own point.

His or her post about Wake having academics on par with the top schools (regardless of how ranked) is a much more accurate statement than Wake has no difference in academics than UGA.

The public’s didn’t all of sudden start attracting the top faculty members. Go check the credentials of the departments at UGA vs Tulane vs Wake to verify.

Not really...I actually am not telling anyone to use or not use the rankings. I am simply pointing out that you can't equate Wake with a T15 school "under the old rankings", but now somehow claim that it's new ranking of 47 is so incorrect when the T15 are still the T15 (with the deck chairs shuffled a bit).

There are now about 6+ posts of one or more people claiming they aren't crying over the new rankings...while they proceed to cry over the new rankings.

All sorts of schools have different rankings under different measures. Why can't someone prefer the old USNWR? No one I know is looking at the new one, though I'm sure there are people interested in that one. Most people I know at private schools are disregarding the new rankings because they are made for a very specific HS student.

Do you realize the old rankings were also made for a very specific HS student? The old rankings were made for the prestige obsessed and as a result, colleges catered to the rich. Things are different now. If your college no longer fares well, why are they not doing a better job serving first gen and Pell students?

So you don't believe rankings of college should promote (1) % of students from top of HS class, (2) being taught by a professor with a terminal degree rather than a TA, and (3) smaller class sizes? Instead I should focus on if the school has a large number of Pell grants?

I am not sure how much I care about the % of students from the top of the HS class (what does top mean anyway...top 10%)? Are you trying to imply the average Princeton student is not a really smart kid?

Also, on #2...is it literally taught by a professor vs. a TA...or taught by someone without a terminal degree? Reason I ask, is because as an example, Wharton will have guest professors who are Managing Directors and Partners from top Wall Street firms and they don't have a terminal degree...but hell yeah, I would rather be taught by those people who are actually out doing deals (and they hire a couple of kids from the class) vs. someone with a PhD in Finance

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wake in a landslide

Yes, Wake.
Wake has a much more academic vibe, and is most similar to an elite/T15 (and was commonly T25 until USnews took all importnat metrics out of rankings). UGA and Tulane are not close to Wake considering outcomes(MD, Law, other grad placement, careers).

The fact you have to reference the rankings and somehow explain why they are wrong makes it plain that you care far too much about those exact rankings.

If Wake was similar to a T15…it would be ranked in the T15 which actually didn’t lose their rankings at all.

Everyone…stop crying about the rankings.

No one is crying about the rankings; they just ignore them now because they actually care more about factors like how many kids from top of HS class and small class sizes, versus DEI outcomes.

It's really funny watching people cling to the "old" rankings, yet also trying to convince others to ignore the "new" rankings. You don't get to have it both ways. Either the rankings have always been a crapshoot, or you need to accept the new formula.

Actually no. The new are only relevant if you highly value performance and percentage of Pell grant eligible and first gen. If you care about factors like class size and who is teaching the class, the old are better.

People blindly trusted USNWR rankings when it was convenient. Let’s not pretend they were ever college experts.

Rankings were based on quantifiable measures of academic achievement and desirable aspects of a college experience for me before. I am not interested in how a child how is 1st Gen will do. I know others are interested in that.

This is stupid. A college that can graduate and support 1st gen students is likely doing amazing for your average student. You have to have on-campus resources that are reliable and helpful for students who are first gen to get through. So yes, you should care, because that stat means your child has more resources on campus. The ivies are undoubtedly one of the best places for a first-gen student to go to college. Berkeley, a massive state school, also happens to be one, because they invest heavily into supporting and recruiting first gen students and, oh yeah, Berkeley has world class resources for all students.

Not previous poster, but these resources are devoted to 1st Gen & Pell and not to the rest of the class.

This is just not true. Some of the biggest contributions to college campuses due to the arrival of first gen students have been Writing programs, Tutor programs, and Quantitative skills center. They don't "appear" for first gen students, but these were created to increase the graduation rates of schools since the bottom were falling out, and now they have become the standard for colleges. Here's another example we just accept but dont critically think about how they were made to support fgli students: paying students to take up unpaid internships. Improving campus community so fgli students can succeed has many benefits for the whole campus, because it requires solutions that help all students.

