Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Notre dame might fall out

Considering Norte Dame is a haven and an incubator for MAGA types, I think not. The fact that Amy Coney Barrett is a proud Notre Dame Law alum is a huge red flag in my book.

You don't make any sense and sound unintelligent.

Notre Dame is markedly more conservative than pretty much every single top school.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Notre dame might fall out

Considering Norte Dame is a haven and an incubator for MAGA types, I think not. The fact that Amy Coney Barrett is a proud Notre Dame Law alum is a huge red flag in my book.

You don't make any sense and sound unintelligent.

Anonymous wrote:Notre dame might fall out

Considering Norte Dame is a haven and an incubator for MAGA types, I think not. The fact that Amy Coney Barrett is a proud Notre Dame Law alum is a huge red flag in my book.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Stop obsessing about acceptance rates. It may stroke your ego that your kid got into a single digit acceptance rate school, but it doesn't matter.

Its an important factor when looking at colleges.
It matters a lot.

Why?

You are going to just apply to schools blindly and randomly without knowing those crucial information???
good luck.

Your response does nothing to answer the question. Why does the acceptance rate matter a lot? (Other than telling you how difficult it will likely be for you to gain entry?)

My response has a lot to do with the question
If your kid has 1300 SAT, your kid want to avoid applying to the schools with <20% acceptance rate for example.
Vital information. Don't you have common sense?

Law of supply and demand applies very well again.
Lesser the product, cheaper the price.
Better the school, more demand and lower acceptance rate.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Notre dame might fall out

No it's the one with least chance to fall out with 7th largest endowment.
Yes money still talks.

A school ranked 19 is not least likely to fall out, in fact it's most likely besides UCLA. You saying it's 7th in endowment means it underperforms in a lot of other areas.

The endowment increased a lot relatively recently, so they now have more ammunition.

Columbia is out

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Notre dame might fall out

No it's the one with least chance to fall out with 7th largest endowment.
Yes money still talks.

A school ranked 19 is not least likely to fall out, in fact it's most likely besides UCLA. You saying it's 7th in endowment means it underperforms in a lot of other areas.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Stop obsessing about acceptance rates. It may stroke your ego that your kid got into a single digit acceptance rate school, but it doesn't matter.

Its an important factor when looking at colleges.
It matters a lot.

Why?

You are going to just apply to schools blindly and randomly without knowing those crucial information???
good luck.

Your response does nothing to answer the question. Why does the acceptance rate matter a lot? (Other than telling you how difficult it will likely be for you to gain entry?)

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Based on earlier comments, it sounds like people want to base academic rankings on job placement and salary statistics. Those two don’t necessarily correlate. If you’re comparing an Ivy classics major to a State U CS major, the comparison makes no sense from an academic perspective, but the CS major will have a higher salary. What’s the point of the ROI focus? To make the arts look bad? Don’t people already know which majors pay? ROI is a dumb way to rate academic excellence.

Yes. If incomes are tied to certain set of majors, and school A has a higher percentage of graduates in that set of majors than school B, school A will likely do better in the ROI studies. Despite that, students in the given set of majors from school B may have better average ROI outcomes than those from school A.

A real world example of school A may be Georgia Tech and school B Berkeley. Georgia Tech has higher average ROI than Berkeley due to its extremely high concentration of engineering majors, but when the comparison is major to major, Berkeley is likely higher.

The other thing that skews ROI is geography and cost of living. Schools with a higher percentage of graduates settling in high cost areas (NYC, Bay Area, etc.) tend to have higher incomes, but also much higher cost of living. Cost of living is not factored in published college ROI studies.

Amazing that most people cannot seem to understand this. WPI/RPI/Colorado school of the mines have very high ROI---of course they do, they are STEM/Engineering schools, so most grads are going to start at $60K+ Similarly, any engineering focused school in CA/Bay Area will have higher ROI as the salaries in Silicon Valley are crazy high (so is COL) and many of their grads will end up in Silicon Valley or Seattle area.

ROI shouldn't be a sole factor, but indeed one of the most important factors.

Anonymous wrote:Notre dame might fall out

No it's the one with least chance to fall out with 7th largest endowment.
Yes money still talks.

