Anonymous
12/20/2024 12:42
Subject: What happened to W&M, Brandeis, Tulane, Pepperdine and others..from historically T50 to outside looking in?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Everyone needs to stop blaming USNews for the rankings slide.
It stands to reason that if it was only a USNews problem, that these schools would rank highly in Forbes or WSJ or other rankings.
However, at least with Wake and Tulane, the USNews Rankings are the highest rankings...BY FAR.
Actually, Forbes ranks W&M 55 and USNews ranks it #54 (WSJ is at 178). Seems about right.
Pepperdine is #83 USNews and #125 Forbes and #145 WSJ.
Brandeis is #63 USNews, #105 Forbes and #335 WSJ
Wake is #46 USNews, #469 Forbes and #137 WSJ
Tulane is #63 USNews, #147 Forbes and #451 WSJ
US News changed their methodology with the express purpose of becoming more like Forbes and WSJ. Wake, W&M, Tulane, Brandeis were all t40-30+ for many, many years. Only after the movement to value DEI did these schools start to be ranked among schools that had always ranked much lower. It is because of methodology changes and methodology changes alone that the (made up) rankings of these schools have changed.
Produce any reputable 3rd party ranking then...if you think all rankings suck, then stop taking issue with USNews' new methodology.
None of them are because they've all switched to social mobility. Nobody wants to be the one that says that isn't important.
Considering at least Tulane and Wake are chasing the new USNews rankings...something tells me if they move back to where they were prior, folks like you will start touting them again.
No I still think they're bad rankings. Also Wake said that they have no plans to chase it multiple times.
+1 Tulane also said this
The rankings were never the sole reason smart kids went to these schools (as is evidenced by either increasing or stable
test stats at all of these schools). It was more like a bonus or nice in that an external source acknowledged what the people at these schools know to be true. If they don't agree this year, so what? Who cares.
Great...why are there three pages of posts trying to argue why the rankings are "wrong". Seems now it's "we never cared about the rankings". Maybe just stick with that.
I cared about US News back when it was primarily focused on the quality of academics at a school. I don't think it's wrong to want a ranking available so the smartest students know where they should go.
There is...it's called USNews. The top 20 schools have had the deck chairs shuffled...but they didn't go anywhere.
Nobody has ever accused Tulane or Pepperdine of attracting the "smartest students".
It doesn't matter if some schools maintained their place, they got rid of SO many factors related to undergraduate education experience, and so it's no longer a valid measure of that. Yada yada broken clock. Maybe Tulane and Pepperdine didn't but WF, W&M, BU, and BC all did and they all dropped a lot the last two years. Hell even WashU and NYU did.
lol Tulane, Pepperdine, BU and BC compete for the same students. W&M is a state school behind UVa and Vtech. WF is below all of these.
UVA: 1470 (59% submitting scores)
W&M: 1470 (59% submitting scores)
WF: 1450 (48% submitting scores)
VT: 1360 (48% submitting scores)
Try again.
W&M is a safety for UVA kids. UVA is a safety for T20 kids. Unless yield protection is a thing.
Somehow their enrolling SATs are identical as are their GPAs. I think if UVA were really the next step for t20 applicants their SAT median would be more similar to Harvard, Yale, etc.
Absolutely. The ivies plus MIT Stanford Duke Hopkins and a couple others all had 25th%ile SAT of enrolled students at 1470 or higher pre-test optional. UVA and William and Mary both had the 75th%ile at 1470or so. The top quarter of UVA (and WM) is the same as the top 3/4 of ivy/+ schools: they are not the same tier, and they are essentially tied as far as student quality. UVA and WM should both be about 25-30 national ranking. They are peers but neither is on par with ivy.
Anonymous
12/20/2024 12:41
Subject: What happened to W&M, Brandeis, Tulane, Pepperdine and others..from historically T50 to outside looking in?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Everyone needs to stop blaming USNews for the rankings slide.
It stands to reason that if it was only a USNews problem, that these schools would rank highly in Forbes or WSJ or other rankings.
However, at least with Wake and Tulane, the USNews Rankings are the highest rankings...BY FAR.
Actually, Forbes ranks W&M 55 and USNews ranks it #54 (WSJ is at 178). Seems about right.
Pepperdine is #83 USNews and #125 Forbes and #145 WSJ.
Brandeis is #63 USNews, #105 Forbes and #335 WSJ
Wake is #46 USNews, #469 Forbes and #137 WSJ
Tulane is #63 USNews, #147 Forbes and #451 WSJ
US News changed their methodology with the express purpose of becoming more like Forbes and WSJ. Wake, W&M, Tulane, Brandeis were all t40-30+ for many, many years. Only after the movement to value DEI did these schools start to be ranked among schools that had always ranked much lower. It is because of methodology changes and methodology changes alone that the (made up) rankings of these schools have changed.
Produce any reputable 3rd party ranking then...if you think all rankings suck, then stop taking issue with USNews' new methodology.
None of them are because they've all switched to social mobility. Nobody wants to be the one that says that isn't important.
Considering at least Tulane and Wake are chasing the new USNews rankings...something tells me if they move back to where they were prior, folks like you will start touting them again.
No I still think they're bad rankings. Also Wake said that they have no plans to chase it multiple times.
+1 Tulane also said this
The rankings were never the sole reason smart kids went to these schools (as is evidenced by either increasing or stable
test stats at all of these schools). It was more like a bonus or nice in that an external source acknowledged what the people at these schools know to be true. If they don't agree this year, so what? Who cares.
Great...why are there three pages of posts trying to argue why the rankings are "wrong". Seems now it's "we never cared about the rankings". Maybe just stick with that.
I cared about US News back when it was primarily focused on the quality of academics at a school. I don't think it's wrong to want a ranking available so the smartest students know where they should go.
There is...it's called USNews. The top 20 schools have had the deck chairs shuffled...but they didn't go anywhere.
Nobody has ever accused Tulane or Pepperdine of attracting the "smartest students".
Not sure where you've been but these two and others mentioned do attract top students. "Smartest" isn't a concrete classification, btw.
Maybe because the kids that actually attend will freely admit they weren't the smartest kids at their school or the top kids.
Smartest doesn't have to mean just the top 1%, and probably better describes the top 10-15% of most schools.
How is the 10-15% the smartest? What would you call the 1% then? Talk about DEIing a superlative.
15% of American households are millionaires, would you not consider them some of the richest people in the country?
It's certainly not a metric that is touted when discussing wealth...which is almost always about the top 1%.
When any 3rd party measures the wealth of a college student body they always comment on what %age comes from the top 1%...not the top 15% (or even the top 5% or top 10%).
Usually it's both top 1% and top 10%. For colleges the CDS asks about top 10%.
Anonymous
12/20/2024 12:40
Subject: What happened to W&M, Brandeis, Tulane, Pepperdine and others..from historically T50 to outside looking in?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Everyone needs to stop blaming USNews for the rankings slide.
It stands to reason that if it was only a USNews problem, that these schools would rank highly in Forbes or WSJ or other rankings.
However, at least with Wake and Tulane, the USNews Rankings are the highest rankings...BY FAR.
Actually, Forbes ranks W&M 55 and USNews ranks it #54 (WSJ is at 178). Seems about right.
Pepperdine is #83 USNews and #125 Forbes and #145 WSJ.
Brandeis is #63 USNews, #105 Forbes and #335 WSJ
Wake is #46 USNews, #469 Forbes and #137 WSJ
Tulane is #63 USNews, #147 Forbes and #451 WSJ
US News changed their methodology with the express purpose of becoming more like Forbes and WSJ. Wake, W&M, Tulane, Brandeis were all t40-30+ for many, many years. Only after the movement to value DEI did these schools start to be ranked among schools that had always ranked much lower. It is because of methodology changes and methodology changes alone that the (made up) rankings of these schools have changed.
Produce any reputable 3rd party ranking then...if you think all rankings suck, then stop taking issue with USNews' new methodology.
None of them are because they've all switched to social mobility. Nobody wants to be the one that says that isn't important.
Considering at least Tulane and Wake are chasing the new USNews rankings...something tells me if they move back to where they were prior, folks like you will start touting them again.
No I still think they're bad rankings. Also Wake said that they have no plans to chase it multiple times.
+1 Tulane also said this
The rankings were never the sole reason smart kids went to these schools (as is evidenced by either increasing or stable
test stats at all of these schools). It was more like a bonus or nice in that an external source acknowledged what the people at these schools know to be true. If they don't agree this year, so what? Who cares.
Great...why are there three pages of posts trying to argue why the rankings are "wrong". Seems now it's "we never cared about the rankings". Maybe just stick with that.
I cared about US News back when it was primarily focused on the quality of academics at a school. I don't think it's wrong to want a ranking available so the smartest students know where they should go.
There is...it's called USNews. The top 20 schools have had the deck chairs shuffled...but they didn't go anywhere.
Nobody has ever accused Tulane or Pepperdine of attracting the "smartest students".
Not sure where you've been but these two and others mentioned do attract top students. "Smartest" isn't a concrete classification, btw.
Maybe because the kids that actually attend will freely admit they weren't the smartest kids at their school or the top kids.
Smartest doesn't have to mean just the top 1%, and probably better describes the top 10-15% of most schools.
How is the 10-15% the smartest? What would you call the 1% then? Talk about DEIing a superlative.
15% of American households are millionaires, would you not consider them some of the richest people in the country?
It's certainly not a metric that is touted when discussing wealth...which is almost always about the top 1%.
When any 3rd party measures the wealth of a college student body they always comment on what %age comes from the top 1%...not the top 15% (or even the top 5% or top 10%).
0.1 percenters would laugh at 1 percenters who think they're wealthy. It's all subjective. Do you have any concrete numbers to back up any point?
Anonymous
12/20/2024 12:39
Subject: What happened to W&M, Brandeis, Tulane, Pepperdine and others..from historically T50 to outside looking in?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Everyone needs to stop blaming USNews for the rankings slide.
It stands to reason that if it was only a USNews problem, that these schools would rank highly in Forbes or WSJ or other rankings.
However, at least with Wake and Tulane, the USNews Rankings are the highest rankings...BY FAR.
Actually, Forbes ranks W&M 55 and USNews ranks it #54 (WSJ is at 178). Seems about right.
Pepperdine is #83 USNews and #125 Forbes and #145 WSJ.
Brandeis is #63 USNews, #105 Forbes and #335 WSJ
Wake is #46 USNews, #469 Forbes and #137 WSJ
Tulane is #63 USNews, #147 Forbes and #451 WSJ
US News changed their methodology with the express purpose of becoming more like Forbes and WSJ. Wake, W&M, Tulane, Brandeis were all t40-30+ for many, many years. Only after the movement to value DEI did these schools start to be ranked among schools that had always ranked much lower. It is because of methodology changes and methodology changes alone that the (made up) rankings of these schools have changed.
