Are US News rankings making DC rethink college list?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Dd says many people are taking Washu off their lists after the rankings fallout, and that many more are adding the top 3 publics to their list. People can dismiss usnews all they want but I would not be surprised if washu takes a huge hit on applications this year, and the publics see big spikes upward

NP. Sorry, that is really dumb.

Hopefully this benefits WashU as they will get applicants with actual interest in the school beyond its ranking. (No, I don't have a kid who attended, though we were looking at this school a few years ago and there was much to like. I'd be thrilled if my high stats senior were to put it on his list.)

Meant to add, I agree PP that this might happen. The privates that dropped in ranking need to find the silver lining.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No. My son wants to go into International Relations/Govt/Politics--his passion.

So- we look for schools that specialize in that.

unweighted 4.0/4.4 at a private. 35 ACT. 5s on every AP exam. He is an in-state VA. Lots of sports (high level), tons of community service, college credit, job, president of a club, etc.

He also has some college coaches in talks for his sport--a few D3, a couple D1. Not sure if that will pan out--but they are schools on his list.

We didn't look at USNWR to come up with a list. He also isn't looking for a big state university and could care less about their football programs.

He's got a mix of reaches/targets/safeties.

Sounds like WM and UVA should top this list. UVA would be club sports and not D1 (sport dependent) and big football. WM may we’ll get him playing D1, depending on sport. And he’d be a very solid applicant from the info provided. Lots of good SLACs, like Vassar, Macalaster, Middlebury, Bates and Carleton in IR.

My IR kid chose WM and WM IR is exceptional. And rigorous. Your kid wants to look at what the major entails before committing. Or consider government,, global policy or public policy which are less competitive. IR, you have to apply to be admitted and it has a series of weed out econ classes (and for some kids the foreign language requirement is an issue as well).

Thanks so much! Very helpful information. He has a lot of interest in WM after the tour and interview.

[Anonymous]

Georgetown over UVA if your son wants to do Govt/Politics. No Brainer.

Anonymous wrote:No. My son wants to go into International Relations/Govt/Politics--his passion.

So- we look for schools that specialize in that.

unweighted 4.0/4.4 at a private. 35 ACT. 5s on every AP exam. He is an in-state VA. Lots of sports (high level), tons of community service, college credit, job, president of a club, etc.

He also has some college coaches in talks for his sport--a few D3, a couple D1. Not sure if that will pan out--but they are schools on his list.

We didn't look at USNWR to come up with a list. He also isn't looking for a big state university and could care less about their football programs.

He's got a mix of reaches/targets/safeties.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So, here is a question for all those who claim the rankings have no impact on your college decision.

How do you even come up with a list from the start? If your kid is generally just interested in a common major...say finance, CS, mechanical engineering, political science...how do you come up with your list of say 30 schools (to start)?

Is there some easy way to find out class sizes by school and all these other criteria you espouse? Won't that search still result in hundreds of schools that meet those criteria? Are you limiting geographic search so that the first cut is manageable?

Putting aside the overall USNews rankings...are the rankings by Major/Specialty done by the same criteria as the list as a whole, or are those more "honest" rankings of the quality of the program?

I don't disagree that the ultimate decision is not based on the rankings...but again, how do you come up with your initial list of 30 schools without at least looking at the top 150 schools as determined by USNews?

One of those big college guidebooks? A list of "schools with good Environmental Studies/Politics/Underwater Basket-Weaving majors?" Finding a school DC likes and building out based on what schools are similar?

+1. Many, including Fiskes, have cross admit lists. Say my kid toured UVA, WM, a SLAC and VT— close, easy to research and known quantities. And WM was a strong first, followed by the SLACs why sis she like them— size, atmosphere, etc. what are their cross admits. Check several places.

