2007 USNEWS Rankings!

College Search & Selection
381

<p>TourGuide446, Amherst lowers their standards the most for lacrosse and football players, they have lower stats (1200-1250 SATs) than the URMs. </p>

<p>Tourguide, why so judgemental if the girl wants to go to Spelman over Amherst? Spelman is a great school, you don't what the circumstances were ,whether there was a reward, whether she wanted an all-girl school. But to turn it around into some AA arguement is bullheaded.</p>

<p>In my new class, I haven't met one URM that seemed anywhere near as much as an undeserving airhead than as all of these lacrosse and football player, guzzling beer on facebook w/ a group stating "I only got into Amherst because I'm an athlete." and "I am not worthy". </p>

<p>But really, me complaining about why those kids are her, the partiers at Amherst that strattle a C average while drinking down at the social dorms...
that is about as rediculous as those who complain about why are thsoe URMs here that <em>MAY HAVE</em> scored 50 points less than me on the SATs.</p>

<p>Really, those few people do not bring dow the intellectual environment of the school, they actually just add mor eto your college experience. If I or you don't want to deal with that, then pick another institution is the answer, b/c that's what admissions wnated and it's their school, honestly. That's why I don't complain about my 1210 SAT lacrosse playing roommate, as much as I could.</p>

382

<p>I can't believe berkeley has higher selectivity than cornell</p>

383

<p>I asked this before, and was completely ignored...is it because I didn't ask about an IVY, a UC, or engineering programs? I have no means of buying a copy of this thing for myself...</p>

<p>Can somebody post the stats for Emory and UNC-CH, including the SAT percentiles, selectivity rank, acceptance rate, and % of students in top 10%?</p>

<p>Thank you so much in advance.</p>

384

<p>If you don't have the means to buy a $7 magazine, how will you manage to afford a college education at a school like UNC or Emory?</p>

<p>At any rate, here's the answer to your question:</p>

<p>EMORY
Mid 50% SAT range: 1300-1470
Aceeptance Rate: 37%
% graduating in the top 10%: 90%
Selectivity rank: 15</p>

<p>UNC-Chapel Hill
Mid 50% SAT range: 1210-1390
Aceeptance Rate: 37%
% graduating in the top 10%: 74%
Selectiviy rank: 35</p>

<p>Keep in mind that those figures are the ones listed in the latest USNWR, which means they are one year old. Also remember that UNC is much tougher to get into for out of staters.</p>

385

<p>you got it, buy the magazine at a bookstore or order it online!</p>

386

<p>
[quote]
I can't believe berkeley has higher selectivity than cornell

[/quote]
</p>

<p>If you are an out of state applicant, Berkeley is quite difficult to get into.</p>

387

<p>kk, I like your view that AA is for the college, not to aid the URMs. So like the Dean of Faculty at Amherst sends a stinging email to the Dean of Admissions saying, "How do you expect my professors to teach physics and French when the classes have only whites, Chinese, Vietnamese, Cambodians, Sri Lankans, Koreans, Indians, Pakistanis, Iranians, Arabs, Jews, and a bunch of foreigners?"</p>

<p>I've told this tale on cc several times, but it warrants repeating as it reminds me of the Amherst situation. When I was an officer in the Navy, we'd get these letters that invited good URM sailors to apply for a special program where they would go through a year of prep school, and then on to the Naval Academy or an NROTC program. We would hand-deliver these letters, and talk one-on-one to the sailors, encouraging them and telling them all the advantages of getting a free college education and becoming an officer. I never saw anybody accept the invitation. And this was at a time when there were frequent articles in the papers with headlines like "Navy Under Fire for Lack of Minority Officers."</p>

388

<p>All your anecdotes (like always) are interesting, but I do not see what they have to do with much of anything.</p>

389

<p>There is a problem. Social engineers come up with plans to resolve the problem. They bend this, tweek that, lower this, raise that, start this reach-out program, establish that special assistant to the boss to oversee the rectification of the problem. But all of that is worthless if the people they are trying to help decline the opportunities. So the question is: if people are declining resonable opportunities, can you still blame the organization if the problem fails to get resolved?</p>

390

<p>Why should it be held against her if she turned down one school for another despite what you say she should have done? And why do you use this girl's situation as a universal or across the board representation of URMs. This a girl that choose Spelman over Amherst, One (1) girl. Put it to rest.</p>

391

<p>“But all of that is worthless if the people they are trying to help decline the opportunities. So the question is: if people are declining resonable opportunities, can you still blame the organization if the problem fails to get resolved?”</p>

<p>While I understand where you’re going, there is one big flaw in the reasoning. That statement lends to the assumption that all URM students who are admitted to school X (school X being “elite”) should or even must attend the school for the AA program to be effective, when in actuality it is the ability to make the choice of whether or not to attend said school that is key. </p>

<p>To say that anyone is declining “reasonable” opportunities turns a blind eye to all outside factors of college admissions. If a person chooses not to attend school X over school Y (a less-prestigious school), that person is not necessarily making an “unreasonable” decision. There are several outlying factors like opportunity cost, financial aid, region, grading system, etc that play into the final matriculation decision of a student. </p>