Produce any reputable 3rd party ranking then...if you think all rankings suck, then stop taking issue with USNews' new methodology.
None of them are because they've all switched to social mobility. Nobody wants to be the one that says that isn't important.
Considering at least Tulane and Wake are chasing the new USNews rankings...something tells me if they move back to where they were prior, folks like you will start touting them again.
No I still think they're bad rankings. Also Wake said that they have no plans to chase it multiple times.
+1 Tulane also said this
The rankings were never the sole reason smart kids went to these schools (as is evidenced by either increasing or stable
test stats at all of these schools). It was more like a bonus or nice in that an external source acknowledged what the people at these schools know to be true. If they don't agree this year, so what? Who cares.
Great...why are there three pages of posts trying to argue why the rankings are "wrong". Seems now it's "we never cared about the rankings". Maybe just stick with that.
I cared about US News back when it was primarily focused on the quality of academics at a school. I don't think it's wrong to want a ranking available so the smartest students know where they should go.
There is...it's called USNews. The top 20 schools have had the deck chairs shuffled...but they didn't go anywhere.
Nobody has ever accused Tulane or Pepperdine of attracting the "smartest students".
Not sure where you've been but these two and others mentioned do attract top students. "Smartest" isn't a concrete classification, btw.
Maybe because the kids that actually attend will freely admit they weren't the smartest kids at their school or the top kids.
Smartest doesn't have to mean just the top 1%, and probably better describes the top 10-15% of most schools.
How is the 10-15% the smartest? What would you call the 1% then? Talk about DEIing a superlative.
15% of American households are millionaires, would you not consider them some of the richest people in the country?
It's certainly not a metric that is touted when discussing wealth...which is almost always about the top 1%.
When any 3rd party measures the wealth of a college student body they always comment on what %age comes from the top 1%...not the top 15% (or even the top 5% or top 10%).
Anonymous
12/20/2024 12:37
Subject: What happened to W&M, Brandeis, Tulane, Pepperdine and others..from historically T50 to outside looking in?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Everyone needs to stop blaming USNews for the rankings slide.
It stands to reason that if it was only a USNews problem, that these schools would rank highly in Forbes or WSJ or other rankings.
However, at least with Wake and Tulane, the USNews Rankings are the highest rankings...BY FAR.
Actually, Forbes ranks W&M 55 and USNews ranks it #54 (WSJ is at 178). Seems about right.
Pepperdine is #83 USNews and #125 Forbes and #145 WSJ.
Brandeis is #63 USNews, #105 Forbes and #335 WSJ
Wake is #46 USNews, #469 Forbes and #137 WSJ
Tulane is #63 USNews, #147 Forbes and #451 WSJ
US News changed their methodology with the express purpose of becoming more like Forbes and WSJ. Wake, W&M, Tulane, Brandeis were all t40-30+ for many, many years. Only after the movement to value DEI did these schools start to be ranked among schools that had always ranked much lower. It is because of methodology changes and methodology changes alone that the (made up) rankings of these schools have changed.
Produce any reputable 3rd party ranking then...if you think all rankings suck, then stop taking issue with USNews' new methodology.
None of them are because they've all switched to social mobility. Nobody wants to be the one that says that isn't important.
Considering at least Tulane and Wake are chasing the new USNews rankings...something tells me if they move back to where they were prior, folks like you will start touting them again.
No I still think they're bad rankings. Also Wake said that they have no plans to chase it multiple times.
+1 Tulane also said this
The rankings were never the sole reason smart kids went to these schools (as is evidenced by either increasing or stable
test stats at all of these schools). It was more like a bonus or nice in that an external source acknowledged what the people at these schools know to be true. If they don't agree this year, so what? Who cares.
Great...why are there three pages of posts trying to argue why the rankings are "wrong". Seems now it's "we never cared about the rankings". Maybe just stick with that.
I cared about US News back when it was primarily focused on the quality of academics at a school. I don't think it's wrong to want a ranking available so the smartest students know where they should go.
There is...it's called USNews. The top 20 schools have had the deck chairs shuffled...but they didn't go anywhere.
Nobody has ever accused Tulane or Pepperdine of attracting the "smartest students".
It doesn't matter if some schools maintained their place, they got rid of SO many factors related to undergraduate education experience, and so it's no longer a valid measure of that. Yada yada broken clock. Maybe Tulane and Pepperdine didn't but WF, W&M, BU, and BC all did and they all dropped a lot the last two years. Hell even WashU and NYU did.
lol Tulane, Pepperdine, BU and BC compete for the same students. W&M is a state school behind UVa and Vtech. WF is below all of these.
UVA: 1470 (59% submitting scores)
W&M: 1470 (59% submitting scores)
WF: 1450 (48% submitting scores)
VT: 1360 (48% submitting scores)
Try again.
W&M is a safety for UVA kids. UVA is a safety for T20 kids. Unless yield protection is a thing.
It's funny how the other poster has actual numbers and evidence, but yet you continue to delude yourself that your unobjective feelings are what really matters.
+1
Every school other than HYP is someone's backup. Even those schools, backups for each other. Who cares.
