Anonymous wrote:I would avoid any school in the upstate NY, PA, Ohio, Western part of New England - mainly due to weather and isolation.

Its just not worth it.

weird take

I would avoid any school in the upstate NY, PA, Ohio, Western part of New England - mainly due to weather and isolation.

Its just not worth it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In the real world, Rochester is far from being a peer to schools like USC, NYU, or BU which are highly competitive.

Parents and students don't consider Rochester as their peer, hence it ends up with 36% acceptance rate and 21% yield.
Almost 4 out of 10 people can walk in, and out those only 2 out of 10 are willing to attend.

Peerness is determined by the actual parents and students and we can easily see the result.

Actually peerless is best determined by the schools themselves and who they compare themselves too. All of the schools that you mentioned are good schools and academic peers. Differences in admissions rates can be entirely explained by location.

NOPE. It's not the magazines or schools determine peerness.
It's the paying customers(parents and students) for the products and services who determine that.
If Rochester was a peer, it would be as competitive as the other schools, but not at all.

There are hundreds of schools in the Boston, NYC, and LA area. Location helps, but only handful of them are competitive like USC, NYU, BU.

You can make excuse so much. Rocheser just couldn't overcome whatever disadvantage it has and it failed to become a peer school to those competitive schools.

Nope, it is the fact that the schools that you mentioned consider Rochester a peer in the comparison that the schools themselves provide to the govt. that let's one know who actual peers are. You might want to try working with actual facts and data from the schools themselves.

'provide to the govt'??
What do you mean?
Let me see.

Nonetheless, what parents and students consider and act matters.
Evaluations from parents and studetsn are based on actual facts, data, references, etc.
At the end, we get the actual result which shows parents and students don't consider URochester a peer.
Other schools are much competitive with way higher yield.

It has been explained to you that this isn't how it works. Just like NEU getting 100K+ applicants does not "make it a better school". It just means it's a good school in Boston, one of the best college towns around, and they have done a good job of marketing and they have no supplemental essays. But they are not ranked T40 because they are not a T40 school, despite being "very popular".

Similarly, the fact UR is in rochester (not Boston or NY or Chicago or another big exciting city) does not take away from their quality of education. Or the fact they are not D1 big sports. But it does explain why they might not have as high of yield or as many people applying.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In the real world, Rochester is far from being a peer to schools like USC, NYU, or BU which are highly competitive.

Parents and students don't consider Rochester as their peer, hence it ends up with 36% acceptance rate and 21% yield.
Almost 4 out of 10 people can walk in, and out those only 2 out of 10 are willing to attend.

Peerness is determined by the actual parents and students and we can easily see the result.

Actually peerless is best determined by the schools themselves and who they compare themselves too. All of the schools that you mentioned are good schools and academic peers. Differences in admissions rates can be entirely explained by location.

NOPE. It's not the magazines or schools determine peerness.
It's the paying customers(parents and students) for the products and services who determine that.
If Rochester was a peer, it would be as competitive as the other schools, but not at all.

There are hundreds of schools in the Boston, NYC, and LA area. Location helps, but only handful of them are competitive like USC, NYU, BU.

You can make excuse so much. Rocheser just couldn't overcome whatever disadvantage it has and it failed to become a peer school to those competitive schools.

Nope, it is the fact that the schools that you mentioned consider Rochester a peer in the comparison that the schools themselves provide to the govt. that let's one know who actual peers are. You might want to try working with actual facts and data from the schools themselves.

'provide to the govt'??
What do you mean?
Let me see.

Nonetheless, what parents and students consider and act matters.
Evaluations from parents and studetsn are based on actual facts, data, references, etc.
At the end, we get the actual result which shows parents and students don't consider URochester a peer.
Other schools are much competitive with way higher yield.

Look up IPEDS slipknot. In the end you obviously aren’t qualified to have this conversation. Your intellectual capabilities aren’t up to the challenge for this one.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In the real world, Rochester is far from being a peer to schools like USC, NYU, or BU which are highly competitive.

Parents and students don't consider Rochester as their peer, hence it ends up with 36% acceptance rate and 21% yield.
Almost 4 out of 10 people can walk in, and out those only 2 out of 10 are willing to attend.

Peerness is determined by the actual parents and students and we can easily see the result.

Actually peerless is best determined by the schools themselves and who they compare themselves too. All of the schools that you mentioned are good schools and academic peers. Differences in admissions rates can be entirely explained by location.

NOPE. It's not the magazines or schools determine peerness.
It's the paying customers(parents and students) for the products and services who determine that.
If Rochester was a peer, it would be as competitive as the other schools, but not at all.

