Anonymous
12/20/2024 12:07
Subject: What happened to W&M, Brandeis, Tulane, Pepperdine and others..from historically T50 to outside looking in?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Everyone needs to stop blaming USNews for the rankings slide.
It stands to reason that if it was only a USNews problem, that these schools would rank highly in Forbes or WSJ or other rankings.
However, at least with Wake and Tulane, the USNews Rankings are the highest rankings...BY FAR.
Actually, Forbes ranks W&M 55 and USNews ranks it #54 (WSJ is at 178). Seems about right.
Pepperdine is #83 USNews and #125 Forbes and #145 WSJ.
Brandeis is #63 USNews, #105 Forbes and #335 WSJ
Wake is #46 USNews, #469 Forbes and #137 WSJ
Tulane is #63 USNews, #147 Forbes and #451 WSJ
US News changed their methodology with the express purpose of becoming more like Forbes and WSJ. Wake, W&M, Tulane, Brandeis were all t40-30+ for many, many years. Only after the movement to value DEI did these schools start to be ranked among schools that had always ranked much lower. It is because of methodology changes and methodology changes alone that the (made up) rankings of these schools have changed.
Produce any reputable 3rd party ranking then...if you think all rankings suck, then stop taking issue with USNews' new methodology.
None of them are because they've all switched to social mobility. Nobody wants to be the one that says that isn't important.
Considering at least Tulane and Wake are chasing the new USNews rankings...something tells me if they move back to where they were prior, folks like you will start touting them again.
No I still think they're bad rankings. Also Wake said that they have no plans to chase it multiple times.
+1 Tulane also said this
The rankings were never the sole reason smart kids went to these schools (as is evidenced by either increasing or stable
test stats at all of these schools). It was more like a bonus or nice in that an external source acknowledged what the people at these schools know to be true. If they don't agree this year, so what? Who cares.
Great...why are there three pages of posts trying to argue why the rankings are "wrong". Seems now it's "we never cared about the rankings". Maybe just stick with that.
I cared about US News back when it was primarily focused on the quality of academics at a school. I don't think it's wrong to want a ranking available so the smartest students know where they should go.
There is...it's called USNews. The top 20 schools have had the deck chairs shuffled...but they didn't go anywhere.
Nobody has ever accused Tulane or Pepperdine of attracting the "smartest students".
Not sure where you've been but these two and others mentioned do attract top students. "Smartest" isn't a concrete classification, btw.
Maybe because the kids that actually attend will freely admit they weren't the smartest kids at their school or the top kids.
Smartest doesn't have to mean just the top 1%, and probably better describes the top 10-15% of most schools.
Correct...and the kids going to Pepperdine and Tulane (from private schools) are outside the top 20%. Again, no secret.
Anonymous
12/20/2024 12:06
Subject: What happened to W&M, Brandeis, Tulane, Pepperdine and others..from historically T50 to outside looking in?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Everyone needs to stop blaming USNews for the rankings slide.
It stands to reason that if it was only a USNews problem, that these schools would rank highly in Forbes or WSJ or other rankings.
However, at least with Wake and Tulane, the USNews Rankings are the highest rankings...BY FAR.
Actually, Forbes ranks W&M 55 and USNews ranks it #54 (WSJ is at 178). Seems about right.
Pepperdine is #83 USNews and #125 Forbes and #145 WSJ.
Brandeis is #63 USNews, #105 Forbes and #335 WSJ
Wake is #46 USNews, #469 Forbes and #137 WSJ
Tulane is #63 USNews, #147 Forbes and #451 WSJ
US News changed their methodology with the express purpose of becoming more like Forbes and WSJ. Wake, W&M, Tulane, Brandeis were all t40-30+ for many, many years. Only after the movement to value DEI did these schools start to be ranked among schools that had always ranked much lower. It is because of methodology changes and methodology changes alone that the (made up) rankings of these schools have changed.
Produce any reputable 3rd party ranking then...if you think all rankings suck, then stop taking issue with USNews' new methodology.
None of them are because they've all switched to social mobility. Nobody wants to be the one that says that isn't important.