I like Niche. Not for the pure rankings. But because they also like the 3-4 years students most use to describe the school atmosphere. And IMO, they are often spot on. It helps distinquish between the schools where students say, “work hard Party hard” and”quirky but kind”. And they Niche individual majors. No, I’m not sending a kid any where because of a niche ranking. But if you have Chemistry kid, what does niche rank as the top 50 schools. Any we haven’t considered. Then double check the department and especially outcomes. Some publish destinations. I’ve also had my kid contact school and asked for for department placement over the past 5 years. They have it. Dig into the CDS on all sorts of things, especially ED admissions, size of merit aid options, Etc. And yes, I want my kid to have a decent chance of graduating in 4 years with a standard major (as opposed to a dual degree or BA an MA, JD, MD.

It takes legwork and research. But even before the rankings change, I didn’t believe a #20 school was always better than a#50 for my kid. Now, I really don’t.

+1

Well said.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:FFS, no. The biggest problem with college rankings is SOMEONE else is telling you WHAT is important and HOW important in evaluating a college It’s utter nonsense, and a paradigm of intellectual laziness.

As an example, USNWR tweaked it to favor Pell grant admissions and graduation. Laudable goals for universities, to be sure. But how many in the DCUM world really care about that as far as their own kid’s concerns? If, eg, Harvard were to drop in this metric, people on DCUM wouldn’t want Harvard any less.

No, instead, what you’re doing is using rankings to justify schools you already liked or to avoid ones you don’t for whatever reason. Northeastern climbs but they are “gaming the system” or “cheating”. Chicago falls and they “never deserved to be that high anyway”.

The biggest thing most of you care about is how it will sound to your peer group. Just start being honest with yourself; you’ll be happier for it.

It’s not even just graduation rates, it’s six year graduation rates with adjustments to rates over predicted performance and then subcategories ood this for first Gen and pell elguboe.. If you look at the actual graduating rates, the private schools are better than the public schools ranked similarly. For example, Tufts has a 94 percent graduation rate and Rutgers a 84 percent rate nit thru are ranked side by side.

The publication uses six year graduation rates because the federal government does and requires that they be reported.

[Anonymous]

My child is picking their school based on their major and not ranking.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Would be so silly if they did. The college did not change since last week.

You people REALLY give USNWR too much power

Are you sure the college didn’t change? I’m not sure about that all. Colleges clearly care about the rankings ( eg some send out letters / essentially press releases exhaling why they fell in the ranking and why it’s wrong). So, with the new ranking methodology, they could change the admission criteria to improve. I think that’s a real possibility which then would then imply colleges did indeed change since last week. You don’t think USNWR has that much power and I REALLY hope your right, but I’m not sure AT ALL.

No, I do not think CWRU or WM or Chicago or Wake or Tulane or any large publics shooting up the charts changed much in academic quality or student experience in one year. The question is will they play the new USNWR a raking game and change over the next 5-10 years. You can get some idea by their public statements about rankings. I think some may just pull out. And it’s a reasonable question for a parent to ask at a visit— are you/how are you adjusting admissions and undergrad experience in light of the new USNRW ranking system. Some colleges will list factors they are considering tweaking. Some will say, we aren’t. We feel good about the academics and community we have and aren’t puppets dancing on USNWR strings.

If the college has gone down in the rankings, definitely find a written statement or ask the question. Because it would affect your kid in admissions, class size if that’s out the window and the social fit of the campus. If they like it now, how would they feel if it moved to a model that squeezes out the donut hole and “gets some aid” middle. Are more of full pays are needed to support more Pell grant kids. Does that mean aid is shifted from middle class to pell grants and first Gen as a school policy?

Ask the questions.

Absolutely

Asking these questions will be important.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No, my child is sane.

Rankings don’t even factor in. Current priority list is:

1. Fit
2. Fit
3. How’s the fit?
4. Strength of desired degree programs
5. Vibe check
6. Net price and can we avoid loans
7. Odds of acceptance, maybe 1 or 2 lottery plays at most

Fit is such a bullshit term. What it really means is “we are full pay and our kid can’t into a top school.”