Anonymous
12/20/2024 12:35
Subject: Re:What happened to W&M, Brandeis, Tulane, Pepperdine and others..from historically T50 to outside looking in?
Anonymous wrote:Wake Forest is barely "t50", somehow beat out by Rutgers. W&M has exactly the same entering class stats and %s as UVA yet is beat out by Virginia Tech on US News. Michigan State (no offense to Michigan State) is somehow t70 now. Did the average student at Rutgers suddenly become much smarter than the average Wake student? No. Is the average Virginia Tech student smarter than the average student at Tulane? No.
So-called "t50" schools with ranks that now reflect their ability to be large, pell-grant numbers, etc. will always be on the outside looking into the group of schools whose intellectual character remains clear to those who make any effort at all to look.
+1000!!
Anonymous
12/20/2024 12:35
Subject: What happened to W&M, Brandeis, Tulane, Pepperdine and others..from historically T50 to outside looking in?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Everyone needs to stop blaming USNews for the rankings slide.
It stands to reason that if it was only a USNews problem, that these schools would rank highly in Forbes or WSJ or other rankings.
However, at least with Wake and Tulane, the USNews Rankings are the highest rankings...BY FAR.
Actually, Forbes ranks W&M 55 and USNews ranks it #54 (WSJ is at 178). Seems about right.
Pepperdine is #83 USNews and #125 Forbes and #145 WSJ.
Brandeis is #63 USNews, #105 Forbes and #335 WSJ
Wake is #46 USNews, #469 Forbes and #137 WSJ
Tulane is #63 USNews, #147 Forbes and #451 WSJ
US News changed their methodology with the express purpose of becoming more like Forbes and WSJ. Wake, W&M, Tulane, Brandeis were all t40-30+ for many, many years. Only after the movement to value DEI did these schools start to be ranked among schools that had always ranked much lower. It is because of methodology changes and methodology changes alone that the (made up) rankings of these schools have changed.
Produce any reputable 3rd party ranking then...if you think all rankings suck, then stop taking issue with USNews' new methodology.
None of them are because they've all switched to social mobility. Nobody wants to be the one that says that isn't important.
Considering at least Tulane and Wake are chasing the new USNews rankings...something tells me if they move back to where they were prior, folks like you will start touting them again.
No I still think they're bad rankings. Also Wake said that they have no plans to chase it multiple times.
+1 Tulane also said this
The rankings were never the sole reason smart kids went to these schools (as is evidenced by either increasing or stable
test stats at all of these schools). It was more like a bonus or nice in that an external source acknowledged what the people at these schools know to be true. If they don't agree this year, so what? Who cares.
Great...why are there three pages of posts trying to argue why the rankings are "wrong". Seems now it's "we never cared about the rankings". Maybe just stick with that.
I cared about US News back when it was primarily focused on the quality of academics at a school. I don't think it's wrong to want a ranking available so the smartest students know where they should go.
There is...it's called USNews. The top 20 schools have had the deck chairs shuffled...but they didn't go anywhere.
Nobody has ever accused Tulane or Pepperdine of attracting the "smartest students".
It doesn't matter if some schools maintained their place, they got rid of SO many factors related to undergraduate education experience, and so it's no longer a valid measure of that. Yada yada broken clock. Maybe Tulane and Pepperdine didn't but WF, W&M, BU, and BC all did and they all dropped a lot the last two years. Hell even WashU and NYU did.
lol Tulane, Pepperdine, BU and BC compete for the same students. W&M is a state school behind UVa and Vtech. WF is below all of these.
UVA: 1470 (59% submitting scores)
W&M: 1470 (59% submitting scores)
WF: 1450 (48% submitting scores)
VT: 1360 (48% submitting scores)
Try again.
W&M is a safety for UVA kids. UVA is a safety for T20 kids. Unless yield protection is a thing.
It's funny how the other poster has actual numbers and evidence, but yet you continue to delude yourself that your unobjective feelings are what really matters.
Anonymous
12/20/2024 12:35
Subject: What happened to W&M, Brandeis, Tulane, Pepperdine and others..from historically T50 to outside looking in?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Everyone needs to stop blaming USNews for the rankings slide.
It stands to reason that if it was only a USNews problem, that these schools would rank highly in Forbes or WSJ or other rankings.
However, at least with Wake and Tulane, the USNews Rankings are the highest rankings...BY FAR.
Actually, Forbes ranks W&M 55 and USNews ranks it #54 (WSJ is at 178). Seems about right.
Pepperdine is #83 USNews and #125 Forbes and #145 WSJ.
Brandeis is #63 USNews, #105 Forbes and #335 WSJ
Wake is #46 USNews, #469 Forbes and #137 WSJ
Tulane is #63 USNews, #147 Forbes and #451 WSJ
US News changed their methodology with the express purpose of becoming more like Forbes and WSJ. Wake, W&M, Tulane, Brandeis were all t40-30+ for many, many years. Only after the movement to value DEI did these schools start to be ranked among schools that had always ranked much lower. It is because of methodology changes and methodology changes alone that the (made up) rankings of these schools have changed.
Produce any reputable 3rd party ranking then...if you think all rankings suck, then stop taking issue with USNews' new methodology.
None of them are because they've all switched to social mobility. Nobody wants to be the one that says that isn't important.
Considering at least Tulane and Wake are chasing the new USNews rankings...something tells me if they move back to where they were prior, folks like you will start touting them again.
