Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Serously doubt you went to Princeton OP. If you did, you wouldn't dispute rankings. You'd applaud them.

People who went to Princeton don't care about the rankings. Princeton and other top schools were elite schools long before USNWR and their ilk came along. THAT'S why "ratings" are bunk. The elite schools will always been elite. There are some schools that can spend their way to the top (see NYU).

Have you met a Princeton grad? They care a whole lot about the rankings. Every time Princeton surpasses Harvard you never hear the end of it. Maybe it's only the Princeton folks I knew back in the day in law school. Insufferable.

Bizarre. Those people must be really insecure. Princeton's eliteness has nothing to do with USNWR or whatever other rankings BS is out there.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Serously doubt you went to Princeton OP. If you did, you wouldn't dispute rankings. You'd applaud them.

People who went to Princeton don't care about the rankings. Princeton and other top schools were elite schools long before USNWR and their ilk came along. THAT'S why "ratings" are bunk. The elite schools will always been elite. There are some schools that can spend their way to the top (see NYU).

Sorry, clicked submit too early. While there are some schools that can buy their way into the top like NYU, just think about the top 15 universities (and SLAC). How many of those schools have been elite since the beginning of time? And, how many of them are considered top schools only because of USNWR rankings? I haven't bothered to look at the rankings for years, but I'm guessing the elite schools are the elite schools, period. They don't need USNWR for validation.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Serously doubt you went to Princeton OP. If you did, you wouldn't dispute rankings. You'd applaud them.

People who went to Princeton don't care about the rankings. Princeton and other top schools were elite schools long before USNWR and their ilk came along. THAT'S why "ratings" are bunk. The elite schools will always been elite. There are some schools that can spend their way to the top (see NYU).

Have you met a Princeton grad? They care a whole lot about the rankings. Every time Princeton surpasses Harvard you never hear the end of it. Maybe it's only the Princeton folks I knew back in the day in law school. Insufferable.

Um, I went to Princeton too and I agree that rankings are bunk.

14:31 here. Same with my alma mater - we know we're good, and we'll let the rest of you fight over slot 25 vs. slot 26. Plus, the Ivies will always be 8 colleges, and even if some people question Brown or Cornell, it's too late to change that.

Anonymous wrote:Serously doubt you went to Princeton OP. If you did, you wouldn't dispute rankings. You'd applaud them.

People who went to Princeton don't care about the rankings. Princeton and other top schools were elite schools long before USNWR and their ilk came along. THAT'S why "ratings" are bunk. The elite schools will always been elite. There are some schools that can spend their way to the top (see NYU).

I went to a different highly ranked Ivy. I guess I know enough about constructing indices like this to understand they're bunk. Which variables to include, and how to weight them? I could probably make a justifiable index that puts your least favorite school at the top.

But the PP is right to say, ignore the rankings at your peril. Most of the rest if the country has no insight into games index people play, and they take USNWR as gospel.

Yeah, I love the US News rankings. Your love or hatred of them depends precisely on where your undergrad/ grad rank.

Serously doubt you went to Princeton OP. If you did, you wouldn't dispute rankings. You'd applaud them.

Go ahead and ignore the rankings. Then try to explain to prospective employers why your low ranked school is really better than higher ranked schools.

"Reality" is far too deep and complex to be captured in a numerical ranking, but given the impossibility of making an informed subjective assessment, the mass perception defines the useful reality. The US News rankings define the operative reality at this time - no matter how flawed they may be. Ignore the US News rankings at your own peril.

It is an excellent article. The rankings criteria do seem to be outcome determinative. Yale will always win for "Yaleness." I had always suspected this was the case, but now I know it is the case.

Now if only someone could devise a way to free us from this phony rankings regime that has taken root.

You mean, "I went to Princeton, b****!

www.youtube.com/watch?v=YDhf9qwiA34

Wrong. I went to Princeton.

Said the Christopher Newport Grad...

The best article I've read on the topic:

http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2011/02/14/110214fa_fact_gladwell?currentPage=1

Basically, you can't quantify what they are trying to quantify. And this doesn't even get into the myriad ways schools try to game the system.