<p>yeah i did… why you ask : )</p>
<p>just too show our little friend here that Rside is a great school and ppl pick it over top tier UCs</p>
<p>not from riverside, but just to add to skate8975 and jason2009, i know quite a few people who chose davis and santacruz over UCLA and UCB.</p>
<p>I think for this year’s ranking, the UCs will remain generally the same though next year I can see all UC’s getting hit hard badly if faculty hiring continues to freeze/slow down, professor to class ratio rising, retention going down (higher tuition, taking longer time to graduate due to classes cut or over-capacity), endowment not able to maintain or compete with other peer universities, faculty members being on forced furloughs and pay cuts (this affects the Faculty Resources rank heavily). All these I mentioned do influence USNWR’s rankings based on their methodology. </p>
<p>The only bright spot I see is the UC’s scoring higher in Selectivity while being constant in Peer Assessment unless some department really screw themselves such that it shames their respective university.</p>
<p>From the way I see it, the financial crisis will affect the rankings of the UC’s either this year or next year. </p>
<p>UCB and UCLA will probably jump up the rankings a bit since they were the least affected and have raised the standards for getting in this year. </p>
<p>UCSD, UCI, UCD, and UCSB I’m afraid may be affected and possibly dropped in the rankings or not changed at all. HermanLiu may be right about UCI breaking out of that threesome of I/D/SB but it won’t jump too far…</p>
<p>UCSC is very unpredictable, UCR may stay the same and UCM will still not show up in the rankings.</p>
<p>All in all… who gives a flying **** about all this anyway… it changes every year and they haven’t really switched the order within the UC system itself in years.</p>
<p>Sorry, but when it’s a numbers game, anything can be manipulated. Just ask Clemson how they do it. </p>
<p>And no, other statistics are not facts! As long as we are dealing with numbers, anything can be manipulated.</p>
<p>Well, if you’d like to believe this guy:</p>
<p><a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/college-search-selection/767046-2010-usnews-top-national-universities-official.html[/url]”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/college-search-selection/767046-2010-usnews-top-national-universities-official.html</a></p>
<p>21: Berkeley (same)
24: UCLA (+1)
35: UCSD (same)
42: UC Davis (+2)
42: UCSB (+2)
46: UCI (-2)</p>
<p>It would be nice if that guy was telling the truth… would mean UCSC is up ~25 spots this year.</p>
<p>He has a lot of posts on CC so it doesn’t look like the typical posts before him with new members posting rankings. UCSC has had some wild swings before (going way down last year) so I’d say that’s pretty believable. That means the top publics looks like this now:</p>
<p>(I did this quickly so I might be off)</p>
<ol>
<li>Berkeley</li>
<li>UCLA</li>
<li>UVA</li>
<li>Michigan </li>
<li>UNC </li>
<li>William and Mary </li>
<li>Georgia Tech </li>
<li>UCSD </li>
<li>U of Illnois- Urbana-Champaign</li>
<li>Wisconsin-Madison </li>
<li>UC-Davis</li>
<li>UC-Santa Barbara</li>
<li>Washington</li>
<li>UC-Irvine</li>
<li>Penn State</li>
<li>University of Florida</li>
<li>Texas-Austin</li>
</ol>
<p>The rankings are a real money-maker for USN&WR but their criteria for basing the rankings is seriously flawed and is the reason 100+ college/university presidents have signed a petition against participation in these publications. I have a problem with them including endowment into the equation - which automatically gives and edge to the top tier ivies.</p>
<p>*I have a problem with them including endowment into the equation - which automatically gives and edge to the top tier ivies. *</p>
<p>Actually they don’t. Here’s how it is ranked:</p>
<p>Peer Assessment: 25%
Student Selectivity: 15%
Faculty Resources: 20%
Graduation & Retention Rate: 20%
Financial Resources (Expenditures per student): 10%
Alumni Giving: 5%
Graduate Rate Performance: 5%</p>
<p>See here for more details:</p>
<p>[Undergraduate</a> Ranking Criteria and Weights - US News and World Report](<a href=“http://www.usnews.com/articles/education/best-colleges/2008/08/21/undergraduate-ranking-criteria-and-weights.html?PageNr=1]Undergraduate”>http://www.usnews.com/articles/education/best-colleges/2008/08/21/undergraduate-ranking-criteria-and-weights.html?PageNr=1)</p>
<p>It’s no secret that the UC’s, especially those not Cal/UCLA, get royaly screwed by some of the criteria in these rankings. Privates as a whole have more money to fulfill all of the above components of the ranking equation. For a more valid measure, UCs should be compared against other public institutions, which they fare very well in.</p>
<p>They also really get helped by the “top 10% of high school class” rating which is pretty controversial itself too.</p>
<p>NO offense but how is Georgia Tech so highly ranked when they have a 61 % acceptance rate ?</p>
<p>Acceptance rate doesn’t mean much at all by itself. San Diego State has a lower acceptance rate than UCSD for example. They could have a small, highly qualified applicant pool, for example.</p>
<p>i sure hope that guy is legit :] im an aggie XD, +2 may not be much, but at least is something! I was hoping for UCSB to get more of a boost than +2. didnt expect LA to even move.</p>
<p>it only has the top 50</p>
<p>^Someone posted up through 71</p>
<p>it seems like the guy was right :)</p>
<p>“UCR is ranked higher than UCSC (no offense banana slugs I have respect for u guys) and I extremely doubt it will pass it since UCR has the Med school, the education school, and the school of Public policy coming in the next 3 to 4 years and UCR seems to be one of the UCs to be hit the less in the cuts cause plans for the Med school r still under way”</p>
<p>Guess you can’t use your “UCR is ranked higher than UCSC” talking point anymore 
</p>
<p>I am not sure why you kept bringing this point up in defense for your school, since UCSC has been ranked above UCR ever since USNEWS started ranking colleges 16 years ago. It was bound to bounce back, and it did.</p>