No I still think they're bad rankings. Also Wake said that they have no plans to chase it multiple times.
+1 Tulane also said this
The rankings were never the sole reason smart kids went to these schools (as is evidenced by either increasing or stable
test stats at all of these schools). It was more like a bonus or nice in that an external source acknowledged what the people at these schools know to be true. If they don't agree this year, so what? Who cares.
Great...why are there three pages of posts trying to argue why the rankings are "wrong". Seems now it's "we never cared about the rankings". Maybe just stick with that.
I cared about US News back when it was primarily focused on the quality of academics at a school. I don't think it's wrong to want a ranking available so the smartest students know where they should go.
There is...it's called USNews. The top 20 schools have had the deck chairs shuffled...but they didn't go anywhere.
Nobody has ever accused Tulane or Pepperdine of attracting the "smartest students".
It doesn't matter if some schools maintained their place, they got rid of SO many factors related to undergraduate education experience, and so it's no longer a valid measure of that. Yada yada broken clock. Maybe Tulane and Pepperdine didn't but WF, W&M, BU, and BC all did and they all dropped a lot the last two years. Hell even WashU and NYU did.
lol Tulane, Pepperdine, BU and BC compete for the same students. W&M is a state school behind UVa and Vtech. WF is below all of these.
UVA: 1470 (59% submitting scores)
W&M: 1470 (59% submitting scores)
WF: 1450 (48% submitting scores)
VT: 1360 (48% submitting scores)
Try again.
W&M is a safety for UVA kids. UVA is a safety for T20 kids. Unless yield protection is a thing.
Somehow their enrolling SATs are identical as are their GPAs. I think if UVA were really the next step for t20 applicants their SAT median would be more similar to Harvard, Yale, etc.
Anonymous
12/20/2024 12:33
Subject: What happened to W&M, Brandeis, Tulane, Pepperdine and others..from historically T50 to outside looking in?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Everyone needs to stop blaming USNews for the rankings slide.
It stands to reason that if it was only a USNews problem, that these schools would rank highly in Forbes or WSJ or other rankings.
However, at least with Wake and Tulane, the USNews Rankings are the highest rankings...BY FAR.
Actually, Forbes ranks W&M 55 and USNews ranks it #54 (WSJ is at 178). Seems about right.
Pepperdine is #83 USNews and #125 Forbes and #145 WSJ.
Brandeis is #63 USNews, #105 Forbes and #335 WSJ
Wake is #46 USNews, #469 Forbes and #137 WSJ
Tulane is #63 USNews, #147 Forbes and #451 WSJ
US News changed their methodology with the express purpose of becoming more like Forbes and WSJ. Wake, W&M, Tulane, Brandeis were all t40-30+ for many, many years. Only after the movement to value DEI did these schools start to be ranked among schools that had always ranked much lower. It is because of methodology changes and methodology changes alone that the (made up) rankings of these schools have changed.
Produce any reputable 3rd party ranking then...if you think all rankings suck, then stop taking issue with USNews' new methodology.
None of them are because they've all switched to social mobility. Nobody wants to be the one that says that isn't important.
Considering at least Tulane and Wake are chasing the new USNews rankings...something tells me if they move back to where they were prior, folks like you will start touting them again.
No I still think they're bad rankings. Also Wake said that they have no plans to chase it multiple times.
+1 Tulane also said this
The rankings were never the sole reason smart kids went to these schools (as is evidenced by either increasing or stable
test stats at all of these schools). It was more like a bonus or nice in that an external source acknowledged what the people at these schools know to be true. If they don't agree this year, so what? Who cares.
Great...why are there three pages of posts trying to argue why the rankings are "wrong". Seems now it's "we never cared about the rankings". Maybe just stick with that.
I cared about US News back when it was primarily focused on the quality of academics at a school. I don't think it's wrong to want a ranking available so the smartest students know where they should go.
There is...it's called USNews. The top 20 schools have had the deck chairs shuffled...but they didn't go anywhere.
Nobody has ever accused Tulane or Pepperdine of attracting the "smartest students".
It doesn't matter if some schools maintained their place, they got rid of SO many factors related to undergraduate education experience, and so it's no longer a valid measure of that. Yada yada broken clock. Maybe Tulane and Pepperdine didn't but WF, W&M, BU, and BC all did and they all dropped a lot the last two years. Hell even WashU and NYU did.
lol Tulane, Pepperdine, BU and BC compete for the same students. W&M is a state school behind UVa and Vtech. WF is below all of these.
UVA: 1470 (59% submitting scores)
W&M: 1470 (59% submitting scores)
WF: 1450 (48% submitting scores)
VT: 1360 (48% submitting scores)
Try again.
W&M is a safety for UVA kids. UVA is a safety for T20 kids. Unless yield protection is a thing.
Anonymous
12/20/2024 12:33
Subject: What happened to W&M, Brandeis, Tulane, Pepperdine and others..from historically T50 to outside looking in?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Everyone needs to stop blaming USNews for the rankings slide.
It stands to reason that if it was only a USNews problem, that these schools would rank highly in Forbes or WSJ or other rankings.
However, at least with Wake and Tulane, the USNews Rankings are the highest rankings...BY FAR.
Actually, Forbes ranks W&M 55 and USNews ranks it #54 (WSJ is at 178). Seems about right.
Pepperdine is #83 USNews and #125 Forbes and #145 WSJ.