There are hundreds of schools in the Boston, NYC, and LA area. Location helps, but only handful of them are competitive like USC, NYU, BU.

You can make excuse so much. Rocheser just couldn't overcome whatever disadvantage it has and it failed to become a peer school to those competitive schools.

Nope, it is the fact that the schools that you mentioned consider Rochester a peer in the comparison that the schools themselves provide to the govt. that let's one know who actual peers are. You might want to try working with actual facts and data from the schools themselves.

'provide to the govt'??
What do you mean?
Let me see.

Nonetheless, what parents and students consider and act matters.
Evaluations from parents and studetsn are based on actual facts, data, references, etc.
At the end, we get the actual result which shows parents and students don't consider URochester a peer.
Other schools are much competitive with way higher yield.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m not a fan of college ranking but do wonder why it’s taken quite a tumble. A few years ago it was in the high 30s (with BC). UR has gone way down (and BC held steady). While UR has been on our kids’ radar, one ended up at BC and the other at UMiami (she specifically needed sunshine).

Because the USNWR ranking criteria eliminated class sizes for one ,so many large universities leaped over many smaller universities. Yet nothing really changed.

So yeah, change the rankings criteria to things that don't matter and remove stuff that matters, and you will get new rankings. But nothing at UR, NYU, BU has changed to affect that

Could be true but, rankings aside, my kids would choose BC or UMiami over UR every time. Similar in size, BC and UMiami are closer to great cities and have D1 sports if that appeals.

I get that. Put UR in Boston and it would be much more popular. However, I don't count having D1 Sports as part of "making a school better/higher ranked" I look at academics for that. So while it will explain increased popularity for admissions, it does not "make the school a better school". Colleges are about academics.
And location and being D3 is likely a reason other similar schools have much higher yield and lower acceptance rates (more popular).

yep. goes to best fit.

yep, part of best fit for some kids, but I don't want "how good the sports programs are or if it's D1 vs D3" as part of college rankings. I as a parent care about academics, research, career center, quality of students/peers academically, is there an honors program, etc. My kid is there to get an education, but I get how some kids might not like a D3 school because they want some Rah, rah sports atmosphere.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m not a fan of college ranking but do wonder why it’s taken quite a tumble. A few years ago it was in the high 30s (with BC). UR has gone way down (and BC held steady). While UR has been on our kids’ radar, one ended up at BC and the other at UMiami (she specifically needed sunshine).

Because the USNWR ranking criteria eliminated class sizes for one ,so many large universities leaped over many smaller universities. Yet nothing really changed.

So yeah, change the rankings criteria to things that don't matter and remove stuff that matters, and you will get new rankings. But nothing at UR, NYU, BU has changed to affect that

Could be true but, rankings aside, my kids would choose BC or UMiami over UR every time. Similar in size, BC and UMiami are closer to great cities and have D1 sports if that appeals.

I get that. Put UR in Boston and it would be much more popular. However, I don't count having D1 Sports as part of "making a school better/higher ranked" I look at academics for that. So while it will explain increased popularity for admissions, it does not "make the school a better school". Colleges are about academics.
And location and being D3 is likely a reason other similar schools have much higher yield and lower acceptance rates (more popular).

yep. goes to best fit.

Rochester is an underachiever.

Anonymous wrote:Alumni here - I came from DC to attend and the weather was back breaking. This was years ago but it was grey for months on end and there was lake effect snow constantly.

I would never recommend it. If you seriously are considering it, fly on up in Jan/Feb and spend a few days!

Ithaca is 100x as nice in the area around Cornell, there is nothing around Rochester in walking distance.

You obviously haven't been around the campus in quite awhile. I too went there many years ago and relate to much of what you mentioned but it is out of date. Rochester was on my kids list so we visited last year. There has been a huge amount of development along Mt Hope and Elmwood so there is quite a bit more in walking distance.

Cornell was also on the list and I do love Ithaca but Rochester is much more accessible overall.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In the real world, Rochester is far from being a peer to schools like USC, NYU, or BU which are highly competitive.

Parents and students don't consider Rochester as their peer, hence it ends up with 36% acceptance rate and 21% yield.
Almost 4 out of 10 people can walk in, and out those only 2 out of 10 are willing to attend.

Peerness is determined by the actual parents and students and we can easily see the result.

Actually peerless is best determined by the schools themselves and who they compare themselves too. All of the schools that you mentioned are good schools and academic peers. Differences in admissions rates can be entirely explained by location.

