Reply to 2022 US News Best National Universities

Forum Index » College and University Discussion

Reply to "2022 US News Best National Universities"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]I love these threads! The subjective BS from posters about how they think schools should be ranked is always top-notch entertainment.[/quote]

Whole lot of feelings in these posts…[/quote]

A whole lot of pathetic pieces of garbage in these posts...[/quote]

On the one hand: the hostility toward schools like Columbia is absurd.

On the other hand: The rankings ARE relevant to borrowing money for college.

I’m pretty idealistic about the liberal arts and what an education is worth. But the rankings do have a bearing on what I’d be willing to borrow to pay the education for a typical great kid. If the competition was UVA for in-state tuition, the only schools I’d see as possibly being worth a lot more cash per year would be the top 10 schools here and a few SLACs. 
[/quote]

Don’t know the obsession with guarding some stupid acronym or “tier” made up by insecure parents. They sound as if there’s some massive drop-off after HYPSM when in fact there really isn’t and it only lives in their imaginations. I’ve never heard the acronym being used in any formal, business, or even cocktail events. Can’t even find it on Wikipedia. [/quote]

[b]Idk why they can’t accept that these acronyms expand over time.[/b] It was only 10 years ago that HYP became HYPSM, and now it’s about to change to CHYMPS. Because it’s not an official acronym used by employers, schools, etc., there’s no good reason to defend it either. I guess people really like dividing schools based on yield rates, which is determined by how popular the school is, and not actually how good it is. Those who insist on defending HYPSM think of it as a popularity contest.[/quote]
They could if they're confident enough to drop ED and still have 70%+ yield rate. FYI, Caltech doesn't have ED and its yield rate is 40%.[/quote]

That’s exactly what I’m saying. Students don’t choose based on how good a school is, but how popular it is to laymen, which are two different things. Caltech is a better institution for STEM than Harvard, Yale, Princeton, etc. and yet their yield rate is 40%. That just shows that students don’t choose a school based on the strength of their academics. And that’s why to using yield rates as a measure of how good a school is doesn’t make sense at all.[/quote]

The stem kids know to go to cal tech but why would an econ or history kid choose cal tech over other options?   The rankings are based on a more general picture which is not that useful.   The narrow lists would be of more use to a student that already has focused on a major and area if study.[/quote]

The Econ or history kid wouldn’t apply to Caltech in the first place. So thinking that the 60% who didn’t choose Caltech are all non STEM students is simply false. [/quote]

I really don't think the kids that want to attend cal tech are deterred by the yield rate.[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics