Why are schools like Columbia and UChicago descending in prestige while schools like Duke and Vanderbilt ascending?

[Anonymous]

^A- median classes are much more frequent in upperlevels hence the graduation GPA median around 3.7

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Couldn't be just about a protest, weather or basketball, could it? The protest was shortlived, and the weather and basketball were always there, so why they suddenly more popular now?

None of that is a valid assessment of the quality of the students.

Duke is a stable T10 no rise or decline: solidly in the T10, only one year in the last 10 has been outside of it, and has the SAT scores (pre-TO) that rival the top-4 ivies and MIT.
Columbia is in a decline: falsified data led to a fake "T3" spot, and never reported SAT scores on the CDS, due to lower than the top 4 ivies with the large pool of GS students, then they had the extensive issues with the protests and now a gated campus. It remains a top school T11-15, it could go back up to T10 (And bump down JHU with its 2 rounds of ED) but not likely in the next 5 years.
UChicago: Stable but not really a T10, though not declining fro those that understand where it really sits. Like Columbia they never reported CDS, and have been TO for a while. Furthermore they have ED1 ED2 and EA and RD, now an ED0. They game the system too much to be T10, period. They are a stable T15 That gets ranked USN T10 due to gimmicks.
Vanderbilt: used to have one of the Top-7 SAT ranges in the country, now they take tons of TO, take hundreds in sophomore transfers, all TO and many quite low (1350s). They are not ascending they are moving from what used to be T12-15 to T18-22. Their fit over the USN rankings drop was illustrative. Act like you belong, don't whine. WashU has become more prestigious as far as talent of the student body than Vanderbilt.

Disagree. Has been T10 for years, even before ED. I'm not a Chicago lover but that's just the truth. And their SAT score averages also matched the upper Ivies and other T10s before TO.

UChicago has been TO for a very long time and did not release CDS until everyone was TO (neither did Columbia, though not TO and widely suspected to be the GS data that made the matriculated SAT/ACT scores not desirable for release). Chicago does not and did not have SAT ranges on par with the top-ten SAT range schools. That is why Chicago and Columbia did not publish CDS, they did not want to admit they were not on par with who they say are peer schools.
UChicago is a school that in studies has been included with "ivy+"(Duke, MIT, Stanford, Chicago) and thus does, like ivies, provide a statistically significant boost for top jobs and top grad/professional schools. It is worth every cent to ED there if one does not have a good chance at the others.
However it likely has scores that are similar to the bottom third of these. They are at the bottom of this "ivy+" based the %age of unhooked true top candidates who matriculate. The unhooked admit data from schools like HWS, Groton, Nobles and the Big3 in DMV indicate they gather not-quite top students for ED zero-2. Counselors know it and push the 3.9uw, top but not quite max rigor, 1500 ish but still not-quite-top-of the class crew to apply there ED, versus ivy or Duke ED, even over the easier admit ivy, Cornell. Cornell is T11-14. That is about where Chicago truly is on a peer quality basis.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Please see below. Vanderbilt has always been ranked below both Duke and UChicago. This yea (2026) is not shown, nut I beleive Chicago is now 6th again and Duke is lower. It depends on the methodology for US News and World Report. When they deemphasized small class sizes and nobel laureates, and emphasized Pell Grant recipients Chicago fell in the rankings. Also, Chicago has many who do not graduate in 4 years because it is too hard, which also hurts their rankings.

https://www.aronfrishberg.com/projects/usnews.html

Do you know anything about current UChicago post 2018? Obviously not. The median grade is a B+ in many classes, A- in some and B in some, overall around a 3.7. Less inflation than half the ivy league but on par with the half that does not over-inflate(Princeton, Penn, Cornell, Columbia).
There is no issue graduating in 4 years. Some choose to do an extra year for masters programs, that is what makes the grad numbers lower. There are very very few who have any trouble completing a bachelors in 4 years. Come off it. Stop spreading false narratives.

This is correct.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What a weird post. The obsession with prestige and creating micro-hierarchies between ultra elite schools is a royal waste of time.

yes. also was wondering if its a chicago hater that threw in columbia to cover it up

Probably + they're likely a Confederate MAGA who deride "woke" policies.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Couldn't be just about a protest, weather or basketball, could it? The protest was shortlived, and the weather and basketball were always there, so why they suddenly more popular now?

None of that is a valid assessment of the quality of the students.

Duke is a stable T10 no rise or decline: solidly in the T10, only one year in the last 10 has been outside of it, and has the SAT scores (pre-TO) that rival the top-4 ivies and MIT.
Columbia is in a decline: falsified data led to a fake "T3" spot, and never reported SAT scores on the CDS, due to lower than the top 4 ivies with the large pool of GS students, then they had the extensive issues with the protests and now a gated campus. It remains a top school T11-15, it could go back up to T10 (And bump down JHU with its 2 rounds of ED) but not likely in the next 5 years.
UChicago: Stable but not really a T10, though not declining fro those that understand where it really sits. Like Columbia they never reported CDS, and have been TO for a while. Furthermore they have ED1 ED2 and EA and RD, now an ED0. They game the system too much to be T10, period. They are a stable T15 That gets ranked USN T10 due to gimmicks.
Vanderbilt: used to have one of the Top-7 SAT ranges in the country, now they take tons of TO, take hundreds in sophomore transfers, all TO and many quite low (1350s). They are not ascending they are moving from what used to be T12-15 to T18-22. Their fit over the USN rankings drop was illustrative. Act like you belong, don't whine. WashU has become more prestigious as far as talent of the student body than Vanderbilt.