I don't think its a BS term whatsoever. It really should be the top reason for choosing a college not because some insecure parent wants to brag

Except “fit” implies that there’s a single perfect school for a kid when there isn’t. It’s not a marriage. There’s more than one fit. So you go for the highest fit you can get into.

No it doesn't. You can have several schools that fit and you can certainly go for the "highest" fit but at the end of the day, it still comes down to fit.

[Anonymous]

DCUM’s reaction to the new rankings absolutely cracks me up. The truth is that the rankings are probably more accurate than ever before, but they run counter to the general thinking of the prevailing DCUM demographic (rich white folks) that since their kids can’t get into an Ivy or Stanford that second tier privates are better than any public and it’s just not true. I’ve always felt the way that US News now does and that’s how our kids approached the college search? Tulane? Wake? Wash U? Etc? Never in a million years would we have paid for schools like those.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:DCUM’s reaction to the new rankings absolutely cracks me up. The truth is that the rankings are probably more accurate than ever before, but they run counter to the general thinking of the prevailing DCUM demographic (rich white folks) that since their kids can’t get into an Ivy or Stanford that second tier privates are better than any public and it’s just not true. I’ve always felt the way that US News now does and that’s how our kids approached the college search? Tulane? Wake? Wash U? Etc? Never in a million years would we have paid for schools like those.

You do you. GL with that.

[Anonymous]

We're public school people, so we don't care.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DCUM’s reaction to the new rankings absolutely cracks me up. The truth is that the rankings are probably more accurate than ever before, but they run counter to the general thinking of the prevailing DCUM demographic (rich white folks) that since their kids can’t get into an Ivy or Stanford that second tier privates are better than any public and it’s just not true. I’ve always felt the way that US News now does and that’s how our kids approached the college search? Tulane? Wake? Wash U? Etc? Never in a million years would we have paid for schools like those.

You do you. GL with that.

See, we DID do us. And we’re now sitting prett while the rest of you fret.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DCUM’s reaction to the new rankings absolutely cracks me up. The truth is that the rankings are probably more accurate than ever before, but they run counter to the general thinking of the prevailing DCUM demographic (rich white folks) that since their kids can’t get into an Ivy or Stanford that second tier privates are better than any public and it’s just not true. I’ve always felt the way that US News now does and that’s how our kids approached the college search? Tulane? Wake? Wash U? Etc? Never in a million years would we have paid for schools like those.

You do you. GL with that.

See, we DID do us. And we’re now sitting prett while the rest of you fret.

I think you are confusing us with those who give a damn

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DCUM’s reaction to the new rankings absolutely cracks me up. The truth is that the rankings are probably more accurate than ever before, but they run counter to the general thinking of the prevailing DCUM demographic (rich white folks) that since their kids can’t get into an Ivy or Stanford that second tier privates are better than any public and it’s just not true. I’ve always felt the way that US News now does and that’s how our kids approached the college search? Tulane? Wake? Wash U? Etc? Never in a million years would we have paid for schools like those.

You do you. GL with that.

See, we DID do us. And we’re now sitting prett while the rest of you fret.

I think you are confusing us with those who give a damn

Yea you don’t care. That’s why you’re still commenting on page 8 of this thread.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No, my child is sane.

Rankings don’t even factor in. Current priority list is:

1. Fit
2. Fit
3. How’s the fit?
4. Strength of desired degree programs
5. Vibe check
6. Net price and can we avoid loans
7. Odds of acceptance, maybe 1 or 2 lottery plays at most

Fit is such a bullshit term. What it really means is “we are full pay and our kid can’t into a top school.”

I don't think its a BS term whatsoever. It really should be the top reason for choosing a college not because some insecure parent wants to brag

It is a BS term just like 'thriving' is a BS term as in: my DC found a perfect 'fit' at [2nd rate no name very small LAC that can be passed off as something better/exotic] and is 'thriving' there.