Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Initially I was puzzled with some of the ratings in the various categories, until I realized that they are based on actual data vs expectations, where if the data outperforms the expectations, they receive a higher rating. I was looking specifically at graduation rate and was initially surprised to see higher grad ratings on some of the schools where I knew they were lower.

I actually like this balanced approach. I think looking at both this ranking and USNWR would be a good way to evaluate a school. I also like the New York Times tool, where you can set your own parameters. You can learn a lot from these three platforms.

No, it's like measuring your schwantz from the floor up. Does not give an accurate measurement of what it claims to. It's data, not information.

Sorry you are not happy with the results of your school that sunk in the rankings. Signed, mom of kid whose kid's school is in top 20 for both USNWR and WSJ.

+ a million
The PP is no different than a spoiled kid throwing a tantrum. Absolutely insufferable.

You are the one whining, and you are agreeing the the PP who went to ad hominem attacks with no salient point.

You also didn't read the response to the post which showed the PP's accusation was incorrect.

There was no ad hominem attack. You're just incredibly angry because your school (or your kid's school) is low, low, low on this list and you feel entitled to a high ranking. *Shrug*

Wow you can't read.

There certainly was an ad hominem attack - an accusation that I was angry about my kids schools ranking as the reason for the post. That is the definition of ad hominem, attacking the messenger and not the message.

And you didn't read the second part either where I mentioned where my kids went to school, and I have no idea where they rank on the WSJ list and only a vague idea on USN.

Nobody's angry.

These ranking are useless.

You know exactly where your kids' schools rank on both the USN and WSJ lists. Please.

Anonymous wrote:Can someone explain how Claremont McKenna is so high and Pomona is so low? Are they really that different? I’ve read the whole thread and the methodology - and as a Colgate alum I’m happy with my college’s placement - but I still think this list is weird.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Serious question, even does anyone believe- even for one second-that there are 270 schools better than NYU?

Ketchup on the walls of a certain south Florida resort tonight.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Serious question, even does anyone believe- even for one second-that there are 270 schools better than NYU?

If not, then these rankings are bile and trash, assembled merely to get a Barnum-like reaction from the masses.

It's not that they are trash...it's that their ranking methodology is drastically different than other rankings and they really don't give a good explanation how they are different.

As an example, University of Delaware (#24) gets a graduation rate ranking of 96/100 while Duke (#45) gets a graduation rate ranking of 77/100.

On the surface, it implies that Delaware kids graduate in 4 years at a much higher rate than Duke kids...which most people think sounds crazy. Well, it is crazy. Duke's 4-year graduation rate is 95% while Delaware's is 73%. So, how does Delaware score a 96 while Duke scores a 77? In theory, it's because Duke should have the same graduation rate of Princeton (at 99%) because the kids have similar test scores and demographics. Yet, it doesn't...it's 4 percentage points lower.

On the flip side, Delaware should have a graduation rate that their statisticians believe should be much lower than 73% based on the test scores and other demographics of their students. In fact, it is much higher so they get rewarded for this fact.

Again, these are useful rankings...but the methodology is quite confusing and not well explained.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Serious question, even does anyone believe- even for one second-that there are 270 schools better than NYU?

If not, then these rankings are bile and trash, assembled merely to get a Barnum-like reaction from the masses.

What, exactly, is special about NYU? Other than its price tag?

Curious why a school with an acceptance rate below 10%, and is so hugely popular, suddenly became an overpriced community college? Are all those students applying to it not counted in how good a school is? You would think according to free market principles that how good a school is can be judged by the demand for the school. But I guess the WSJ doesn't believe in supply and demand and basic economic theory.

Anonymous wrote:Serious question, even does anyone believe- even for one second-that there are 270 schools better than NYU?

If not, then these rankings are bile and trash, assembled merely to get a Barnum-like reaction from the masses.

Anonymous wrote:Top 20 for those interested without subscriptions:
1: Princeton
2: Babson
3: Stanford
4: Yale
5: Claremont McKenna
6: MIT
7: Harvard
8: Berkeley
9: Georgia Tech
10: Davidson
11: Bentley
12: UC Davis
13: Penn
14: Columbia
15: Lehigh
16: San Jose State
17: Notre Dame
18: UC Merced
19: Virginia Tech
20: Harvey Mudd

I kind of like the list - very pre-professional focused and makes sense for the type who read WSJ. Methodology is 70% Student Outcomes, 20% Learning Environment, and 10% Diversity, with each of those broken up with different metrics.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Serious question, even does anyone believe- even for one second-that there are 270 schools better than NYU?