Disagree. Has been T10 for years, even before ED. I'm not a Chicago lover but that's just the truth. And their SAT score averages also matched the upper Ivies and other T10s before TO.

UChicago has been TO for a very long time and did not release CDS until everyone was TO (neither did Columbia, though not TO and widely suspected to be the GS data that made the matriculated SAT/ACT scores not desirable for release). Chicago does not and did not have SAT ranges on par with the top-ten SAT range schools. That is why Chicago and Columbia did not publish CDS, they did not want to admit they were not on par with who they say are peer schools.
UChicago is a school that in studies has been included with "ivy+"(Duke, MIT, Stanford, Chicago) and thus does, like ivies, provide a statistically significant boost for top jobs and top grad/professional schools. It is worth every cent to ED there if one does not have a good chance at the others.
However it likely has scores that are similar to the bottom third of these. They are at the bottom of this "ivy+" based the %age of unhooked true top candidates who matriculate. The unhooked admit data from schools like HWS, Groton, Nobles and the Big3 in DMV indicate they gather not-quite top students for ED zero-2. Counselors know it and push the 3.9uw, top but not quite max rigor, 1500 ish but still not-quite-top-of the class crew to apply there ED, versus ivy or Duke ED, even over the easier admit ivy, Cornell. Cornell is T11-14. That is about where Chicago truly is on a peer quality basis.

So much misinformation. You can compare the test ranges (with percentage of students submitting scores) from the CDS in recent years, when Ivies plus Duke, etc we’re all test optional.

The numbers were virtually identical:

Princeton: 1500-1540-1560
56-21 (percentage of students submitting SAT-ACT)

UChicago: 1510-1540-1560
49-27

Yale: 1480-1530-1560
61-25

Cornell: 1510-1540-1560
45-15

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Couldn't be just about a protest, weather or basketball, could it? The protest was shortlived, and the weather and basketball were always there, so why they suddenly more popular now?

None of that is a valid assessment of the quality of the students.

Duke is a stable T10 no rise or decline: solidly in the T10, only one year in the last 10 has been outside of it, and has the SAT scores (pre-TO) that rival the top-4 ivies and MIT.
Columbia is in a decline: falsified data led to a fake "T3" spot, and never reported SAT scores on the CDS, due to lower than the top 4 ivies with the large pool of GS students, then they had the extensive issues with the protests and now a gated campus. It remains a top school T11-15, it could go back up to T10 (And bump down JHU with its 2 rounds of ED) but not likely in the next 5 years.
UChicago: Stable but not really a T10, though not declining fro those that understand where it really sits. Like Columbia they never reported CDS, and have been TO for a while. Furthermore they have ED1 ED2 and EA and RD, now an ED0. They game the system too much to be T10, period. They are a stable T15 That gets ranked USN T10 due to gimmicks.
Vanderbilt: used to have one of the Top-7 SAT ranges in the country, now they take tons of TO, take hundreds in sophomore transfers, all TO and many quite low (1350s). They are not ascending they are moving from what used to be T12-15 to T18-22. Their fit over the USN rankings drop was illustrative. Act like you belong, don't whine. WashU has become more prestigious as far as talent of the student body than Vanderbilt.

Disagree. Has been T10 for years, even before ED. I'm not a Chicago lover but that's just the truth. And their SAT score averages also matched the upper Ivies and other T10s before TO.

UChicago has been TO for a very long time and did not release CDS until everyone was TO (neither did Columbia, though not TO and widely suspected to be the GS data that made the matriculated SAT/ACT scores not desirable for release). Chicago does not and did not have SAT ranges on par with the top-ten SAT range schools. That is why Chicago and Columbia did not publish CDS, they did not want to admit they were not on par with who they say are peer schools.
UChicago is a school that in studies has been included with "ivy+"(Duke, MIT, Stanford, Chicago) and thus does, like ivies, provide a statistically significant boost for top jobs and top grad/professional schools. It is worth every cent to ED there if one does not have a good chance at the others.
However it likely has scores that are similar to the bottom third of these. They are at the bottom of this "ivy+" based the %age of unhooked true top candidates who matriculate. The unhooked admit data from schools like HWS, Groton, Nobles and the Big3 in DMV indicate they gather not-quite top students for ED zero-2. Counselors know it and push the 3.9uw, top but not quite max rigor, 1500 ish but still not-quite-top-of the class crew to apply there ED, versus ivy or Duke ED, even over the easier admit ivy, Cornell. Cornell is T11-14. That is about where Chicago truly is on a peer quality basis.

DP. Other than misinformation, you are using SAT as the be-all end-all measure of peer quality and, worse yet, as the ultimate measure of who belongs in t10, t20, etc. I love the SAT as much as the next gal/guy. I have a 1580 one-sitting (DCUMers love this term), no-accommodation (DCUMers hate this term) son so I'm firmly in the camp of SAT being a pretty good proxy of academic capability. But like many who aren't SAT-obsessed, I understand that we can't equate SAT range with t-whatever and make ridiculous statements such as "School A's SAT range is 1510-1560, slightly higher than School B's is 1500-1550, so School A is better than School B."