Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:UVA, pretty laid back unless you are in pre-med, then it is cut throat and intense. Good balance of work hard, play hard.
UNC also comes to mind.
Vanderbilt, except for pre-med track. I’m an Econ grad.
I think vandy has changed in the last 5 yrs. I’m sitting on the commons as i write this and the vibe is … resolute and dutiful. My sophomore feels duped because he too read all the “happy students” rankings. He says it’s a boring slog and no one wants to socialize because work
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Is top 30 the new top 20?
Oh FFS. Splitting hairs on rankings that are meaningless to begin with is beyond stupid. Any tiny amount of critical thought could point you to several fatal flaws in the USNWR ranking methodology.
1. 20% is based on peer assessment. Basically a popularity contest. How many college presidents know anything about 99% of the colleges they are “assessing” other than where they’ve been in prior years’ rankings? Hint: not many. It would be like ranking restaurants by asking restaurant managers what they think of restaurants they’ve never been to. And this is by far the single biggest factor. So if College A rates College B highly because College A’s president sent them a nice Harry & David’s at the holidays, that alone moves them up several spots, without having ANYTHING to do with academic excellence.
2. Weighting of graduation rates. The biggest factor in graduation rates is not the academics at the school, but non-academic factors of the students. Students from non-upper classes struggle to stay in college for predominantly financial, non intellectual, reasons. The rankings basically punish schools for not filling up with UMC and wealthy applicants.
3. Endowment. So much of today’s endowment dollars go to “amenities”. To attract UMC and wealthy students (see #2 above), you need to built swanky dorms with luxury amenities. Again, this may enhance a student’s “experience”, but has no bearing on academic excellence.
There are, what, 3000+ colleges in the US? There is no methodology that could possibly accurately rank them, not even taking composites of USNWR, WSJ, Forbes, etc. They basically measure the same things with different weights. Any attempt to do this is folly. Trying to rank order, e.g., Dartmouth and UChicago and Duke based on what USNWR says about them is asinine. They are different institutions with different strengths and weaknesses that appeal to different candidates. I don’t know why we can’t just leave it at that and stop obsessing over which one is “better” or “best”.
All of USNWR is basically "popularity" amongst other schools. I can only imagine the behind the scenes negotiations between schools----Ill vote for you if you vote for us.
Just look at the Engineering rankings for undergrad---all of the big schools and well known schools come out at the top---because obviously everyone has heard of GATech and UIUC and Stanford, MIT, etc. But most have not heard of WPI Rose Hulman and other excellent smaller schools. So those schools are "underrated" because it's a popularity contest.
So obviously the big schools are great schools, but the ranking system by popularity ensures not much will change
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Is top 30 the new top 20?
Oh FFS. Splitting hairs on rankings that are meaningless to begin with is beyond stupid. Any tiny amount of critical thought could point you to several fatal flaws in the USNWR ranking methodology.
1. 20% is based on peer assessment. Basically a popularity contest. How many college presidents know anything about 99% of the colleges they are “assessing” other than where they’ve been in prior years’ rankings? Hint: not many. It would be like ranking restaurants by asking restaurant managers what they think of restaurants they’ve never been to. And this is by far the single biggest factor. So if College A rates College B highly because College A’s president sent them a nice Harry & David’s at the holidays, that alone moves them up several spots, without having ANYTHING to do with academic excellence.
2. Weighting of graduation rates. The biggest factor in graduation rates is not the academics at the school, but non-academic factors of the students. Students from non-upper classes struggle to stay in college for predominantly financial, non intellectual, reasons. The rankings basically punish schools for not filling up with UMC and wealthy applicants.
3. Endowment. So much of today’s endowment dollars go to “amenities”. To attract UMC and wealthy students (see #2 above), you need to built swanky dorms with luxury amenities. Again, this may enhance a student’s “experience”, but has no bearing on academic excellence.
There are, what, 3000+ colleges in the US? There is no methodology that could possibly accurately rank them, not even taking composites of USNWR, WSJ, Forbes, etc. They basically measure the same things with different weights. Any attempt to do this is folly. Trying to rank order, e.g., Dartmouth and UChicago and Duke based on what USNWR says about them is asinine. They are different institutions with different strengths and weaknesses that appeal to different candidates. I don’t know why we can’t just leave it at that and stop obsessing over which one is “better” or “best”.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Is top 30 the new top 20?
Oh FFS. Splitting hairs on rankings that are meaningless to begin with is beyond stupid. Any tiny amount of critical thought could point you to several fatal flaws in the USNWR ranking methodology.
1. 20% is based on peer assessment. Basically a popularity contest. How many college presidents know anything about 99% of the colleges they are “assessing” other than where they’ve been in prior years’ rankings? Hint: not many. It would be like ranking restaurants by asking restaurant managers what they think of restaurants they’ve never been to. And this is by far the single biggest factor. So if College A rates College B highly because College A’s president sent them a nice Harry & David’s at the holidays, that alone moves them up several spots, without having ANYTHING to do with academic excellence.
