Anonymous
12/20/2024 12:25
Subject: What happened to W&M, Brandeis, Tulane, Pepperdine and others..from historically T50 to outside looking in?
Anonymous wrote:UC Merced=UMichigan, Purdue, Wisconsin, UVA, William and Mary, VA Tech
According to US News.
With a 1080 SAT, 90% acceptance rate, and 9% yield.
Yeah this is ridiculous.
Anonymous
12/20/2024 12:24
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: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.
Source?
78% of students accepted to Tulane University were in the top 25% of their high school class, and 51% were in the top decile.
Tulane University is extremely selective, with an acceptance rate of around 15%:
https://www.collegetransitions.com/blog/how-to-get-into-tulane/#:~:text=What%20class%20rank%20do%20you,were%20in%20the%20top%20decile.
Acceptance rate
The average acceptance rate is 12.9%, but it decreased to 9.7% for the class of 2025.
https://www.turito.com/blog/college-guide/tulane-acceptance-rate#:~:text=of%20national%20universities.-,Tulane%20Acceptance%20Rate,take%20admitted%20to%20the%20school.
Early acceptance rate
The early acceptance rate is 16.8%
. https://www.usnews.com/best-colleges/tulane-university-2029/applying#:~:text=Tulane%20University%20admissions%20has%20an,score%20of%2031%20and%2033.
Test scores
Half of admitted applicants with test scores have an SAT score between 1390 and 1510 or an ACT score of 31 and 33.
https://www.collegetransitions.com/blog/how-to-get-into-tulane/#:~:text=What%20class%20rank%20do%20you,were%20in%20the%20top%20decile.
GPA
The average GPA requirement in previous years was estimated at 3.5 on a scale of 4.0.
https://www.turito.com/blog/college-guide/tulane-acceptance-rate
Tulane considers test scores to be "very important" to admissions decisions. They super score both the SAT and ACT, considering the highest section scores and ACT score reports from all test dates
https://blog.collegevine.com/what-does-it-take-to-get-into-tulane-university#:~:text=2.,More%20ACT%20Info%20and%20Tips
I really do not understand grown adults trying to scare another parent because of their kids choice of a school. There are some very petty losers on this board.
Seems like overhyped meh. No different than Colby. Overselect for higher stats to cover their mediocrity, and even then a 3.6/1400 with enough money can waltz in.
Anonymous
12/20/2024 12:24
Subject: What happened to W&M, Brandeis, Tulane, Pepperdine and others..from historically T50 to outside looking in?
Anonymous wrote:
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.
It’s not a dump but it sure as heck is not a T20-T40! I’m not DCUM and live in a big LDS area, LDS hires and marries LDS. Many LDS in our area are affluent, with money to pay for tutors, donate to the school, etc.
Side note: I think half of undergrads are married by graduation.
Not a T20-T40 in anyone’s book except LDS. It’s just not.
Anonymous
12/20/2024 12:23
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: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.
lol Tulane, Pepperdine, BU and BC compete for the same students. W&M is a state school behind UVa and Vtech. WF is below all of these.
UVA: 1470 (59% submitting scores)
W&M: 1470 (59% submitting scores)
WF: 1450 (48% submitting scores)
Tulane: 1450 (45% submitting scores)
BU: 1450 (40% submitting scores)
BC: 1470 (50% submitting scores)
Pepperdine: 1360 (21% submitting scores)
VT: 1360 (48% submitting scores)
Just to give a full picture....
The top schools on this list (except for UVA because of its size) are undoubtedly peer institutions. What are you talking about?
No clue what's going on at Pepperdine.
All the percentages are overstated of kids reporting. You are simply adding the SAT + ACT...but if you look at test-required schools like MIT, adding those two will get you to nearly 110%.
Okay...so what? You want me to subtract 4% from each which would leave everything functionally identical???
"Overstated of" is not a correct construction.
Anonymous
12/20/2024 12:21
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: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.
Source?
78% of students accepted to Tulane University were in the top 25% of their high school class, and 51% were in the top decile.
Tulane University is extremely selective, with an acceptance rate of around 15%:
https://www.collegetransitions.com/blog/how-to-get-into-tulane/#:~:text=What%20class%20rank%20do%20you,were%20in%20the%20top%20decile.
Acceptance rate
The average acceptance rate is 12.9%, but it decreased to 9.7% for the class of 2025.
https://www.turito.com/blog/college-guide/tulane-acceptance-rate#:~:text=of%20national%20universities.-,Tulane%20Acceptance%20Rate,take%20admitted%20to%20the%20school.
Early acceptance rate
The early acceptance rate is 16.8%
. https://www.usnews.com/best-colleges/tulane-university-2029/applying#:~:text=Tulane%20University%20admissions%20has%20an,score%20of%2031%20and%2033.
