WSJ Rankings 2025

[Anonymous]

Finally, a ranking that puts my alma mater above its rival. I give it a thumbs up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People might be misinterpreting these results. As I understand it, the ranking shows which schools produce the biggest bang (outcomes) for the buck (cost minus aid), essentially a ROI, with a few other measures too (30%). So, if the average cost to attend is high, even good outcomes are significantly offset. On the other hand, if the average cost to attend is low, just a better-than-average outcome would rank the school highly. So, it’s the balance of the two that gets a school highly ranked.

This is the way I read it as well. I have kids at two of the schools, and the normally much higher-ranked one is ranked well below the other school. But the WSJ lower-ranked school is much more expensive. At least initially, the kid going there will make much less money than the one at the better-ranked (by WSJ) university, at least initially.

I am confused…are you saying your kid at the expensive school is going to make less money than the kid at the cheaper school?

I read this to say that a kid from NYU may make a ton more than a kid from University of Delaware, but NYU costs a fortune and gives little aid so the payback period is longer (and hence the lower ranking).

Your situation seems to justify the WSJ ranking.

[Anonymous]

I really appreciate lists that list things differently. This one is pretty much about employment and pay. I think that's an interesting and useful metric tbh. I dont think I need one be all, end all list - I like the variety.

I dont have a kid who qualifies for a pell grant. And I think it's good for our country to have colleges that serve those kids. But it doesn't really impact our college list. There are plenty of diverse schools that aren't tops at helping kids. (Hey, where's the list of colleges that serve UMC families).

So I like this list and can take notes from this as well as others

[Anonymous]

There's no credibility for a list like this - it's indefensible.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The list is schools with the most kids (often men) who major in engineering and comp sci and finance and make a lot of money.

Another poster liked this list because it did NOT appear to include pre-professional programs like engineering and business. LOL.

[Anonymous]

Imagine having the courage to turn this in to your supervisors. "Yep, let's run it!"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I've never heard of 2 schools in the Top 10 (Babson, Claremont McKenna).

Guessing I can't afford those anyway.

They are both great schools, under the radar no more!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
For outcome, I would just go here. The ranking has big discrepancy.

https://collegescorecard.ed.gov/

The discrepancy is the WSJ factors in costs as well. This is a great forcing factor to get the cost of college down!

[Anonymous]

I know this may sound crazy, but UC Merced is stealing applicants and students from Yale, Oxford and Cambridge. It is a force.

I know my neighbor, 1600 SAT, 4.0, math olympiads, gunning either for hedge fund or biomedical research whose dream school is UC Merced.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I do like the criteria though.. Limited fluff/BS factors, not based on hoity-toity professorial 'reputation' opinions (like we care). It's all about the money.

Though it is a weird methodology that they actually use. It's not just raw salary data for the schools.

Salary impact (33%): This measures the extent to which a college boosts its graduates’ salaries beyond what they would be expected to earn regardless of which college they attended. We used statistical modeling to estimate what we would expect the median earnings of a college’s graduates to be on the basis of the exam results of its students prior to attending the college and the cost of living in the state in which the college is based. We then scored the college on its performance against that estimate. These scores were then combined with scores for raw graduate salaries to factor in absolute performance alongside performance relative to our estimates. Our analysis for this metric used research on this topic by the policy-research think tank the Brookings Institution as a guide.

So this reminds me of “A+ Colleges for B Students.”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:UC Merced is definitely a top 20 school. NYU at 250+ is a borderline community college.

The Wall Street Journal did a fine rankings job.

NYU got deservedly pinged because they have horrible financial aid and graduate kids with useless degrees. NYU has an incredibly high default rate on student loans.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As soon as you see Babson at #2, ahead of Stanford, Yale, MIT, etc, you know this list is a joke!

Bingo.

This list is lacking any semblance of student quality ranking. Student peers matter. Parents and families want kids to go to the schools that people know have smart kids. This list has zero assessment for smarts.

You must want to see all the 4.6 MCPS grads. I’ll take a list that finally gives credence to the incredible results Jesuit universities produce.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What’s so curious to me is how did Emma Tucker, the editor in chief, even get this job. Obviously, a best colleges list for the WSJ is a big roll out. What was the thinking here?

It’s so manifestly stupid and thoughtless. And there was a huge opportunity to claim this space.

And they went with what they did.

Baffling.

Clearly morons in control at WSJ.

This is not the first year the WSJ has published rankings; they just emphasized earnings a lot more.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:People might be misinterpreting these results. As I understand it, the ranking shows which schools produce the biggest bang (outcomes) for the buck (cost minus aid), essentially a ROI, with a few other measures too (30%). So, if the average cost to attend is high, even good outcomes are significantly offset. On the other hand, if the average cost to attend is low, just a better-than-average outcome would rank the school highly. So, it’s the balance of the two that gets a school highly ranked.

Right, so if you’re the atypical not-loaded DCUM, and you need FA or merit, this is the list for you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The list is schools with the most kids (often men) who major in engineering and comp sci and finance and make a lot of money.

Funny, because some of the top 50 do not even offer engineering! Explain that!