Brandeis is #63 USNews, #105 Forbes and #335 WSJ
Wake is #46 USNews, #469 Forbes and #137 WSJ
Tulane is #63 USNews, #147 Forbes and #451 WSJ
US News changed their methodology with the express purpose of becoming more like Forbes and WSJ. Wake, W&M, Tulane, Brandeis were all t40-30+ for many, many years. Only after the movement to value DEI did these schools start to be ranked among schools that had always ranked much lower. It is because of methodology changes and methodology changes alone that the (made up) rankings of these schools have changed.
Produce any reputable 3rd party ranking then...if you think all rankings suck, then stop taking issue with USNews' new methodology.
None of them are because they've all switched to social mobility. Nobody wants to be the one that says that isn't important.
Considering at least Tulane and Wake are chasing the new USNews rankings...something tells me if they move back to where they were prior, folks like you will start touting them again.
No I still think they're bad rankings. Also Wake said that they have no plans to chase it multiple times.
+1 Tulane also said this
The rankings were never the sole reason smart kids went to these schools (as is evidenced by either increasing or stable
test stats at all of these schools). It was more like a bonus or nice in that an external source acknowledged what the people at these schools know to be true. If they don't agree this year, so what? Who cares.
Great...why are there three pages of posts trying to argue why the rankings are "wrong". Seems now it's "we never cared about the rankings". Maybe just stick with that.
I cared about US News back when it was primarily focused on the quality of academics at a school. I don't think it's wrong to want a ranking available so the smartest students know where they should go.
+1
Anonymous
12/20/2024 12:32
Subject: What happened to W&M, Brandeis, Tulane, Pepperdine and others..from historically T50 to outside looking in?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Everyone needs to stop blaming USNews for the rankings slide.
It stands to reason that if it was only a USNews problem, that these schools would rank highly in Forbes or WSJ or other rankings.
However, at least with Wake and Tulane, the USNews Rankings are the highest rankings...BY FAR.
Actually, Forbes ranks W&M 55 and USNews ranks it #54 (WSJ is at 178). Seems about right.
Pepperdine is #83 USNews and #125 Forbes and #145 WSJ.
Brandeis is #63 USNews, #105 Forbes and #335 WSJ
Wake is #46 USNews, #469 Forbes and #137 WSJ
Tulane is #63 USNews, #147 Forbes and #451 WSJ
US News changed their methodology with the express purpose of becoming more like Forbes and WSJ. Wake, W&M, Tulane, Brandeis were all t40-30+ for many, many years. Only after the movement to value DEI did these schools start to be ranked among schools that had always ranked much lower. It is because of methodology changes and methodology changes alone that the (made up) rankings of these schools have changed.
Produce any reputable 3rd party ranking then...if you think all rankings suck, then stop taking issue with USNews' new methodology.
None of them are because they've all switched to social mobility. Nobody wants to be the one that says that isn't important.
Considering at least Tulane and Wake are chasing the new USNews rankings...something tells me if they move back to where they were prior, folks like you will start touting them again.
No I still think they're bad rankings. Also Wake said that they have no plans to chase it multiple times.
+1 Tulane also said this
The rankings were never the sole reason smart kids went to these schools (as is evidenced by either increasing or stable
test stats at all of these schools). It was more like a bonus or nice in that an external source acknowledged what the people at these schools know to be true. If they don't agree this year, so what? Who cares.
Great...why are there three pages of posts trying to argue why the rankings are "wrong". Seems now it's "we never cared about the rankings". Maybe just stick with that.
I cared about US News back when it was primarily focused on the quality of academics at a school. I don't think it's wrong to want a ranking available so the smartest students know where they should go.
There is...it's called USNews. The top 20 schools have had the deck chairs shuffled...but they didn't go anywhere.
Nobody has ever accused Tulane or Pepperdine of attracting the "smartest students".
Not sure where you've been but these two and others mentioned do attract top students. "Smartest" isn't a concrete classification, btw.
Maybe because the kids that actually attend will freely admit they weren't the smartest kids at their school or the top kids.
Smartest doesn't have to mean just the top 1%, and probably better describes the top 10-15% of most schools.
How is the 10-15% the smartest? What would you call the 1% then? Talk about DEIing a superlative.
15% of American households are millionaires, would you not consider them some of the richest people in the country?
Anonymous
12/20/2024 12:32
Subject: What happened to W&M, Brandeis, Tulane, Pepperdine and others..from historically T50 to outside looking in?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Everyone needs to stop blaming USNews for the rankings slide.
It stands to reason that if it was only a USNews problem, that these schools would rank highly in Forbes or WSJ or other rankings.
However, at least with Wake and Tulane, the USNews Rankings are the highest rankings...BY FAR.
Actually, Forbes ranks W&M 55 and USNews ranks it #54 (WSJ is at 178). Seems about right.
Pepperdine is #83 USNews and #125 Forbes and #145 WSJ.
Brandeis is #63 USNews, #105 Forbes and #335 WSJ
Wake is #46 USNews, #469 Forbes and #137 WSJ
Tulane is #63 USNews, #147 Forbes and #451 WSJ
US News changed their methodology with the express purpose of becoming more like Forbes and WSJ. Wake, W&M, Tulane, Brandeis were all t40-30+ for many, many years. Only after the movement to value DEI did these schools start to be ranked among schools that had always ranked much lower. It is because of methodology changes and methodology changes alone that the (made up) rankings of these schools have changed.
