2007 USNEWS Rankings!

<p>Please post the rank for undergraduate engineering for schools without a PhD in engineering (rose, HMC, etc).</p>

<p>I almost hate to ask, but can someone list the rest up to the top 100?</p>

<p>Some of us might be in the lower "quadrant" :)</p>

<p>Yes would someone please print the 2nd tier! I want ammo on my friends who attended the inferior rival state school.</p>

<p>So happy for UFlorida!! We went up three spots. Does anyone know the rankings for public schools would be?</p>

<p>Can you please put the top engineering programs for undergradutes of schools with Phd?</p>

<p>"Does anyone know the rankings for public schools would be?"</p>

<p>Tied for 12th</p>

<p>It seems according to US News web site that the cover of the 2007 guide is indeed yellow. It also has the same text as the jpg released on the previous link.</p>

<p><a href="http://www.usnews.com/usnews/store/products/collegepreorder_index.htm%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.usnews.com/usnews/store/products/collegepreorder_index.htm&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>Nopoisonivy, patience is called for here. The actual results will be released very soon. I would have to agree with others that this may be a ruse (my apologies to Calidan if I’m wrong). If you look carefully, you’ll see that the OP’s image shows a cover stating that more than 1,400 colleges are reviewed. The references on the U.S. News website (see the link in the previous posting) refer to over 1,900 schools being reviewed. The difference makes it appear suspect.</p>

<p>Good observation PtonGrand200. I was wondering that also. Plus the pictures he provided were extremely blurry, unreadable. I started to think this is a fake, but I had to admit, it did seem believable at first.</p>

<p>I think it's real.</p>

<p>The text under "America's Best Colleges" is correct for the 2007 version, which differs from the 2006 version (which had only 3 lines of text, and alternating colors).</p>

<p>wasn't 2006 orange?</p>

<p>Princeton being #1 all the time is so silly</p>

<p>I don't understand these rankings. They refer to "National Universities", but are they actually ranking colleges (I know, I have read the cover)? If so, then why do they refer to Harvard "University" and Yale "University" intead of Harvard College and Yale College? The difference is ENORMOUS. If the rankings refer to entire universities, then how in the heck does Pton get ranked #1 without a Med school, Law School, or a Business school? In addition, if the rankings refer to only colleges, then how does Harvard get the number two spot? If you have visited Harvard and other top ten colleges (for comparision), you'll know what I mean.</p>

<p>I think the cover image is real, and that USNEWS is probably the one who's wrong about the "1900" number. It seems unlikely that someone would go through all the trouble photoshopping a fake cover image.</p>

<p>This is silly. Calidan's pics even the blurry ones are real. You can still make out the changed order this year the way he lists them.</p>

<p>I don't like the way they TIE the tech-ish schools, MIT Caltech Stanford together
It's almost like an attempt to specialize, homogenize, and discredit them</p>

<p>IMHO Duke should be lower, and Princeton should be below Yale, MIT, and Stanford</p>

<p>
[quote]
I don't like the way they TIE the tech-ish schools, MIT Caltech Stanford together
It's almost like an attempt to specialize, homogenize, and discredit them

[/quote]
</p>

<p>They are specialized. They should have a separate list like the LACs.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Princeton should be below Yale, MIT, and Stanford

[/quote]
</p>

<p>In terms of undergraduate education quality, no.</p>

<p>I have seen a bound stack of the 2007 US News' ranking issue and the top cover is identical to that shown in the photo posted several pagess back. </p>

<p>I can't imagine the poster would have repeatedly typed lists and answered questions with made up answers. Looks legit to me.</p>

<p>river, not sure what arguments you could give for Duke being any lower than 7th/8th, but i can explain that Princeton is higher up because it is a smaller school overall and that helps with its alumni giving and prof:student ratio - this almost always floats it near the top</p>

<p>Also, MIT and Stanford had similar objective data, I'm sure they don't are about what type of colleges they are generally percieved as</p>