Notre dame might fall out

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Based on earlier comments, it sounds like people want to base academic rankings on job placement and salary statistics. Those two don’t necessarily correlate. If you’re comparing an Ivy classics major to a State U CS major, the comparison makes no sense from an academic perspective, but the CS major will have a higher salary. What’s the point of the ROI focus? To make the arts look bad? Don’t people already know which majors pay? ROI is a dumb way to rate academic excellence.

Yes. If incomes are tied to certain set of majors, and school A has a higher percentage of graduates in that set of majors than school B, school A will likely do better in the ROI studies. Despite that, students in the given set of majors from school B may have better average ROI outcomes than those from school A.

A real world example of school A may be Georgia Tech and school B Berkeley. Georgia Tech has higher average ROI than Berkeley due to its extremely high concentration of engineering majors, but when the comparison is major to major, Berkeley is likely higher.

The other thing that skews ROI is geography and cost of living. Schools with a higher percentage of graduates settling in high cost areas (NYC, Bay Area, etc.) tend to have higher incomes, but also much higher cost of living. Cost of living is not factored in published college ROI studies.

Amazing that most people cannot seem to understand this. WPI/RPI/Colorado school of the mines have very high ROI---of course they do, they are STEM/Engineering schools, so most grads are going to start at $60K+ Similarly, any engineering focused school in CA/Bay Area will have higher ROI as the salaries in Silicon Valley are crazy high (so is COL) and many of their grads will end up in Silicon Valley or Seattle area.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Stop obsessing about acceptance rates. It may stroke your ego that your kid got into a single digit acceptance rate school, but it doesn't matter.

Its an important factor when looking at colleges.
It matters a lot.

In fact, the combination of acceptance rate + student stats + yield rate provides the most accurate and true standing of colleges.
For a bonus, throw in a retention rate.

Students reference the rankings as one of the factors, then each student calculates the true overall value of the schools.

Nothing beats the free market of supply and demand which would determine the actual standing of colleges in reality.

But if the demand is based on false assumptions that rely at least partially on rankings, then poor decisions will abound.

You think you are the only smart one and the mass general public makes poor decisions based on false assumptions?
The world doesn't that way. You can come up with your own ranking but it's not the world.

Published rankings are good references but one of many factors to consider.
There are only few stupid people would blindly trust those rankings and pick a school solely based on that.

Most people make good decisions, and better the product, higher the demand.
High demand and popular schools have reasons for it, and the outcome is what it is the actual true representation of the standings of colleges.

However you would not just look at acceptance rate only. If a particular school is popular among bunch of 1300 SAT kids, that means not much.
You also want to look at student stats to see if a school is sought after by high stat kids. Also you also need to look at yield rate.
School A and School B may have similar acceptance rate and student stat, but School A might have higher yield meaning more students want to attend it.
Retention rate is another factor tells that the students indeed find the school valuable, thus stay.

So acceptance rate + student stats + yield rate and throw in retention rate.

These are all relatively objective and direct numbers from actual outcome by students/consumers, not some vague criterion on some published rankings.

Anonymous wrote:Based on earlier comments, it sounds like people want to base academic rankings on job placement and salary statistics. Those two don’t necessarily correlate. If you’re comparing an Ivy classics major to a State U CS major, the comparison makes no sense from an academic perspective, but the CS major will have a higher salary. What’s the point of the ROI focus? To make the arts look bad? Don’t people already know which majors pay? ROI is a dumb way to rate academic excellence.

Yes. If incomes are tied to certain set of majors, and school A has a higher percentage of graduates in that set of majors than school B, school A will likely do better in the ROI studies. Despite that, students in the given set of majors from school B may have better average ROI outcomes than those from school A.

A real world example of school A may be Georgia Tech and school B Berkeley. Georgia Tech has higher average ROI than Berkeley due to its extremely high concentration of engineering majors, but when the comparison is major to major, Berkeley is likely higher.

The other thing that skews ROI is geography and cost of living. Schools with a higher percentage of graduates settling in high cost areas (NYC, Bay Area, etc.) tend to have higher incomes, but also much higher cost of living. Cost of living is not factored in published college ROI studies.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Stop obsessing about acceptance rates. It may stroke your ego that your kid got into a single digit acceptance rate school, but it doesn't matter.

Its an important factor when looking at colleges.
It matters a lot.

Why?

You are going to just apply to schools blindly and randomly without knowing those crucial information???
good luck.