Also last obvious way that more fgli students has improved most people in here's college search: financial aid has become much more substantial than the past.

So the private schools that dropped in the rankings (like a Vanderbilt and Dartmouth) have fewer resources than the State Schools that rose up? These things may have been added at State schools, but they have always existed at private schools. And just because the rankings changed this one year, doesn't mean that the schools have changed. A TA teaching a class of 100+ kids vs. a PhD teaching a class of 15-25 is and enormous difference in resources. How does this square with your argument? It doesn't.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wake in a landslide

Yes, Wake.
Wake has a much more academic vibe, and is most similar to an elite/T15 (and was commonly T25 until USnews took all importnat metrics out of rankings). UGA and Tulane are not close to Wake considering outcomes(MD, Law, other grad placement, careers).

The fact you have to reference the rankings and somehow explain why they are wrong makes it plain that you care far too much about those exact rankings.

If Wake was similar to a T15…it would be ranked in the T15 which actually didn’t lose their rankings at all.

Everyone…stop crying about the rankings.

I am not the poster that you are referring to. But your post seems kinda internally inconsistent. You told the poster to not use the rankings, but you used the rankings (T15 which hasn’t changed as much) to make your own point.

His or her post about Wake having academics on par with the top schools (regardless of how ranked) is a much more accurate statement than Wake has no difference in academics than UGA.

The public’s didn’t all of sudden start attracting the top faculty members. Go check the credentials of the departments at UGA vs Tulane vs Wake to verify.

Not really...I actually am not telling anyone to use or not use the rankings. I am simply pointing out that you can't equate Wake with a T15 school "under the old rankings", but now somehow claim that it's new ranking of 47 is so incorrect when the T15 are still the T15 (with the deck chairs shuffled a bit).

There are now about 6+ posts of one or more people claiming they aren't crying over the new rankings...while they proceed to cry over the new rankings.

All sorts of schools have different rankings under different measures. Why can't someone prefer the old USNWR? No one I know is looking at the new one, though I'm sure there are people interested in that one. Most people I know at private schools are disregarding the new rankings because they are made for a very specific HS student.

Don't post nonsense. Most people you know aren't using the old rankings...why would they since their top targets all are still top-ranked?

Why is the whining so bad on this thread?

You think people stopped applying to Dartmouth or Vanderbilt because their ranking plummeted on the new US News ranking? You are clueless.

Neither Dartmouth nor Vanderbilt plummeted...that's your problem (I think Vanderbilt went from like 14 to 18)...Dartmouth is also ranked #18 and maybe dropped 5 spots. I think people look at the rankings and see those schools are solidly Top 20.

It would appear that you are the clueless one. I also don't think Wake will suffer a drop in applications...but it's not because people have to justify that it's still #27 by clinging to old rankings.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wake in a landslide

Yes, Wake.
Wake has a much more academic vibe, and is most similar to an elite/T15 (and was commonly T25 until USnews took all importnat metrics out of rankings). UGA and Tulane are not close to Wake considering outcomes(MD, Law, other grad placement, careers).

The fact you have to reference the rankings and somehow explain why they are wrong makes it plain that you care far too much about those exact rankings.

If Wake was similar to a T15…it would be ranked in the T15 which actually didn’t lose their rankings at all.

Everyone…stop crying about the rankings.

I am not the poster that you are referring to. But your post seems kinda internally inconsistent. You told the poster to not use the rankings, but you used the rankings (T15 which hasn’t changed as much) to make your own point.

His or her post about Wake having academics on par with the top schools (regardless of how ranked) is a much more accurate statement than Wake has no difference in academics than UGA.

The public’s didn’t all of sudden start attracting the top faculty members. Go check the credentials of the departments at UGA vs Tulane vs Wake to verify.

