Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anything over 80% is exceptional.

The government requires colleges to report 6-year rates.

The national average is 63%.
62% at pubics
68% at privates
26% at for-profits

https://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=40

OP st year retention, and this is graduation rate, so it's in a similar category, but little bit different, and should be lower.

There are shit ton of worthless colleges, so 60 something sounds good.

My bad. The average retention rate of US college students is 76%.

https://www.studentclearinghouse.org/nscblog/research-center-releases-2020-persistence-and-retention-report/

Anonymous wrote:Anything over 80% is exceptional.

The government requires colleges to report 6-year rates.

The national average is 63%.
62% at pubics
68% at privates
26% at for-profits

https://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=40

OP st year retention, and this is graduation rate, so it's in a similar category, but little bit different, and should be lower.

There are shit ton of worthless colleges, so 60 something sounds good.

Anything over 80% is exceptional.

The government requires colleges to report 6-year rates.

The national average is 63%.
62% at pubics
68% at privates
26% at for-profits

https://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=40

This says Harvard is only 92%? This can't be right.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is odd to me that all of the schools that have a reputation for being unhappy and overly difficult (MIT, Caltech, CMU, UC, JHU, GT) are clustered at the top of the list. Are the reputations not deserved?

There you go again, as PPs mentioned, there is no difference between 99 and 97. It does not say anything about anything.

Doesn't it say that for schools where people routinely talk about how miserable the students are, they do a great job at bringing back nearly all of their students?

It's all within the margin of error so you cannot draw definitive conclusions like you are trying to do.

Really? Tell me more about the margin oof error and how it negates any conclusion that I have drawn.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is odd to me that all of the schools that have a reputation for being unhappy and overly difficult (MIT, Caltech, CMU, UC, JHU, GT) are clustered at the top of the list. Are the reputations not deserved?

There you go again, as PPs mentioned, there is no difference between 99 and 97. It does not say anything about anything.

As well as for many schools, one should delve deeper and look at the "why kids didn't continue"/demographics of those that didn't return. If the school has a high international population or a high "first generation" or high number of students with PellGrants (lower income) then those are all populations that might struggle and the reason for not returning might simply have nothing to do with "satisfaction with the university" but more to do with finances/family events/life in general. Similarly, those can also affect graduation rates. Likewise if you are at a school with 70% males, the graduation rates might be lower than a school with 70% females, because across the board more males struggle in college than females (every school I've delved deep into the stats has a distinct difference between even White non- first gen/non lower income males and White not-first gen/not lower income females; sometimes it's as much as 5% difference in graduation rates for 4 years and these are at T100 schools).

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is odd to me that all of the schools that have a reputation for being unhappy and overly difficult (MIT, Caltech, CMU, UC, JHU, GT) are clustered at the top of the list. Are the reputations not deserved?

There you go again, as PPs mentioned, there is no difference between 99 and 97. It does not say anything about anything.

Doesn't it say that for schools where people routinely talk about how miserable the students are, they do a great job at bringing back nearly all of their students?

It's all within the margin of error so you cannot draw definitive conclusions like you are trying to do.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is odd to me that all of the schools that have a reputation for being unhappy and overly difficult (MIT, Caltech, CMU, UC, JHU, GT) are clustered at the top of the list. Are the reputations not deserved?

There you go again, as PPs mentioned, there is no difference between 99 and 97. It does not say anything about anything.

Doesn't it say that for schools where people routinely talk about how miserable the students are, they do a great job at bringing back nearly all of their students?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is odd to me that all of the schools that have a reputation for being unhappy and overly difficult (MIT, Caltech, CMU, UC, JHU, GT) are clustered at the top of the list. Are the reputations not deserved?

There you go again, as PPs mentioned, there is no difference between 99 and 97. It does not say anything about anything.

of course, but there's probably diference between 99 and 80.
What's you point?

