Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does anyone else think it is weird that Hopkins is tied with Caltech?

Why not Northwestern or Duke by that same token?

I mean Hopkins has humanities and is way more well rounded than Caltech

But it is no match for Caltech at what Caltech excels at

so what? Hopkins is higher ranked than most of the other top 10 for engineering and stem. And it wildly outranks caltech at social sciences and humanities.

You want to rank the top 10 Hopkins humanities department by itself?

Anonymous wrote:I don't see the point. The top 20 never change much. They rank the schools to sell magazines.

Why else do they continue to rank them every year? So, people can see Princeton moved up to 1 or slipped to 3?

Some you all are a little obsessed with this.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ok, so they started getting it wrong at number 4 this year. Hopkins and Northwestern don’t even belong in the top 50.

Test optional Hopkins def doesn’t

You're an idiot because Hopkins already declared itself to be not test optional going forward.

https://hub.jhu.edu/2024/08/16/undergrad-admissions-standardized-test-requirement/

Duke meanwhile hasnt.

Neither has northwestern, harvard, penn, or Yale.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ok, so they started getting it wrong at number 4 this year. Hopkins and Northwestern don’t even belong in the top 50.

Test optional Hopkins def doesn’t

You're an idiot because Hopkins already declared itself to be not test optional going forward.

https://hub.jhu.edu/2024/08/16/undergrad-admissions-standardized-test-requirement/

Duke meanwhile hasnt.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are we satisfied that US news is clearly a bit more stable and based in reality of what schools are prestigious.

Well, they certainly weren't last year. They got rid of class size, the qualifications of professors, the number of years it takes students to graduate, and so on. The financial aid that private universities offered didn't matter anymore. What mattered where the number of students on federal Pell grants, which are not needed when you go to high-endowment schools that offer grants that meet all need. And so on and so forth.

So it was chaos in the US News rankings last year. Public colleges moved up by 30,40,50 places in a single year. And private colleges took a heavy hit in last years rankings. It was obvious that the editors of US News had certain biases that they wished to see expressed in their rankings.

We will see what this year's list looks like and whether the editors continue to be ridiculous. If the leaked top 10 are true, I personally am not particularly bothered by the list so far. It seems fairly reasonable. We can all quibble about CalTech. It's such an unusual school for undergrad. There's less than 250 students per year that attend, and it's all STEM. What's the point of even comparing it to larger and more comprehensive universities? But no one would dispute that it's not a terrific school with some serious students.

And I would argue that Duke is overrated. But whatever. It's the rest of the list that I'm curious about.

The bolded indicates that it is *you* who has certain biases. Those of you who felt last year's USNWR rankings was "chaos" very clearly have kids in the small, expensive privates that were demoted.

Yes, god forbid a public school outrank a private one. The horror.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ok, so they started getting it wrong at number 4 this year. Hopkins and Northwestern don’t even belong in the top 50.

Test optional Hopkins def doesn’t

Anonymous wrote:Ok, so they started getting it wrong at number 4 this year. Hopkins and Northwestern don’t even belong in the top 50.

Anonymous wrote:I find the top ten to be boring because it's always the same schools. Much more interesting to me is the top 50.

Anonymous wrote:Ok, so they started getting it wrong at number 4 this year. Hopkins and Northwestern don’t even belong in the top 50.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are we satisfied that US news is clearly a bit more stable and based in reality of what schools are prestigious.

Well, they certainly weren't last year. They got rid of class size, the qualifications of professors, the number of years it takes students to graduate, and so on. The financial aid that private universities offered didn't matter anymore. What mattered where the number of students on federal Pell grants, which are not needed when you go to high-endowment schools that offer grants that meet all need. And so on and so forth.

So it was chaos in the US News rankings last year. Public colleges moved up by 30,40,50 places in a single year. And private colleges took a heavy hit in last years rankings. It was obvious that the editors of US News had certain biases that they wished to see expressed in their rankings.

We will see what this year's list looks like and whether the editors continue to be ridiculous. If the leaked top 10 are true, I personally am not particularly bothered by the list so far. It seems fairly reasonable. We can all quibble about CalTech. It's such an unusual school for undergrad. There's less than 250 students per year that attend, and it's all STEM. What's the point of even comparing it to larger and more comprehensive universities? But no one would dispute that it's not a terrific school with some serious students.

And I would argue that Duke is overrated. But whatever. It's the rest of the list that I'm curious about.

The bolded indicates that it is *you* who has certain biases. Those of you who felt last year's USNWR rankings was "chaos" very clearly have kids in the small, expensive privates that were demoted.

Anonymous wrote:I find the top ten to be boring because it's always the same schools. Much more interesting to me is the top 50.