Considering at least Tulane and Wake are chasing the new USNews rankings...something tells me if they move back to where they were prior, folks like you will start touting them again.
No I still think they're bad rankings. Also Wake said that they have no plans to chase it multiple times.
+1 Tulane also said this
The rankings were never the sole reason smart kids went to these schools (as is evidenced by either increasing or stable
test stats at all of these schools). It was more like a bonus or nice in that an external source acknowledged what the people at these schools know to be true. If they don't agree this year, so what? Who cares.
Great...why are there three pages of posts trying to argue why the rankings are "wrong". Seems now it's "we never cared about the rankings". Maybe just stick with that.
I cared about US News back when it was primarily focused on the quality of academics at a school. I don't think it's wrong to want a ranking available so the smartest students know where they should go.
There is...it's called USNews. The top 20 schools have had the deck chairs shuffled...but they didn't go anywhere.
Nobody has ever accused Tulane or Pepperdine of attracting the "smartest students".
Not sure where you've been but these two and others mentioned do attract top students. "Smartest" isn't a concrete classification, btw.
Maybe because the kids that actually attend will freely admit they weren't the smartest kids at their school or the top kids.
You are certifiable
Anonymous
12/20/2024 12:05
Subject: What happened to W&M, Brandeis, Tulane, Pepperdine and others..from historically T50 to outside looking in?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Everyone needs to stop blaming USNews for the rankings slide.
It stands to reason that if it was only a USNews problem, that these schools would rank highly in Forbes or WSJ or other rankings.
However, at least with Wake and Tulane, the USNews Rankings are the highest rankings...BY FAR.
Actually, Forbes ranks W&M 55 and USNews ranks it #54 (WSJ is at 178). Seems about right.
Pepperdine is #83 USNews and #125 Forbes and #145 WSJ.
Brandeis is #63 USNews, #105 Forbes and #335 WSJ
Wake is #46 USNews, #469 Forbes and #137 WSJ
Tulane is #63 USNews, #147 Forbes and #451 WSJ
US News changed their methodology with the express purpose of becoming more like Forbes and WSJ. Wake, W&M, Tulane, Brandeis were all t40-30+ for many, many years. Only after the movement to value DEI did these schools start to be ranked among schools that had always ranked much lower. It is because of methodology changes and methodology changes alone that the (made up) rankings of these schools have changed.
Produce any reputable 3rd party ranking then...if you think all rankings suck, then stop taking issue with USNews' new methodology.
None of them are because they've all switched to social mobility. Nobody wants to be the one that says that isn't important.
Considering at least Tulane and Wake are chasing the new USNews rankings...something tells me if they move back to where they were prior, folks like you will start touting them again.
No I still think they're bad rankings. Also Wake said that they have no plans to chase it multiple times.
+1 Tulane also said this
The rankings were never the sole reason smart kids went to these schools (as is evidenced by either increasing or stable
test stats at all of these schools). It was more like a bonus or nice in that an external source acknowledged what the people at these schools know to be true. If they don't agree this year, so what? Who cares.
Great...why are there three pages of posts trying to argue why the rankings are "wrong". Seems now it's "we never cared about the rankings". Maybe just stick with that.
If you care about Pell grants the new ranking are great. Now Trump has promised to do away with the Department of Education and all Pell grants. So look for radical changes in the ranks once Pell grants are gone.
If rankings don't matter as most DCUMers assert, so what?
The smart kids will get into the top schools.
No one is thinking about Pepperdine anyways.
Anonymous
12/20/2024 12:05
Subject: What happened to W&M, Brandeis, Tulane, Pepperdine and others..from historically T50 to outside looking in?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Everyone needs to stop blaming USNews for the rankings slide.
It stands to reason that if it was only a USNews problem, that these schools would rank highly in Forbes or WSJ or other rankings.
However, at least with Wake and Tulane, the USNews Rankings are the highest rankings...BY FAR.
Actually, Forbes ranks W&M 55 and USNews ranks it #54 (WSJ is at 178). Seems about right.