Produce any reputable 3rd party ranking then...if you think all rankings suck, then stop taking issue with USNews' new methodology.
None of them are because they've all switched to social mobility. Nobody wants to be the one that says that isn't important.
Considering at least Tulane and Wake are chasing the new USNews rankings...something tells me if they move back to where they were prior, folks like you will start touting them again.
No I still think they're bad rankings. Also Wake said that they have no plans to chase it multiple times.
+1 Tulane also said this
The rankings were never the sole reason smart kids went to these schools (as is evidenced by either increasing or stable
test stats at all of these schools). It was more like a bonus or nice in that an external source acknowledged what the people at these schools know to be true. If they don't agree this year, so what? Who cares.
Great...why are there three pages of posts trying to argue why the rankings are "wrong". Seems now it's "we never cared about the rankings". Maybe just stick with that.
I cared about US News back when it was primarily focused on the quality of academics at a school. I don't think it's wrong to want a ranking available so the smartest students know where they should go.
There is...it's called USNews. The top 20 schools have had the deck chairs shuffled...but they didn't go anywhere.
Nobody has ever accused Tulane or Pepperdine of attracting the "smartest students".
Not sure where you've been but these two and others mentioned do attract top students. "Smartest" isn't a concrete classification, btw.
Maybe because the kids that actually attend will freely admit they weren't the smartest kids at their school or the top kids.
Smartest doesn't have to mean just the top 1%, and probably better describes the top 10-15% of most schools.
How is the 10-15% the smartest? What would you call the 1% then? Talk about DEIing a superlative.
1%s should not and cannot be compared to 0.1 and 0.01%s. No comparison to be made. Stop trying to make 1% something special when it's not.
Anonymous
12/20/2024 12:30
Subject: What happened to W&M, Brandeis, Tulane, Pepperdine and others..from historically T50 to outside looking in?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Everyone needs to stop blaming USNews for the rankings slide.
It stands to reason that if it was only a USNews problem, that these schools would rank highly in Forbes or WSJ or other rankings.
However, at least with Wake and Tulane, the USNews Rankings are the highest rankings...BY FAR.
Actually, Forbes ranks W&M 55 and USNews ranks it #54 (WSJ is at 178). Seems about right.
Pepperdine is #83 USNews and #125 Forbes and #145 WSJ.
Brandeis is #63 USNews, #105 Forbes and #335 WSJ
Wake is #46 USNews, #469 Forbes and #137 WSJ
Tulane is #63 USNews, #147 Forbes and #451 WSJ
US News changed their methodology with the express purpose of becoming more like Forbes and WSJ. Wake, W&M, Tulane, Brandeis were all t40-30+ for many, many years. Only after the movement to value DEI did these schools start to be ranked among schools that had always ranked much lower. It is because of methodology changes and methodology changes alone that the (made up) rankings of these schools have changed.
Produce any reputable 3rd party ranking then...if you think all rankings suck, then stop taking issue with USNews' new methodology.
None of them are because they've all switched to social mobility. Nobody wants to be the one that says that isn't important.
Considering at least Tulane and Wake are chasing the new USNews rankings...something tells me if they move back to where they were prior, folks like you will start touting them again.
No I still think they're bad rankings. Also Wake said that they have no plans to chase it multiple times.
+1 Tulane also said this
The rankings were never the sole reason smart kids went to these schools (as is evidenced by either increasing or stable
test stats at all of these schools). It was more like a bonus or nice in that an external source acknowledged what the people at these schools know to be true. If they don't agree this year, so what? Who cares.
Great...why are there three pages of posts trying to argue why the rankings are "wrong". Seems now it's "we never cared about the rankings". Maybe just stick with that.
I cared about US News back when it was primarily focused on the quality of academics at a school. I don't think it's wrong to want a ranking available so the smartest students know where they should go.
There is...it's called USNews. The top 20 schools have had the deck chairs shuffled...but they didn't go anywhere.
Nobody has ever accused Tulane or Pepperdine of attracting the "smartest students".
Not sure where you've been but these two and others mentioned do attract top students. "Smartest" isn't a concrete classification, btw.
Maybe because the kids that actually attend will freely admit they weren't the smartest kids at their school or the top kids.
Smartest doesn't have to mean just the top 1%, and probably better describes the top 10-15% of most schools.
How is the 10-15% the smartest? What would you call the 1% then? Talk about DEIing a superlative.
Anonymous
12/20/2024 12:27
Subject: What happened to W&M, Brandeis, Tulane, Pepperdine and others..from historically T50 to outside looking in?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Everyone needs to stop blaming USNews for the rankings slide.
It stands to reason that if it was only a USNews problem, that these schools would rank highly in Forbes or WSJ or other rankings.
However, at least with Wake and Tulane, the USNews Rankings are the highest rankings...BY FAR.
Actually, Forbes ranks W&M 55 and USNews ranks it #54 (WSJ is at 178). Seems about right.
Pepperdine is #83 USNews and #125 Forbes and #145 WSJ.
Brandeis is #63 USNews, #105 Forbes and #335 WSJ
Wake is #46 USNews, #469 Forbes and #137 WSJ
Tulane is #63 USNews, #147 Forbes and #451 WSJ
US News changed their methodology with the express purpose of becoming more like Forbes and WSJ. Wake, W&M, Tulane, Brandeis were all t40-30+ for many, many years. Only after the movement to value DEI did these schools start to be ranked among schools that had always ranked much lower. It is because of methodology changes and methodology changes alone that the (made up) rankings of these schools have changed.
