<p>A word to the NYU haters: the numbers speak for themselves: At the very least NYU deserves its current spot in the rankings, if not a higher one.</p>
<p>NYU does not deserve the number of applications it recieves each year. It's not a bad school but the effect its location has on applications and yields is rediculous.</p>
<p>Why are you making excuses if you accept my premise?</p>
<p>Analogy: If a girl has big breasts, she'll attract more guys. Can she help it that she has big boobs? No. Might she have a bad personality? Possibly. However, that doesn't change the fact that she's attractive to many men. Similar to NYU's great location.</p>
<p>I'm not making a judgement call on that; but the fact remains that it's both an extremely popular school, and academically competitive.</p>
<p>Is it a coincidence alot of guys like girls with big boobs? Likewise, I'm not going to make a judgement call on that. And no, I haven't been to Scores lately, although there are plenty of them in midtown.</p>
<p>NYU receives more applications than Harvard, Yale, Stanford, MIT, or Princeton.</p>
<p>If you said it deserved a rank higher than those schools, I'd say you were wrong. People want to go to a school in NYC, and Columbia is too hard. So tens of thousands apply. Correlation does not equal causation. Jeez.</p>
<p>I could make the case that NYU deserves a higher spot (obviously not up there with Columbia), based on just the 3 categories I mentioned above...but I don't understand all these NYU haters; jealousy is a *****, isn't it?</p>
<p>Keep in mind UCLA's SAT scores are a little lower because it takes single-sitting scores instead of the composite.</p>
<p>So according to your measurement, UCLA clearly beats U Chicago in at least two of the three categories, and nearly the same in the 3rd. So it should definitely be ranked higher right? So you really believe UCLA should be ranked 8th or higher on US News. I'll seriously consider what you posted when you admit that you really think UCLA should be ranked 8th or higher on US News. Better yet, maybe you should go on the Chicago boards and tell them how their school is inferior and anyone who denounces your way of ranking is just "jealous" of UCLA students.</p>
<p>Yes, I have heard countless times how scholarly and research excellence of the faculty actually do not matter for undergraduate studies. I could never understand this argument. A university is only as good as its faculty, and the students who attend it.</p>
<p>I agree with firewalker. NYU deserves a slightly higher spot. I think it had a higher spot last year on America's Best Colleges but for some reason it went down a little this year.</p>
<p>Schools with beautiful campuses, famous sports teams, mild climates, and/or great locations get a boost in the number of applicants and therefore a boost in US News rankings because those are things a lot of 17-year-olds value as much or more than hard-core academics. For example, UVa is gorgeous and has bigtime sports and a relatively climate; Boston College has a pretty campus, good sports teams, and its campus straddles the Newton/Boston line (Newton ritzy/Boston fun); Stanford has pleasant weather, Division I sports, and a pretty campus. </p>
<p>Schools that don't have one or more of those things are hurt a bit because of those. So a fine academic schools like Chicago, Carnegie Mellon, Case Western Reserve, and Johns Hopkins are probably ranked a little low because they are in gritty cold-weather cities in not especially glamorous areas and have no famous sports teams.</p>
<p>While NYU doesn't have a balmy climate, bigtime sports, or a beautiful campus, it's nirvana for those who like fast-paced urban excitement. While it doesn't need to apologize for having big knockers, it's clear that those gozongas help attract a lot of applicants.</p>
<p>i do think it should be a bit higher
like maybe 30 ish
or some where between 25-35
but not any higher in the rankings</p>
<p>oh and tourguide...
i think u forgot, that some people apply to schools with great lookin girls...(i heard NYU has quite a few, and same about U of colorado boulder</p>
<p>The improvement in the average test scores & selectivity of the NYU student body over the years remains astounding to me. In the early '70s NYU was accepting nearly 3/4 of its applicants. Of all major universities only Washington University has upped its student profile more than NYU has.</p>
<p>It has created lots of student housing in lower Manhattan, which has made a huge difference. Manhattan itself has enjoyed a tremendous resurgence. Finance and business careers are now highly coveted, vs. virtually disparaged when I entered college.</p>
<p>NYU has top programs in the Arts (Tisch), and its undergraduate business school is highly regarded. Its graduate professional schools are great.</p>
<p>I am not a big fan of generic rankings; I think basically everyone has to do their own, based on their own personal criteria. But I would suspect that most rankings would reflect not just the quality of the entering student body, but also what that student body gets for their money. From the school itself.</p>
<p>To me, NYU still retains some flavor of its commuter-school legacy. The dorms are a huge change, but they are scattered around the Village and even down to South Street Seaport, so the students are still dispersed and less campus-focused than at most schools. The "campus" is minimal, relatively speaking. </p>
<p>When I was there (for grad) bureaucracy seemed high, as did class sizes. Hopefully these have also improved over the years.</p>
<p>Probably because of this relative lack of central experience, NYU alumni seem relatively disconnected from the school. The listings in the alumni magazine are a fraction of the size of my other alma mater's despite NYU's much larger size. </p>
<p>I suspect there are still some challenges, but it is a far more desirable school today than was formerly the case.</p>