Pepperdine is #83 USNews and #125 Forbes and #145 WSJ.
Brandeis is #63 USNews, #105 Forbes and #335 WSJ
Wake is #46 USNews, #469 Forbes and #137 WSJ
Tulane is #63 USNews, #147 Forbes and #451 WSJ
US News changed their methodology with the express purpose of becoming more like Forbes and WSJ. Wake, W&M, Tulane, Brandeis were all t40-30+ for many, many years. Only after the movement to value DEI did these schools start to be ranked among schools that had always ranked much lower. It is because of methodology changes and methodology changes alone that the (made up) rankings of these schools have changed.
Produce any reputable 3rd party ranking then...if you think all rankings suck, then stop taking issue with USNews' new methodology.
None of them are because they've all switched to social mobility. Nobody wants to be the one that says that isn't important.
Considering at least Tulane and Wake are chasing the new USNews rankings...something tells me if they move back to where they were prior, folks like you will start touting them again.
Didn't both of these places release statements saying the rankings were BS, they aren't going to change, etc.??
Yes USNews ranking removed class size, % of professors teaching classes, legacy preference and endowment. They emphasized peg grants graduation rates. Its was a DEI move by USNews. Nothing changed at any of the schools.
Are you intimidated by DEI or something?
You might want to wake up and take a look around. DEI is dead.
Anonymous
12/20/2024 12:04
Subject: What happened to W&M, Brandeis, Tulane, Pepperdine and others..from historically T50 to outside looking in?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Everyone needs to stop blaming USNews for the rankings slide.
It stands to reason that if it was only a USNews problem, that these schools would rank highly in Forbes or WSJ or other rankings.
However, at least with Wake and Tulane, the USNews Rankings are the highest rankings...BY FAR.
Actually, Forbes ranks W&M 55 and USNews ranks it #54 (WSJ is at 178). Seems about right.
Pepperdine is #83 USNews and #125 Forbes and #145 WSJ.
Brandeis is #63 USNews, #105 Forbes and #335 WSJ
Wake is #46 USNews, #469 Forbes and #137 WSJ
Tulane is #63 USNews, #147 Forbes and #451 WSJ
US News changed their methodology with the express purpose of becoming more like Forbes and WSJ. Wake, W&M, Tulane, Brandeis were all t40-30+ for many, many years. Only after the movement to value DEI did these schools start to be ranked among schools that had always ranked much lower. It is because of methodology changes and methodology changes alone that the (made up) rankings of these schools have changed.
Produce any reputable 3rd party ranking then...if you think all rankings suck, then stop taking issue with USNews' new methodology.
None of them are because they've all switched to social mobility. Nobody wants to be the one that says that isn't important.
Considering at least Tulane and Wake are chasing the new USNews rankings...something tells me if they move back to where they were prior, folks like you will start touting them again.
No I still think they're bad rankings. Also Wake said that they have no plans to chase it multiple times.
+1 Tulane also said this
The rankings were never the sole reason smart kids went to these schools (as is evidenced by either increasing or stable
test stats at all of these schools). It was more like a bonus or nice in that an external source acknowledged what the people at these schools know to be true. If they don't agree this year, so what? Who cares.
Great...why are there three pages of posts trying to argue why the rankings are "wrong". Seems now it's "we never cared about the rankings". Maybe just stick with that.
I cared about US News back when it was primarily focused on the quality of academics at a school. I don't think it's wrong to want a ranking available so the smartest students know where they should go.
There is...it's called USNews. The top 20 schools have had the deck chairs shuffled...but they didn't go anywhere.
Nobody has ever accused Tulane or Pepperdine of attracting the "smartest students".
Not sure where you've been but these two and others mentioned do attract top students. "Smartest" isn't a concrete classification, btw.
Maybe because the kids that actually attend will freely admit they weren't the smartest kids at their school or the top kids.
Smartest doesn't have to mean just the top 1%, and probably better describes the top 10-15% of most schools.