If not, then these rankings are bile and trash, assembled merely to get a Barnum-like reaction from the masses.

What, exactly, is special about NYU? Other than its price tag?

Nada.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Initially I was puzzled with some of the ratings in the various categories, until I realized that they are based on actual data vs expectations, where if the data outperforms the expectations, they receive a higher rating. I was looking specifically at graduation rate and was initially surprised to see higher grad ratings on some of the schools where I knew they were lower.

I actually like this balanced approach. I think looking at both this ranking and USNWR would be a good way to evaluate a school. I also like the New York Times tool, where you can set your own parameters. You can learn a lot from these three platforms.

No, it's like measuring your schwantz from the floor up. Does not give an accurate measurement of what it claims to. It's data, not information.

Sorry you are not happy with the results of your school that sunk in the rankings. Signed, mom of kid whose kid's school is in top 20 for both USNWR and WSJ.

USN rankings mean nothing, and these WSJ rankings mean less than nothing. Not one human being on the planet will make a college selection based on them. Insults and adhoms indicate you know you have weak tea.

Signed parent of one Ivy kid w undergrad degree currently getting grad degree at different Ivy and second kid w NESCAC degree but bragging is for aholes.

DP. Speaking of aholes… it’s funny that you say something as patently false as “rankings mean nothing.” If they truly mean nothing, you wouldn’t be here writing screed after hysterical screed. Meanwhile, millions of families will continue to use rankings as part of their college selection process.

Do continue seething!

OK anyone with a brain knew I meant "rankings mean nothing SUBSTANTIVE" and not "no one cares about rankings", so nice strawman there.

I know USN ranking are used by people. Other than for discovery, they should not be. This is a common opinion. Not one person will use this WSJ list for anything except confirmation bias. If they do, and choose Babson over Harvard... would you say that's a good objective decision?

Answer please. Specifically, with a YES or NO.

I've bolded your actual words. As for Babson vs. Harvard, that's entirely up to the individual - why would it bother you if someone chose Babson over Harvard? How does that affect you in any way? Perhaps that's the best decision FOR THEM. So my answer is a YES.

You are the person who supports choosing Babson over Harvard. Not Hamilton over Harvard, or Amherst, but Babson. And you couldn't even think of one reason to mention how Babson would be better for them.

I rest my case.

Look, your posts are all over this thread. You are extremely upset about these rankings because they don't show your favored school in a good light. Get over it.

No, completely wrong, I could not care less where my kids schools are ranked on this or any other list. This list is useless.

BTW, I have fewer posts in this thread than you think. You are confusing multiple posters who think your position is preposterous.

Also what does it mean that you "bolded my words"? Do you have a point there? Maybe you should, I don't know, make it?

This list is preposterous.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Serious question, even does anyone believe- even for one second-that there are 270 schools better than NYU?

If not, then these rankings are bile and trash, assembled merely to get a Barnum-like reaction from the masses.

What, exactly, is special about NYU? Other than its price tag?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Initially I was puzzled with some of the ratings in the various categories, until I realized that they are based on actual data vs expectations, where if the data outperforms the expectations, they receive a higher rating. I was looking specifically at graduation rate and was initially surprised to see higher grad ratings on some of the schools where I knew they were lower.

I actually like this balanced approach. I think looking at both this ranking and USNWR would be a good way to evaluate a school. I also like the New York Times tool, where you can set your own parameters. You can learn a lot from these three platforms.

No, it's like measuring your schwantz from the floor up. Does not give an accurate measurement of what it claims to. It's data, not information.

Sorry you are not happy with the results of your school that sunk in the rankings. Signed, mom of kid whose kid's school is in top 20 for both USNWR and WSJ.

+ a million
The PP is no different than a spoiled kid throwing a tantrum. Absolutely insufferable.

You are the one whining, and you are agreeing the the PP who went to ad hominem attacks with no salient point.

You also didn't read the response to the post which showed the PP's accusation was incorrect.

There was no ad hominem attack. You're just incredibly angry because your school (or your kid's school) is low, low, low on this list and you feel entitled to a high ranking. *Shrug*

Wow you can't read.

There certainly was an ad hominem attack - an accusation that I was angry about my kids schools ranking as the reason for the post. That is the definition of ad hominem, attacking the messenger and not the message.

And you didn't read the second part either where I mentioned where my kids went to school, and I have no idea where they rank on the WSJ list and only a vague idea on USN.

Nobody's angry.

These ranking are useless.

Anonymous wrote:Serious question, even does anyone believe- even for one second-that there are 270 schools better than NYU?