NOPE. It's not the magazines or schools determine peerness.
It's the paying customers(parents and students) for the products and services who determine that.
If Rochester was a peer, it would be as competitive as the other schools, but not at all.

There are hundreds of schools in the Boston, NYC, and LA area. Location helps, but only handful of them are competitive like USC, NYU, BU.

You can make excuse so much. Rocheser just couldn't overcome whatever disadvantage it has and it failed to become a peer school to those competitive schools.

Nope, it is the fact that the schools that you mentioned consider Rochester a peer in the comparison that the schools themselves provide to the govt. that let's one know who actual peers are. You might want to try working with actual facts and data from the schools themselves.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m not a fan of college ranking but do wonder why it’s taken quite a tumble. A few years ago it was in the high 30s (with BC). UR has gone way down (and BC held steady). While UR has been on our kids’ radar, one ended up at BC and the other at UMiami (she specifically needed sunshine).

Because the USNWR ranking criteria eliminated class sizes for one ,so many large universities leaped over many smaller universities. Yet nothing really changed.

So yeah, change the rankings criteria to things that don't matter and remove stuff that matters, and you will get new rankings. But nothing at UR, NYU, BU has changed to affect that

Could be true but, rankings aside, my kids would choose BC or UMiami over UR every time. Similar in size, BC and UMiami are closer to great cities and have D1 sports if that appeals.

I get that. Put UR in Boston and it would be much more popular. However, I don't count having D1 Sports as part of "making a school better/higher ranked" I look at academics for that. So while it will explain increased popularity for admissions, it does not "make the school a better school". Colleges are about academics.
And location and being D3 is likely a reason other similar schools have much higher yield and lower acceptance rates (more popular).

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In the real world, Rochester is far from being a peer to schools like USC, NYU, or BU which are highly competitive.

Parents and students don't consider Rochester as their peer, hence it ends up with 36% acceptance rate and 21% yield.
Almost 4 out of 10 people can walk in, and out those only 2 out of 10 are willing to attend.

Peerness is determined by the actual parents and students and we can easily see the result.

Actually peerless is best determined by the schools themselves and who they compare themselves too. All of the schools that you mentioned are good schools and academic peers. Differences in admissions rates can be entirely explained by location.

Exactly! Put UR in Boston or NYC or Chicago and it would jump in popularity.

Anonymous wrote:Alumni here - I came from DC to attend and the weather was back breaking. This was years ago but it was grey for months on end and there was lake effect snow constantly.

I would never recommend it. If you seriously are considering it, fly on up in Jan/Feb and spend a few days!

Ithaca is 100x as nice in the area around Cornell, there is nothing around Rochester in walking distance.

See, we visited Cornell and my kid hated it. The area is isolated in middle of nowhere. Campus is huge. Then we drove onto Rochester and my kids loves it. Sure, the campus at UR is "almost self contained", but it's not in the middle of nowhere. Rochester is a decent sized city and has a lot to offer. Oh and the airport is only 2 miles from campus and has many flights per day to many cities.
Ithaca airport has 2 flights to JFK and 2 Flights to Newark per day. That is it.

ROC has over 40 flights departing each day (and same number of arrivals).

You don't need things within walking distance, easy to walk to College town or take the campus bus there. Also can take a bus to Eastman and land yourself in downtown Roc. But also simple to take a $10 uber ride to wherever you want to go with your friends.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m not a fan of college ranking but do wonder why it’s taken quite a tumble. A few years ago it was in the high 30s (with BC). UR has gone way down (and BC held steady). While UR has been on our kids’ radar, one ended up at BC and the other at UMiami (she specifically needed sunshine).

Because the USNWR ranking criteria eliminated class sizes for one ,so many large universities leaped over many smaller universities. Yet nothing really changed.

So yeah, change the rankings criteria to things that don't matter and remove stuff that matters, and you will get new rankings. But nothing at UR, NYU, BU has changed to affect that

Could be true but, rankings aside, my kids would choose BC or UMiami over UR every time. Similar in size, BC and UMiami are closer to great cities and have D1 sports if that appeals.

Anonymous wrote:I’m not a fan of college ranking but do wonder why it’s taken quite a tumble. A few years ago it was in the high 30s (with BC). UR has gone way down (and BC held steady). While UR has been on our kids’ radar, one ended up at BC and the other at UMiami (she specifically needed sunshine).

Because the USNWR ranking criteria eliminated class sizes for one ,so many large universities leaped over many smaller universities. Yet nothing really changed.

So yeah, change the rankings criteria to things that don't matter and remove stuff that matters, and you will get new rankings. But nothing at UR, NYU, BU has changed to affect that