Anonymous
12/20/2024 12:04
Subject: What happened to W&M, Brandeis, Tulane, Pepperdine and others..from historically T50 to outside looking in?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Everyone needs to stop blaming USNews for the rankings slide.
It stands to reason that if it was only a USNews problem, that these schools would rank highly in Forbes or WSJ or other rankings.
However, at least with Wake and Tulane, the USNews Rankings are the highest rankings...BY FAR.
Actually, Forbes ranks W&M 55 and USNews ranks it #54 (WSJ is at 178). Seems about right.
Pepperdine is #83 USNews and #125 Forbes and #145 WSJ.
Brandeis is #63 USNews, #105 Forbes and #335 WSJ
Wake is #46 USNews, #469 Forbes and #137 WSJ
Tulane is #63 USNews, #147 Forbes and #451 WSJ
US News changed their methodology with the express purpose of becoming more like Forbes and WSJ. Wake, W&M, Tulane, Brandeis were all t40-30+ for many, many years. Only after the movement to value DEI did these schools start to be ranked among schools that had always ranked much lower. It is because of methodology changes and methodology changes alone that the (made up) rankings of these schools have changed.
Produce any reputable 3rd party ranking then...if you think all rankings suck, then stop taking issue with USNews' new methodology.
None of them are because they've all switched to social mobility. Nobody wants to be the one that says that isn't important.
Considering at least Tulane and Wake are chasing the new USNews rankings...something tells me if they move back to where they were prior, folks like you will start touting them again.
No I still think they're bad rankings. Also Wake said that they have no plans to chase it multiple times.
+1 Tulane also said this
The rankings were never the sole reason smart kids went to these schools (as is evidenced by either increasing or stable
test stats at all of these schools). It was more like a bonus or nice in that an external source acknowledged what the people at these schools know to be true. If they don't agree this year, so what? Who cares.
Great...why are there three pages of posts trying to argue why the rankings are "wrong". Seems now it's "we never cared about the rankings". Maybe just stick with that.
I cared about US News back when it was primarily focused on the quality of academics at a school. I don't think it's wrong to want a ranking available so the smartest students know where they should go.
There is...it's called USNews. The top 20 schools have had the deck chairs shuffled...but they didn't go anywhere.
Nobody has ever accused Tulane or Pepperdine of attracting the "smartest students".
Not sure where you've been but these two and others mentioned do attract top students. "Smartest" isn't a concrete classification, btw.
Maybe because the kids that actually attend will freely admit they weren't the smartest kids at their school or the top kids.
Why don't you use actual numbers? What SAT score exactly are you talking about?
Anonymous
12/20/2024 12:03
Subject: What happened to W&M, Brandeis, Tulane, Pepperdine and others..from historically T50 to outside looking in?
[img]
+1
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Everyone needs to stop blaming USNews for the rankings slide.
It stands to reason that if it was only a USNews problem, that these schools would rank highly in Forbes or WSJ or other rankings.
However, at least with Wake and Tulane, the USNews Rankings are the highest rankings...BY FAR.
Actually, Forbes ranks W&M 55 and USNews ranks it #54 (WSJ is at 178). Seems about right.
Pepperdine is #83 USNews and #125 Forbes and #145 WSJ.
Brandeis is #63 USNews, #105 Forbes and #335 WSJ
Wake is #46 USNews, #469 Forbes and #137 WSJ
Tulane is #63 USNews, #147 Forbes and #451 WSJ
US News changed their methodology with the express purpose of becoming more like Forbes and WSJ. Wake, W&M, Tulane, Brandeis were all t40-30+ for many, many years. Only after the movement to value DEI did these schools start to be ranked among schools that had always ranked much lower. It is because of methodology changes and methodology changes alone that the (made up) rankings of these schools have changed.
Produce any reputable 3rd party ranking then...if you think all rankings suck, then stop taking issue with USNews' new methodology.
None of them are because they've all switched to social mobility. Nobody wants to be the one that says that isn't important.
Considering at least Tulane and Wake are chasing the new USNews rankings...something tells me if they move back to where they were prior, folks like you will start touting them again.