Anonymous wrote:It is odd to me that all of the schools that have a reputation for being unhappy and overly difficult (MIT, Caltech, CMU, UC, JHU, GT) are clustered at the top of the list. Are the reputations not deserved?

There you go again, as PPs mentioned, there is no difference between 99 and 97. It does not say anything about anything.

It is odd to me that all of the schools that have a reputation for being unhappy and overly difficult (MIT, Caltech, CMU, UC, JHU, GT) are clustered at the top of the list. Are the reputations not deserved?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Honestly, I would not make a college decision based on a retention difference of 99% and 97%. In the real world, that’s called a distinction without a difference.

Exactly. This is a pointless thread. I kept thinking I'd see something profound come from it, but.....I guess that's another two minutes I'll never get back.

US News & World Report doesn't agree with you.
The most influential flagship ranking uses retention rates for it's ranking factors.

https://www.usnews.com/education/best-colleges/articles/how-us-news-calculated-the-rankings

LOL

It’s not that retention rates are unimportant, but the difference between 99 and 97 is not.

Do you think the highest is 99 and lowest is 97??
Why are you saying that?

How about 99 and 80 or 97 and 70

OP posted the link with a huge list down to like 33%
https://premium.usnews.com/best-colleges/rankings/national-universities/freshmen-least-most-likely-return

NP. if you don't understand that the "distinction without a difference" comment applied to the "top 20" schools listed in the OP --not all schools in the USNEWs rankings -- then we can't help you.

What are you talking about???
OP listed top 20 or so for the first year retention rates, then a link to the full list.
You got mad because OP didn't post the full lis heret?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Honestly, I would not make a college decision based on a retention difference of 99% and 97%. In the real world, that’s called a distinction without a difference.

Exactly. This is a pointless thread. I kept thinking I'd see something profound come from it, but.....I guess that's another two minutes I'll never get back.

US News & World Report doesn't agree with you.
The most influential flagship ranking uses retention rates for it's ranking factors.

https://www.usnews.com/education/best-colleges/articles/how-us-news-calculated-the-rankings

LOL

It’s not that retention rates are unimportant, but the difference between 99 and 97 is not.

Do you think the highest is 99 and lowest is 97??
Why are you saying that?

How about 99 and 80 or 97 and 70

OP posted the link with a huge list down to like 33%
https://premium.usnews.com/best-colleges/rankings/national-universities/freshmen-least-most-likely-return

NP. if you don't understand that the "distinction without a difference" comment applied to the "top 20" schools listed in the OP --not all schools in the USNEWs rankings -- then we can't help you.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Honestly, I would not make a college decision based on a retention difference of 99% and 97%. In the real world, that’s called a distinction without a difference.

Exactly. This is a pointless thread. I kept thinking I'd see something profound come from it, but.....I guess that's another two minutes I'll never get back.

US News & World Report doesn't agree with you.
The most influential flagship ranking uses retention rates for it's ranking factors.

https://www.usnews.com/education/best-colleges/articles/how-us-news-calculated-the-rankings

LOL

It’s not that retention rates are unimportant, but the difference between 99 and 97 is not.

Do you think the highest is 99 and lowest is 97??
Why are you saying that?

How about 99 and 80 or 97 and 70

OP posted the link with a huge list down to like 33%
https://premium.usnews.com/best-colleges/rankings/national-universities/freshmen-least-most-likely-return

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Honestly, I would not make a college decision based on a retention difference of 99% and 97%. In the real world, that’s called a distinction without a difference.

Exactly. This is a pointless thread. I kept thinking I'd see something profound come from it, but.....I guess that's another two minutes I'll never get back.

US News & World Report doesn't agree with you.
The most influential flagship ranking uses retention rates for it's ranking factors.

https://www.usnews.com/education/best-colleges/articles/how-us-news-calculated-the-rankings

LOL

It’s not that retention rates are unimportant, but the difference between 99 and 97 is not.