2. Weighting of graduation rates. The biggest factor in graduation rates is not the academics at the school, but non-academic factors of the students. Students from non-upper classes struggle to stay in college for predominantly financial, non intellectual, reasons. The rankings basically punish schools for not filling up with UMC and wealthy applicants.
3. Endowment. So much of today’s endowment dollars go to “amenities”. To attract UMC and wealthy students (see #2 above), you need to built swanky dorms with luxury amenities. Again, this may enhance a student’s “experience”, but has no bearing on academic excellence.
There are, what, 3000+ colleges in the US? There is no methodology that could possibly accurately rank them, not even taking composites of USNWR, WSJ, Forbes, etc. They basically measure the same things with different weights. Any attempt to do this is folly. Trying to rank order, e.g., Dartmouth and UChicago and Duke based on what USNWR says about them is asinine. They are different institutions with different strengths and weaknesses that appeal to different candidates. I don’t know why we can’t just leave it at that and stop obsessing over which one is “better” or “best”.
Anonymous wrote:Laidback, yet very smart, DS starting college search. Probably economic, math. Would like top-notch academics without the ultra-competitive environment. Is it even possible? Suggestions?
Anonymous wrote:It’s not but has some well regarded programs.
Anonymous wrote:a kid who goes to the 400th best school can be just as successful as someone who went to a top 30 school. pay no attention to rankings, go where they are happy and enjoy it. The rest will all play out.
one of my favorite sayings:
I know a homeless guy with a harvard degree and a college dropout that lives in a mansion.
Anonymous wrote:a kid who goes to the 400th best school can be just as successful as someone who went to a top 30 school. pay no attention to rankings, go where they are happy and enjoy it. The rest will all play out.
one of my favorite sayings:
I know a homeless guy with a harvard degree and a college dropout that lives in a mansion.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Is top 30 the new top 20?
Oh FFS. Splitting hairs on rankings that are meaningless to begin with is beyond stupid. Any tiny amount of critical thought could point you to several fatal flaws in the USNWR ranking methodology.
1. 20% is based on peer assessment. Basically a popularity contest. How many college presidents know anything about 99% of the colleges they are “assessing” other than where they’ve been in prior years’ rankings? Hint: not many. It would be like ranking restaurants by asking restaurant managers what they think of restaurants they’ve never been to. And this is by far the single biggest factor. So if College A rates College B highly because College A’s president sent them a nice Harry & David’s at the holidays, that alone moves them up several spots, without having ANYTHING to do with academic excellence.
2. Weighting of graduation rates. The biggest factor in graduation rates is not the academics at the school, but non-academic factors of the students. Students from non-upper classes struggle to stay in college for predominantly financial, non intellectual, reasons. The rankings basically punish schools for not filling up with UMC and wealthy applicants.
3. Endowment. So much of today’s endowment dollars go to “amenities”. To attract UMC and wealthy students (see #2 above), you need to built swanky dorms with luxury amenities. Again, this may enhance a student’s “experience”, but has no bearing on academic excellence.
There are, what, 3000+ colleges in the US? There is no methodology that could possibly accurately rank them, not even taking composites of USNWR, WSJ, Forbes, etc. They basically measure the same things with different weights. Any attempt to do this is folly. Trying to rank order, e.g., Dartmouth and UChicago and Duke based on what USNWR says about them is asinine. They are different institutions with different strengths and weaknesses that appeal to different candidates. I don’t know why we can’t just leave it at that and stop obsessing over which one is “better” or “best”.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Dartmouth College for economics--if your son likes to celebrate life frequently as Dartmouth has a very social atmosphere.
For math and/or economics with less partying than Dartmouth College, consider Bowdoin College.
University of Virginia for economics.
Vanderbilt University for economics.
Most SLACs offer a less intense environment. Hard to narrow down SLACs without knowing more about your son's likes and dislikes.
Not Vanderbilt for economics.
- vandy current parent. Nashville is great, the people of Nashville are a blast. Vanderbilt is not a chill place in math/econ/medicine
Why "not Vanderbilt for economics" ?
Are you asserting that Vandy econ is intense or that it is bad ?
+1. PP, can you elaborate? Vandy is my kid’s first choice and they will likely major in economics.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:UVA, pretty laid back unless you are in pre-med, then it is cut throat and intense. Good balance of work hard, play hard.
UNC also comes to mind.
Vanderbilt, except for pre-med track. I’m an Econ grad.
Anonymous wrote:If he truly wants non-stressful, he needs the courage to march to the beat of his own drum. I turned down a top 20 school to go to a warm little school far outside the top ranks. I then ended up in a top 5 for grad school because by then I was ok with the stressed out peers. And yes, the kids who go to top 30 are stressed out and a lot of them are miserable.
What he wants is contradictory. If environment really matters, he needs to go outside the top 30.