No I still think they're bad rankings. Also Wake said that they have no plans to chase it multiple times.
+1 Tulane also said this
The rankings were never the sole reason smart kids went to these schools (as is evidenced by either increasing or stable
test stats at all of these schools). It was more like a bonus or nice in that an external source acknowledged what the people at these schools know to be true. If they don't agree this year, so what? Who cares.
Great...why are there three pages of posts trying to argue why the rankings are "wrong". Seems now it's "we never cared about the rankings". Maybe just stick with that.
If you care about Pell grants the new ranking are great. Now Trump has promised to do away with the Department of Education and all Pell grants. So look for radical changes in the ranks once Pell grants are gone.
+1
Anonymous
12/20/2024 12:03
Subject: What happened to W&M, Brandeis, Tulane, Pepperdine and others..from historically T50 to outside looking in?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Everyone needs to stop blaming USNews for the rankings slide.
It stands to reason that if it was only a USNews problem, that these schools would rank highly in Forbes or WSJ or other rankings.
However, at least with Wake and Tulane, the USNews Rankings are the highest rankings...BY FAR.
Actually, Forbes ranks W&M 55 and USNews ranks it #54 (WSJ is at 178). Seems about right.
Pepperdine is #83 USNews and #125 Forbes and #145 WSJ.
Brandeis is #63 USNews, #105 Forbes and #335 WSJ
Wake is #46 USNews, #469 Forbes and #137 WSJ
Tulane is #63 USNews, #147 Forbes and #451 WSJ
US News changed their methodology with the express purpose of becoming more like Forbes and WSJ. Wake, W&M, Tulane, Brandeis were all t40-30+ for many, many years. Only after the movement to value DEI did these schools start to be ranked among schools that had always ranked much lower. It is because of methodology changes and methodology changes alone that the (made up) rankings of these schools have changed.
Produce any reputable 3rd party ranking then...if you think all rankings suck, then stop taking issue with USNews' new methodology.
None of them are because they've all switched to social mobility. Nobody wants to be the one that says that isn't important.
Considering at least Tulane and Wake are chasing the new USNews rankings...something tells me if they move back to where they were prior, folks like you will start touting them again.
No I still think they're bad rankings. Also Wake said that they have no plans to chase it multiple times.
+1 Tulane also said this
The rankings were never the sole reason smart kids went to these schools (as is evidenced by either increasing or stable
test stats at all of these schools). It was more like a bonus or nice in that an external source acknowledged what the people at these schools know to be true. If they don't agree this year, so what? Who cares.
Great...why are there three pages of posts trying to argue why the rankings are "wrong". Seems now it's "we never cared about the rankings". Maybe just stick with that.
I cared about US News back when it was primarily focused on the quality of academics at a school. I don't think it's wrong to want a ranking available so the smartest students know where they should go.
There is...it's called USNews. The top 20 schools have had the deck chairs shuffled...but they didn't go anywhere.
Nobody has ever accused Tulane or Pepperdine of attracting the "smartest students".
Not sure where you've been but these two and others mentioned do attract top students. "Smartest" isn't a concrete classification, btw.
Maybe because the kids that actually attend will freely admit they weren't the smartest kids at their school or the top kids.
Anonymous
12/20/2024 12:02
Subject: What happened to W&M, Brandeis, Tulane, Pepperdine and others..from historically T50 to outside looking in?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Everyone needs to stop blaming USNews for the rankings slide.
It stands to reason that if it was only a USNews problem, that these schools would rank highly in Forbes or WSJ or other rankings.
However, at least with Wake and Tulane, the USNews Rankings are the highest rankings...BY FAR.
Actually, Forbes ranks W&M 55 and USNews ranks it #54 (WSJ is at 178). Seems about right.
Pepperdine is #83 USNews and #125 Forbes and #145 WSJ.