Test scores
Half of admitted applicants with test scores have an SAT score between 1390 and 1510 or an ACT score of 31 and 33.
https://www.collegetransitions.com/blog/how-to-get-into-tulane/#:~:text=What%20class%20rank%20do%20you,were%20in%20the%20top%20decile.
GPA
The average GPA requirement in previous years was estimated at 3.5 on a scale of 4.0.
https://www.turito.com/blog/college-guide/tulane-acceptance-rate
Tulane considers test scores to be "very important" to admissions decisions. They super score both the SAT and ACT, considering the highest section scores and ACT score reports from all test dates
https://blog.collegevine.com/what-does-it-take-to-get-into-tulane-university#:~:text=2.,More%20ACT%20Info%20and%20Tips
I really do not understand grown adults trying to scare another parent because of their kids choice of a school. There are some very petty losers on this board.
Anonymous
12/20/2024 12:21
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".
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.
lol Tulane, Pepperdine, BU and BC compete for the same students. W&M is a state school behind UVa and Vtech. WF is below all of these.
UVA: 1470 (59% submitting scores)
W&M: 1470 (59% submitting scores)
WF: 1450 (48% submitting scores)
Tulane: 1450 (45% submitting scores)
BU: 1450 (40% submitting scores)
BC: 1470 (50% submitting scores)
Pepperdine: 1360 (21% submitting scores)
VT: 1360 (48% submitting scores)
Just to give a full picture....
The top schools on this list (except for UVA because of its size) are undoubtedly peer institutions. What are you talking about?
No clue what's going on at Pepperdine.
All the percentages are overstated of kids reporting. You are simply adding the SAT + ACT...but if you look at test-required schools like MIT, adding those two will get you to nearly 110%.
Anonymous
12/20/2024 12:19
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".
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.
lol Tulane, Pepperdine, BU and BC compete for the same students. W&M is a state school behind UVa and Vtech. WF is below all of these.
UVA: 1470 (59% submitting scores)
W&M: 1470 (59% submitting scores)
WF: 1450 (48% submitting scores)
Tulane: 1450 (45% submitting scores)
BU: 1450 (40% submitting scores)
BC: 1470 (50% submitting scores)
Pepperdine: 1360 (21% submitting scores)
VT: 1360 (48% submitting scores)
Just to give a full picture....
The top schools on this list (except for UVA because of its size) are undoubtedly peer institutions. What are you talking about?
No clue what's going on at Pepperdine.
Anonymous
12/20/2024 12:16
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".
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.
lol Tulane, Pepperdine, BU and BC compete for the same students. W&M is a state school behind UVa and Vtech. WF is below all of these.
Again W&M was literally never behind VTech until the ranking changes. You're making my point for me.
Anonymous
12/20/2024 12:15
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: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.
Source?
Go look at the latest CDS. Tulane SAT range is 1400 - 1490 with only around 40% reporting. 50% outside the top 10% of the class and 22% outside the top 25% (which is very high compared to any top school...Vanderbilt has only 10% outside the top 10% and 5% outside the top 25%).
Pepperdine CDS has only 20% reporting with an SAT range of 1250-1440. They don't report the class rank metrics.
Anonymous
12/20/2024 12:15
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: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.
These aren't the only schools that dropped in the rankings
Anonymous
12/20/2024 12:14
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:US News changed it’s rankings formula in a way that adversely affected these schools.
Pepperdine, unlike the others, really deserves the slide down. They really have not innovated with the times and still signal “white wealthy students at a very expensive school.” I understand they have obligations as a Christian institution, but they seem to be slacking under that title.
If the education is the same then they don't deserve the slide down.
They really do. Most colleges at the top have significantly improved their education and their academic offerings the past few years. What has Pepperdine done? Conservative principles are fine, but you need to progress your education.
Right. They should have added dozens of DEI-related offices with a few hundred people organizing drag shows & designing rainbow lanyards.
I mean…they have added dei offices and do the same thing but with Christian programming. It’s really not that much better.
Anonymous
12/20/2024 12:14
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".
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.
lol Tulane, Pepperdine, BU and BC compete for the same students. W&M is a state school behind UVa and Vtech. WF is below all of these.
Nonsense. BU and BC are not competing for Pepperdine and Tulane students. Nor is Wake Forest below Pepperdine and Tulane.
Anonymous
12/20/2024 12:12
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".
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.
lol Tulane, Pepperdine, BU and BC compete for the same students. W&M is a state school behind UVa and Vtech. WF is below all of these.
UVA: 1470 (59% submitting scores)
W&M: 1470 (59% submitting scores)
WF: 1450 (48% submitting scores)
VT: 1360 (48% submitting scores)
Try again.
Anonymous
12/20/2024 12:10
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".
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.
lol Tulane, Pepperdine, BU and BC compete for the same students. W&M is a state school behind UVa and Vtech. WF is below all of these.
Anonymous
12/20/2024 12:08
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: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.
Source?