<p>The problem (from an applicant’s point of view) is a lack of access to schools, not a lack of representation in said schools. Representation and diversity is a function of AA about which schools tend to care, whereas the ability to be admitted to said institutions is a function of the applicant. </p>

<p>There is a problem in America with citizens not utilizing their right to vote, however, once one studies voting and voting patterns he sees that while it is “reasonable” for one person to vote in a given situation, for another it may be in fact harmful. While that may be a deep structural problem, few are advocating that those who do not vote loose their right to do so. The same goes with AA college admissions; just because some choose not to attend to a school that has admitted them, does not mean that the framework for the program is broken.</p>

392

<p>Calidan, engineering rank for Worcester Polytechnic, please</p>

393

<p>would it be possible to give the numbers for Colby College please?</p>

<p>thanks!</p>

394

<p>KK, I'm not saying that URMs MUST attend an elite school they get admitted to. I'm suggesting that when we get to a point where such admissions aren't a big enough deal to take advantage of, then is it possible that maybe AA isn't needed any more?</p>

<p>Just because a person declines a reasonable opportunity, it doesn't necessarily mean he/she is opting for an "unreasonable" path. There can be more than one reasonable path. And if the opportinity comes with heavy burdens or oppressive conditions (like if the sailors opting for the officer program were were required to make a 20-year commitment to the Navy, for example), then they would have an opportunity, but not what I'd call a "reasonable" opportunity. My point here was that the opportunities offered to the sailors, and to this student accepted by Notre Dame and Amherst, seemed to be good ones...not opportunities that had all sorts of strings attached.</p>

<p>To sum up, I'm suggesting (not demanding or claiming) 2 small points:</p>

<ol>
<li><p>When judging an organizations efforts to offer AA, maybe they should be judged on whether or not they gave good-faith opportunities to URMs, not the RESULTS of those opportunities. If Amherst accepted, say, 100 URMs, and none of them choose to enroll, its AA efforts would be blasted, (which I think is wrong). That's why elite New England LACs like Williams and Middlebury often accept more than 50% of URMs...they are focused on the results, not the opportunities. </p>

<ol>
<li>Some day we are going to reach a point when AA becomes obsolete...when URMs are going to have opportunities without the benefit of AA that are as good as or better than those they get with AA. What will things look like when we get to that point? I'm suggesting that what things will look like at that point is people will be brushing aside golden opportunies like Amherst and ND to go to places they didn't need AA to get into.</li>
</ol></li>
</ol>

395

<p>CollegeBound2007: WPI is #60 in Engineering.</p>

396

<p>werd814: Colby is ranked 20 in the best LAC's
Peer assessment score: 4.0
Selectivity rank: 20
SAT 25th-75thpercentile: 1280-1430
Acceptance rate: 38%</p>

397

<p>Villanova is 1st in its region for master's, this is the only area that USNews will rank Villanova, it does not consider Villanova on is overall list. Also please note, 2005 data was used for this servey so its not very accurate to begin with.</p>

398

<p>whats the undergrad engineering ranking ???? please</p>

<p>where is UT austin</p>

399

<p>
[quote]
I'm suggesting that when we get to a point where such admissions aren't a big enough deal to take advantage of, then is it possible that maybe AA isn't needed any more?

[/quote]
</p>

<p>-I don’t see how one can determine how big a deal an admission offer is to someone. That decision falls solely to the applicant. In this instance, the applicant did not choose the school where she seemingly was helped by affirmative action; this does not mean, however, that the program is in any not needed.</p>

<p>The choice to attend a school depends largely on a person’s opportunity costs of doing so. Again, I liken this to the American voting system. If a person choose not to vote, to an outsider this could seem like an unwillingness to participate in his civic duty, but to another it could depend on something as simple as not wanting to walk to a polling station. Does the fact that some choose not to vote mean that the American voting system should be abolished? Of course not. </p>

<p>
[quote]
My point here was that the opportunities offered to the sailors, and to this student accepted by Notre Dame and Amherst, seemed to be good ones...not opportunities that had all sorts of strings attached.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>-Again, unless you are that applicant it is impossible to know if the opportunities are “good” or not. The very same statement could be made for the school to which she did choose to matriculate. It is a huge assumption to assert that Amherst and ND provided opportunities that were in any way better than the school which she chose to attend. </p>

<p>
[quote]
That's why elite New England LACs like Williams and Middlebury often accept more than 50% of URMs...they are focused on the results, not the opportunities.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>-This is exactly what I said. Diversity or “results” is a function of AA about which schools tend to care and not applicants. Applicants want opportunities to be accepted to schools, and schools want greater diversity. </p>

<p>
[quote]
Some day we are going to reach a point when AA becomes obsolete...when URMs are going to have opportunities without the benefit of AA that are as good as or better than those they get with AA.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>-Unless the population of the country becomes nearly equal across the board, this is highly unlikely. Those in power or the “majority” tend to want to consolidate and maintain their power and social standing for as long as possible. It is only when outside factors like AA begin to engineer society do changes occur. The only way AA can and shall become obsolete is if all colleges reach the equilibrium of diversity they are seeking. However, even if this does happens (which it is highly unlikely that it shall), population and economic trends tell us that it is unlikely that said equilibrium would last for very long.</p>

400

<p>Go UChiacgo!!</p>