Brandeis is #63 USNews, #105 Forbes and #335 WSJ
Wake is #46 USNews, #469 Forbes and #137 WSJ
Tulane is #63 USNews, #147 Forbes and #451 WSJ
US News changed their methodology with the express purpose of becoming more like Forbes and WSJ. Wake, W&M, Tulane, Brandeis were all t40-30+ for many, many years. Only after the movement to value DEI did these schools start to be ranked among schools that had always ranked much lower. It is because of methodology changes and methodology changes alone that the (made up) rankings of these schools have changed.
Produce any reputable 3rd party ranking then...if you think all rankings suck, then stop taking issue with USNews' new methodology.
None of them are because they've all switched to social mobility. Nobody wants to be the one that says that isn't important.
Considering at least Tulane and Wake are chasing the new USNews rankings...something tells me if they move back to where they were prior, folks like you will start touting them again.
No I still think they're bad rankings. Also Wake said that they have no plans to chase it multiple times.
+1 Tulane also said this
The rankings were never the sole reason smart kids went to these schools (as is evidenced by either increasing or stable
test stats at all of these schools). It was more like a bonus or nice in that an external source acknowledged what the people at these schools know to be true. If they don't agree this year, so what? Who cares.
Great...why are there three pages of posts trying to argue why the rankings are "wrong". Seems now it's "we never cared about the rankings". Maybe just stick with that.
I cared about US News back when it was primarily focused on the quality of academics at a school. I don't think it's wrong to want a ranking available so the smartest students know where they should go.
There is...it's called USNews. The top 20 schools have had the deck chairs shuffled...but they didn't go anywhere.
Nobody has ever accused Tulane or Pepperdine of attracting the "smartest students".
It doesn't matter if some schools maintained their place, they got rid of SO many factors related to undergraduate education experience, and so it's no longer a valid measure of that. Yada yada broken clock. Maybe Tulane and Pepperdine didn't but WF, W&M, BU, and BC all did and they all dropped a lot the last two years. Hell even WashU and NYU did.
Anonymous
12/20/2024 12:02
Subject: What happened to W&M, Brandeis, Tulane, Pepperdine and others..from historically T50 to outside looking in?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Everyone needs to stop blaming USNews for the rankings slide.
It stands to reason that if it was only a USNews problem, that these schools would rank highly in Forbes or WSJ or other rankings.
However, at least with Wake and Tulane, the USNews Rankings are the highest rankings...BY FAR.
Actually, Forbes ranks W&M 55 and USNews ranks it #54 (WSJ is at 178). Seems about right.
Pepperdine is #83 USNews and #125 Forbes and #145 WSJ.
Brandeis is #63 USNews, #105 Forbes and #335 WSJ
Wake is #46 USNews, #469 Forbes and #137 WSJ
Tulane is #63 USNews, #147 Forbes and #451 WSJ
US News changed their methodology with the express purpose of becoming more like Forbes and WSJ. Wake, W&M, Tulane, Brandeis were all t40-30+ for many, many years. Only after the movement to value DEI did these schools start to be ranked among schools that had always ranked much lower. It is because of methodology changes and methodology changes alone that the (made up) rankings of these schools have changed.
Produce any reputable 3rd party ranking then...if you think all rankings suck, then stop taking issue with USNews' new methodology.
None of them are because they've all switched to social mobility. Nobody wants to be the one that says that isn't important.
Considering at least Tulane and Wake are chasing the new USNews rankings...something tells me if they move back to where they were prior, folks like you will start touting them again.
No I still think they're bad rankings. Also Wake said that they have no plans to chase it multiple times.
+1 Tulane also said this
The rankings were never the sole reason smart kids went to these schools (as is evidenced by either increasing or stable
test stats at all of these schools). It was more like a bonus or nice in that an external source acknowledged what the people at these schools know to be true. If they don't agree this year, so what? Who cares.
Great...why are there three pages of posts trying to argue why the rankings are "wrong". Seems now it's "we never cared about the rankings". Maybe just stick with that.
If you care about Pell grants the new ranking are great. Now Trump has promised to do away with the Department of Education and all Pell grants. So look for radical changes in the ranks once Pell grants are gone.
Anonymous
12/20/2024 12:01
Subject: What happened to W&M, Brandeis, Tulane, Pepperdine and others..from historically T50 to outside looking in?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Everyone needs to stop blaming USNews for the rankings slide.
