Anonymous wrote:Aspects of the top US News Top 25 ranking don’t pass the smell test IMHO.

Does anybody really think University of Chicago is better than Stanford? I think US News is miffed at Stanford for refusing to release acceptance data. Resistance is futile!

Johns Hopkins and Northwestern ahead of Cal Tech? In what world?

Wash U, Georgetown and Emory ahead of Carnegie Mellon? What am I missing here.

The WSJ/THE rankings are based more on academics and less on social mobility – this is their Top 30 (which includes top SLACs):


1 Harvard University
2 Massachusetts Institute of Technology
3 Yale University
4 Columbia University
5 California Institute of Technology
6 Stanford University
7 Brown University
7 Duke University
9 Princeton University
10 University of Pennsylvania
11 Cornell University
12 Dartmouth College
13 Northwestern University
14 University of Chicago
14 Rice University
16 Carnegie Mellon University
17 University of Southern California
18 Washington University in St Louis
19 Vanderbilt University
20 Emory University
21 Johns Hopkins University
22 Amherst College
23 Williams College
24 Pomona College
25 University of California, Los Angeles
26 University of Notre Dame
27 New York University
28 University of Michigan-Ann Arbor
29 Wellesley College
30 Georgetown University

No one in the field of college admissions pays any attention to the WSJ ratings. This is only its third year. They are late to the gravy train of making money off these rankings.

Anonymous wrote:Does anyone know how to access last years rankings? I see everyone referring to changes, but I don't see anywhere to compare. Thanks.

Please?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Come on people. USNews's change in ranking metrics is terrible need for middle class and upper middle class families who are already getting shafted by the current financial aid evaluation process at these colleges. With the outsized influence this ranking has in driving college behavior, colleges will now move towards filling more seats with Pell Grant recipients and compensate for that budget impact by recruiting more full pay students at the other end. That is really bad news for Average unhooked middle class families. Also now the one thing that have middle class families some edge in merit aid, namely scores and ranks is also being de-emphasized. This will move more dollars from merit to need based aid which is again terrible news for donut hole families

Boo hoo.

You are either a leech on society or a one percenter of you don't care about this. I don't care which school you root for, b this change is not good for middle class Americans

It's also not bad for middle class Americans - just neutral. IMHO affirmative action, if any, should be based on SES. The real divide emerging in this country is between the haves and have nots. SES diversity and some real geographic diversity would help enlarge the range of viewpoints on campus.

It's a scam, you all.

Miami of Ohio took a big drop from 78 to 96.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Come on people. USNews's change in ranking metrics is terrible need for middle class and upper middle class families who are already getting shafted by the current financial aid evaluation process at these colleges. With the outsized influence this ranking has in driving college behavior, colleges will now move towards filling more seats with Pell Grant recipients and compensate for that budget impact by recruiting more full pay students at the other end. That is really bad news for Average unhooked middle class families. Also now the one thing that have middle class families some edge in merit aid, namely scores and ranks is also being de-emphasized. This will move more dollars from merit to need based aid which is again terrible news for donut hole families

Boo hoo.

You are either a leech on society or a one percenter of you don't care about this. I don't care which school you root for, b this change is not good for middle class Americans

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Come on people. USNews's change in ranking metrics is terrible need for middle class and upper middle class families who are already getting shafted by the current financial aid evaluation process at these colleges. With the outsized influence this ranking has in driving college behavior, colleges will now move towards filling more seats with Pell Grant recipients and compensate for that budget impact by recruiting more full pay students at the other end. That is really bad news for Average unhooked middle class families. Also now the one thing that have middle class families some edge in merit aid, namely scores and ranks is also being de-emphasized. This will move more dollars from merit to need based aid which is again terrible news for donut hole families

This seems likely.

I agree. With the potential caveat that US News might have taken things a bridge too far with this latest reconfiguring of its formulae. I feel like some of the top schools have been getting less and less focused on the rankings - finally realizing that it's crazy to base institutional practices on the arbitrary whims of a defunct magazine, in areas that have no demonstrable impact on student success or satisfaction - and that this big change will strengthen that trend.

Does anyone know how to access last years rankings? I see everyone referring to changes, but I don't see anywhere to compare. Thanks.

Anonymous wrote:Of course most kids in the Midwest take only the ACT, so that may have some effect on the average reported SAT scores.

This was the case decades ago. Now the state of Illinois requires its public school students to take the SAT.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:These rankings are a joke. Illinois ranked above Wisconsin? All the smart Chicago kids would rather go to Madison than Urbana Champaign.