Not really...I actually am not telling anyone to use or not use the rankings. I am simply pointing out that you can't equate Wake with a T15 school "under the old rankings", but now somehow claim that it's new ranking of 47 is so incorrect when the T15 are still the T15 (with the deck chairs shuffled a bit).

There are now about 6+ posts of one or more people claiming they aren't crying over the new rankings...while they proceed to cry over the new rankings.

All sorts of schools have different rankings under different measures. Why can't someone prefer the old USNWR? No one I know is looking at the new one, though I'm sure there are people interested in that one. Most people I know at private schools are disregarding the new rankings because they are made for a very specific HS student.

Do you realize the old rankings were also made for a very specific HS student? The old rankings were made for the prestige obsessed and as a result, colleges catered to the rich. Things are different now. If your college no longer fares well, why are they not doing a better job serving first gen and Pell students?

So you don't believe rankings of college should promote (1) % of students from top of HS class, (2) being taught by a professor with a terminal degree rather than a TA, and (3) smaller class sizes? Instead I should focus on if the school has a large number of Pell grants?

I am not sure how much I care about the % of students from the top of the HS class (what does top mean anyway...top 10%)? Are you trying to imply the average Princeton student is not a really smart kid?

Also, on #2...is it literally taught by a professor vs. a TA...or taught by someone without a terminal degree? Reason I ask, is because as an example, Wharton will have guest professors who are Managing Directors and Partners from top Wall Street firms and they don't have a terminal degree...but hell yeah, I would rather be taught by those people who are actually out doing deals (and they hire a couple of kids from the class) vs. someone with a PhD in Finance

Yes, top 10%. So how the college attracts top students from HS should not be a ranking factor? Oh, and yeah, you're right, most classes in all these State schools that rose in rankings are taught by MDs from Wall Street in their spare time and not TAs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I wouldn’t put too much thought into US News rankings, as the tide turns against DEI, I can see another complete redo in the next five years. Until then, I actually expect private schools to be rewarded for moving towards some of the new criteria while public schools will likely just maintain.

Under the “old”rankings, Wake was in the T30 for literally three decades. Neither of the other two were close.

Even the old ranking are a worthless measure of which school is best for your kid.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wake in a landslide

Yes, Wake.
Wake has a much more academic vibe, and is most similar to an elite/T15 (and was commonly T25 until USnews took all importnat metrics out of rankings). UGA and Tulane are not close to Wake considering outcomes(MD, Law, other grad placement, careers).

The fact you have to reference the rankings and somehow explain why they are wrong makes it plain that you care far too much about those exact rankings.

If Wake was similar to a T15…it would be ranked in the T15 which actually didn’t lose their rankings at all.

Everyone…stop crying about the rankings.

I am not the poster that you are referring to. But your post seems kinda internally inconsistent. You told the poster to not use the rankings, but you used the rankings (T15 which hasn’t changed as much) to make your own point.

His or her post about Wake having academics on par with the top schools (regardless of how ranked) is a much more accurate statement than Wake has no difference in academics than UGA.

The public’s didn’t all of sudden start attracting the top faculty members. Go check the credentials of the departments at UGA vs Tulane vs Wake to verify.

Not really...I actually am not telling anyone to use or not use the rankings. I am simply pointing out that you can't equate Wake with a T15 school "under the old rankings", but now somehow claim that it's new ranking of 47 is so incorrect when the T15 are still the T15 (with the deck chairs shuffled a bit).

There are now about 6+ posts of one or more people claiming they aren't crying over the new rankings...while they proceed to cry over the new rankings.

All sorts of schools have different rankings under different measures. Why can't someone prefer the old USNWR? No one I know is looking at the new one, though I'm sure there are people interested in that one. Most people I know at private schools are disregarding the new rankings because they are made for a very specific HS student.

Don't post nonsense. Most people you know aren't using the old rankings...why would they since their top targets all are still top-ranked?

Why is the whining so bad on this thread?

You think people stopped applying to Dartmouth or Vanderbilt because their ranking plummeted on the new US News ranking? You are clueless.

So rankings were never important to begin with?