It stands to reason that if it was only a USNews problem, that these schools would rank highly in Forbes or WSJ or other rankings.
However, at least with Wake and Tulane, the USNews Rankings are the highest rankings...BY FAR.
Actually, Forbes ranks W&M 55 and USNews ranks it #54 (WSJ is at 178). Seems about right.
Pepperdine is #83 USNews and #125 Forbes and #145 WSJ.
Brandeis is #63 USNews, #105 Forbes and #335 WSJ
Wake is #46 USNews, #469 Forbes and #137 WSJ
Tulane is #63 USNews, #147 Forbes and #451 WSJ
US News changed their methodology with the express purpose of becoming more like Forbes and WSJ. Wake, W&M, Tulane, Brandeis were all t40-30+ for many, many years. Only after the movement to value DEI did these schools start to be ranked among schools that had always ranked much lower. It is because of methodology changes and methodology changes alone that the (made up) rankings of these schools have changed.
Produce any reputable 3rd party ranking then...if you think all rankings suck, then stop taking issue with USNews' new methodology.
None of them are because they've all switched to social mobility. Nobody wants to be the one that says that isn't important.
Considering at least Tulane and Wake are chasing the new USNews rankings...something tells me if they move back to where they were prior, folks like you will start touting them again.
Didn't both of these places release statements saying the rankings were BS, they aren't going to change, etc.??
Yes USNews ranking removed class size, % of professors teaching classes, legacy preference and endowment. They emphasized peg grants graduation rates. Its was a DEI move by USNews. Nothing changed at any of the schools.
Are you intimidated by DEI or something?
Why would I pick a school based on social mobility or the number of Pell grants when my kid is already UMC and even great grandparents attended college? Ridiculous measure of a college’s educational worth if you aren’t FGLI.
+1000000
Anonymous
12/20/2024 12:00
Subject: What happened to W&M, Brandeis, Tulane, Pepperdine and others..from historically T50 to outside looking in?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Everyone needs to stop blaming USNews for the rankings slide.
It stands to reason that if it was only a USNews problem, that these schools would rank highly in Forbes or WSJ or other rankings.
However, at least with Wake and Tulane, the USNews Rankings are the highest rankings...BY FAR.
Actually, Forbes ranks W&M 55 and USNews ranks it #54 (WSJ is at 178). Seems about right.
Pepperdine is #83 USNews and #125 Forbes and #145 WSJ.
Brandeis is #63 USNews, #105 Forbes and #335 WSJ
Wake is #46 USNews, #469 Forbes and #137 WSJ
Tulane is #63 USNews, #147 Forbes and #451 WSJ
They are all a joke.
When BYU was ranked #20 for WSJ and #36 for Forbes, all hope is lost. The UC-Merced rankings are wild, as are Cal State Stanislaus (#24 by WSJ!). Like c'mon now.
BYU's rank is inflated for sure but it isn't a dump. They have high engagement + endowment and decent test scores even though they cater to a very specific demographic.
Anonymous
12/20/2024 11:59
Subject: What happened to W&M, Brandeis, Tulane, Pepperdine and others..from historically T50 to outside looking in?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Everyone needs to stop blaming USNews for the rankings slide.
It stands to reason that if it was only a USNews problem, that these schools would rank highly in Forbes or WSJ or other rankings.
However, at least with Wake and Tulane, the USNews Rankings are the highest rankings...BY FAR.
Actually, Forbes ranks W&M 55 and USNews ranks it #54 (WSJ is at 178). Seems about right.
Pepperdine is #83 USNews and #125 Forbes and #145 WSJ.
Brandeis is #63 USNews, #105 Forbes and #335 WSJ
Wake is #46 USNews, #469 Forbes and #137 WSJ
Tulane is #63 USNews, #147 Forbes and #451 WSJ
US News changed their methodology with the express purpose of becoming more like Forbes and WSJ. Wake, W&M, Tulane, Brandeis were all t40-30+ for many, many years. Only after the movement to value DEI did these schools start to be ranked among schools that had always ranked much lower. It is because of methodology changes and methodology changes alone that the (made up) rankings of these schools have changed.