Produce any reputable 3rd party ranking then...if you think all rankings suck, then stop taking issue with USNews' new methodology.
None of them are because they've all switched to social mobility. Nobody wants to be the one that says that isn't important.
Considering at least Tulane and Wake are chasing the new USNews rankings...something tells me if they move back to where they were prior, folks like you will start touting them again.
No I still think they're bad rankings. Also Wake said that they have no plans to chase it multiple times.
+1 Tulane also said this
The rankings were never the sole reason smart kids went to these schools (as is evidenced by either increasing or stable
test stats at all of these schools). It was more like a bonus or nice in that an external source acknowledged what the people at these schools know to be true. If they don't agree this year, so what? Who cares.
Great...why are there three pages of posts trying to argue why the rankings are "wrong". Seems now it's "we never cared about the rankings". Maybe just stick with that.
I cared about US News back when it was primarily focused on the quality of academics at a school. I don't think it's wrong to want a ranking available so the smartest students know where they should go.
There is...it's called USNews. The top 20 schools have had the deck chairs shuffled...but they didn't go anywhere.
Nobody has ever accused Tulane or Pepperdine of attracting the "smartest students".
It doesn't matter if some schools maintained their place, they got rid of SO many factors related to undergraduate education experience, and so it's no longer a valid measure of that. Yada yada broken clock. Maybe Tulane and Pepperdine didn't but WF, W&M, BU, and BC all did and they all dropped a lot the last two years. Hell even WashU and NYU did.
lol Tulane, Pepperdine, BU and BC compete for the same students. W&M is a state school behind UVa and Vtech. WF is below all of these.
Nonsense. BU and BC are not competing for Pepperdine and Tulane students. Nor is Wake Forest below Pepperdine and Tulane.
Wake Forest..lol no. Wake Forest is not even in the same zip code. Tulane, Pepperdine, BU and BC are the same. You need to come out of the 1970’s.
UVA: 1470 (59% submitting scores)
W&M: 1470 (59% submitting scores)
WF: 1450 (48% submitting scores)
Tulane: 1450 (45% submitting scores)
BU: 1450 (40% submitting scores)
BC: 1470 (50% submitting scores)
Pepperdine: 1360 (21% submitting scores)
What do you have to say about this?
Anonymous
12/20/2024 12:26
Subject: What happened to W&M, Brandeis, Tulane, Pepperdine and others..from historically T50 to outside looking in?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Everyone needs to stop blaming USNews for the rankings slide.
It stands to reason that if it was only a USNews problem, that these schools would rank highly in Forbes or WSJ or other rankings.
However, at least with Wake and Tulane, the USNews Rankings are the highest rankings...BY FAR.
Actually, Forbes ranks W&M 55 and USNews ranks it #54 (WSJ is at 178). Seems about right.
Pepperdine is #83 USNews and #125 Forbes and #145 WSJ.
Brandeis is #63 USNews, #105 Forbes and #335 WSJ
Wake is #46 USNews, #469 Forbes and #137 WSJ
Tulane is #63 USNews, #147 Forbes and #451 WSJ
US News changed their methodology with the express purpose of becoming more like Forbes and WSJ. Wake, W&M, Tulane, Brandeis were all t40-30+ for many, many years. Only after the movement to value DEI did these schools start to be ranked among schools that had always ranked much lower. It is because of methodology changes and methodology changes alone that the (made up) rankings of these schools have changed.
Produce any reputable 3rd party ranking then...if you think all rankings suck, then stop taking issue with USNews' new methodology.
None of them are because they've all switched to social mobility. Nobody wants to be the one that says that isn't important.
Considering at least Tulane and Wake are chasing the new USNews rankings...something tells me if they move back to where they were prior, folks like you will start touting them again.
No I still think they're bad rankings. Also Wake said that they have no plans to chase it multiple times.
+1 Tulane also said this
The rankings were never the sole reason smart kids went to these schools (as is evidenced by either increasing or stable
test stats at all of these schools). It was more like a bonus or nice in that an external source acknowledged what the people at these schools know to be true. If they don't agree this year, so what? Who cares.
Great...why are there three pages of posts trying to argue why the rankings are "wrong". Seems now it's "we never cared about the rankings". Maybe just stick with that.
I cared about US News back when it was primarily focused on the quality of academics at a school. I don't think it's wrong to want a ranking available so the smartest students know where they should go.
There is...it's called USNews. The top 20 schools have had the deck chairs shuffled...but they didn't go anywhere.
Nobody has ever accused Tulane or Pepperdine of attracting the "smartest students".
It doesn't matter if some schools maintained their place, they got rid of SO many factors related to undergraduate education experience, and so it's no longer a valid measure of that. Yada yada broken clock. Maybe Tulane and Pepperdine didn't but WF, W&M, BU, and BC all did and they all dropped a lot the last two years. Hell even WashU and NYU did.
lol Tulane, Pepperdine, BU and BC compete for the same students. W&M is a state school behind UVa and Vtech. WF is below all of these.
Nonsense. BU and BC are not competing for Pepperdine and Tulane students. Nor is Wake Forest below Pepperdine and Tulane.
Wake Forest..lol no. Wake Forest is not even in the same zip code. Tulane, Pepperdine, BU and BC are the same. You need to come out of the 1970’s.