No.
Michigan over U of I, sure. But there aren't a bunch of kids paying out of state tuition at Wisconsin if they get into Urbana Champaign.

Yeah, whatever. Who wouldn’t spend four years in a cow town over Madison?

If you're out of state, UW Madison's total cost of attendance is around 50k whereas in-state U of I is around 31k.

As an Illinois grad that was also choosing between Michigan and Wisconsin to go to school and decided on taking the in-state tuition (which I'd do 100 times out of 100 sitting here 20 years later and knowing what I know now with how the "real world" works). I'd agree with Ann Arbor and Madison are nicer college towns compared to Champaign, although to be fair, there are very few college towns that compare to Ann Arbor and Madison overall. That being said, I think a lot of people would be surprised by how Champaign has changed over the past 10 years - the campus area has turned a lot more cosmopolitan (with, for better or worse, a lot of new high-rise luxury apartments) with a huge variety of legit authentic ethnic restaurants (which is a reflection of the large international student population, particularly from Asia). Meanwhile, there continues to be a large bar and nightlife scene overall.

I've always characterized Champaign as an extremely fun town for actual college students. It has a ton of inexpensive restaurants and nightlife with a lot of variety (e.g. not just fast food chains) along with Big Ten sports (albeit underachieving football and basketball programs, to say the least) and a large performing arts scene that punches well above its weight considering the size of the metro area (e.g. the Chicago Symphony Orchestra for a fraction of the price of seeing them in Chicago, the Ebert Film Festival, etc.). As a result, the average college student is going to have plenty to do (whether academic or social) in Champaign.

Admittedly, Champaign is just not that interesting of a town for adults, though, which is where Ann Arbor and Madison (and places like Austin and Boulder) certainly excel. The central areas of Ann Arbor and Madison have much more of a mix of students, professors and and other professionals, whereas the Campustown area of Champaign (which is the main area for campus nightlife) is almost entirely geared toward students. Natural scenery is also non-existent in Central Illinois, so outdoorsy-type people that are attracted to places like Colorado or Vermont aren't going to want anything to do with Champaign. All in all, though, if you're an actual college student living in Champaign for 4 years (as opposed to an adult visiting for a weekend), the town fits what the average college student realistically wants (as opposed to what parents often think their kids *should* want) very well.

0% of Cal students are low income (Pell Grant), just 12% of Georgetown students are low income. When USNWS changed the methodology to account for outcomes for low-income students, it was inevitable that schools like UCLA (36%) and Cal (30%) would benefit and schools like Georgetown (12%) and Wash U. (10%) would suffer.

The real eye opener is that Georgetown, a Jesuit University, ranks so poorly in supporting low-income students.

Actually, it's not really an eye opener. Relatively, Georgetown's finances are not in the same league as the other universities with which it competes. It has a relatively small endowment and has struggled to keep admissions need-blind.

Of course most kids in the Midwest take only the ACT, so that may have some effect on the average reported SAT scores.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:These rankings are a joke. Illinois ranked above Wisconsin? All the smart Chicago kids would rather go to Madison than Urbana Champaign.

No.
Michigan over U of I, sure. But there aren't a bunch of kids paying out of state tuition at Wisconsin if they get into Urbana Champaign.

Yeah, whatever. Who wouldn’t spend four years in a cow town over Madison?

If you're out of state, UW Madison's total cost of attendance is around 50k whereas in-state U of I is around 31k.

Well maybe based on cost alone, Illinois would be preferable.

That's kind of the point. Sure, plenty of smart Chicago kids might prefer UW-Madison's location and wish it had in-state tuition, but it's not a superior school in any meaningful way to justify paying 20k a year more if you get into U of I. And so most smart Chicago kids who are going for a public university will go to U of I, upping its SAT scores. Wisconsin doesn't have a similar giant metro area with similar elite suburban schools so its overall SAT scores are slightly lower.

Admissions office challenge: is there a way to determine which applicants would be Pell grant recipients in a need-blind system?

Anonymous wrote:Come on people. USNews's change in ranking metrics is terrible need for middle class and upper middle class families who are already getting shafted by the current financial aid evaluation process at these colleges. With the outsized influence this ranking has in driving college behavior, colleges will now move towards filling more seats with Pell Grant recipients and compensate for that budget impact by recruiting more full pay students at the other end. That is really bad news for Average unhooked middle class families. Also now the one thing that have middle class families some edge in merit aid, namely scores and ranks is also being de-emphasized. This will move more dollars from merit to need based aid which is again terrible news for donut hole families

This seems likely.