Produce any reputable 3rd party ranking then...if you think all rankings suck, then stop taking issue with USNews' new methodology.
None of them are because they've all switched to social mobility. Nobody wants to be the one that says that isn't important.
Considering at least Tulane and Wake are chasing the new USNews rankings...something tells me if they move back to where they were prior, folks like you will start touting them again.
Didn't both of these places release statements saying the rankings were BS, they aren't going to change, etc.??
Yes USNews ranking removed class size, % of professors teaching classes, legacy preference and endowment. They emphasized peg grants graduation rates. Its was a DEI move by USNews. Nothing changed at any of the schools.
Are you intimidated by DEI or something?
DP.
Intimidated? What an inappropriate use of that word.
Huh?
You must be too.
Let me guess:
White.
Male.
Anonymous
12/20/2024 11:59
Subject: What happened to W&M, Brandeis, Tulane, Pepperdine and others..from historically T50 to outside looking in?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Everyone needs to stop blaming USNews for the rankings slide.
It stands to reason that if it was only a USNews problem, that these schools would rank highly in Forbes or WSJ or other rankings.
However, at least with Wake and Tulane, the USNews Rankings are the highest rankings...BY FAR.
Actually, Forbes ranks W&M 55 and USNews ranks it #54 (WSJ is at 178). Seems about right.
Pepperdine is #83 USNews and #125 Forbes and #145 WSJ.
Brandeis is #63 USNews, #105 Forbes and #335 WSJ
Wake is #46 USNews, #469 Forbes and #137 WSJ
Tulane is #63 USNews, #147 Forbes and #451 WSJ
They are all a joke.
When BYU was ranked #20 for WSJ and #36 for Forbes, all hope is lost. The UC-Merced rankings are wild, as are Cal State Stanislaus (#24 by WSJ!). Like c'mon now.
BYU punches way above it's weight professionally. Now, could be that mormons hire mormons.
Anonymous
12/20/2024 11:59
Subject: What happened to W&M, Brandeis, Tulane, Pepperdine and others..from historically T50 to outside looking in?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Everyone needs to stop blaming USNews for the rankings slide.
It stands to reason that if it was only a USNews problem, that these schools would rank highly in Forbes or WSJ or other rankings.
However, at least with Wake and Tulane, the USNews Rankings are the highest rankings...BY FAR.
Actually, Forbes ranks W&M 55 and USNews ranks it #54 (WSJ is at 178). Seems about right.
Pepperdine is #83 USNews and #125 Forbes and #145 WSJ.
Brandeis is #63 USNews, #105 Forbes and #335 WSJ
Wake is #46 USNews, #469 Forbes and #137 WSJ
Tulane is #63 USNews, #147 Forbes and #451 WSJ
US News changed their methodology with the express purpose of becoming more like Forbes and WSJ. Wake, W&M, Tulane, Brandeis were all t40-30+ for many, many years. Only after the movement to value DEI did these schools start to be ranked among schools that had always ranked much lower. It is because of methodology changes and methodology changes alone that the (made up) rankings of these schools have changed.
Produce any reputable 3rd party ranking then...if you think all rankings suck, then stop taking issue with USNews' new methodology.
None of them are because they've all switched to social mobility. Nobody wants to be the one that says that isn't important.
Considering at least Tulane and Wake are chasing the new USNews rankings...something tells me if they move back to where they were prior, folks like you will start touting them again.
Didn't both of these places release statements saying the rankings were BS, they aren't going to change, etc.??
Yes USNews ranking removed class size, % of professors teaching classes, legacy preference and endowment. They emphasized peg grants graduation rates. Its was a DEI move by USNews. Nothing changed at any of the schools.
Are you intimidated by DEI or something?
Why would I pick a school based on social mobility or the number of Pell grants when my kid is already UMC and even great grandparents attended college? Ridiculous measure of a college’s educational worth if you aren’t FGLI.