Are you familiar with US News’ top 25 national universities?

<p>Are you familiar with US News’ top 25 national universities? Starting from 1983, USNews began to rank America’s best colleges on their August or September issues, with exception of 1984, 1986, and 1987. They did not explain why the rankings were not provided for those years. For the first two rankings, published in 1983 and 1985, each included a list of 10 universities (top 10). Starting from 1988, the list was expanded to 25 universities (top 25). Since its inception in 1983, the orders of top 25 schools varied year by year, which makes the annual event so exiting and dynamic. </p>

<p>To observe the dynamics of the top 25 schools, I subdivided the USNews’ rankings into three periods:</p>

<p>First periods fell between 1983 and 1989(Y1980s),
Second periods between 1990 and 1999(Y1990s), and
Third periods between 2000 and 2009(Y2000s);
And then averaged them to obtain Rank1980s, Rank1990s, and Rank2000s (see the following tables for details).</p>

<p>Summary of findings:</p>

<p>Top 5 </p>

<ol>
<li> Y1980s: YSHPChicagoDuke or SYHPDukeChicago. Yale tied with Stanford at the top; followed by Harvard and Princeton; and Chicago tied with Duke at number 5.</li>
<li> Y1990s: HYPSM or HPYSM. Harvard out-completed Yale and Stanford at the top, followed by a two-way tie of Yale and Princeton at number 2, Stanford at number 4, and MIT which rose from number 7 from Y1980s to replace Chicago and Duke at number 5.</li>
<li> Y2000s: PHYMSCalTech. Princeton out-raced Harvard at the top, followed by Harvard, Yale and MIT, and a two-way tie at number 5 between Stanford and CalTech which ranked at 14 and 7 for Y1980s and Y1990s. </li>
</ol>

<p>Top 10 </p>

<ol>
<li> Universities ranked among top10 for all three periods are: HYPSM, Duke, and Dartmouth (7 in total). </li>
<li> Universities ranked among top10 for at least once of the three periods are: HYPSM, Duke, Dartmouth, CalTech, Columbia, Chicago, Penn, Brown, and Berkeley (13 in total). </li>
</ol>

<p>Top 25 </p>

<ol>
<li> Universities ranked among top25 for all three periods are: HYPSM, Duke, Dartmouth, CalTech, Columbia, Chicago, Penn, Brown, Berkeley, Cornell, Rice, UVA, JHU, Northwestern, Notre Dame, CMU, Michigan, and Georgetown (22 in total).</li>
<li> Universities ranked among top25 for at least once of the three periods are: HYPSM, Duke, Dartmouth, CalTech, Columbia, Chicago, Penn, Brown, Berkeley, Cornell, Rice, UVA, JHU, Northwestern, Notre Dame, CMU, Michigan, Georgetown, WUSL, UNC, Emory, Vanderbilt, Wisconsin, UIUC (28 in total). </li>
</ol>

<p>Rank1980s
Universities 1983-1989
1 Yale University 2.25
1 Stanford University 2.25
3 Harvard University 2.5
4 Princeton University 3.5
5 University of Chicago 7.25
5 Duke University 7.75
7 Dartmouth College 8.25
8 Massachusetts Institute of Technology 9
9 Brown University 9.25
10 University of California at Berkeley 10.25
11 Cornell University 10.75
12 University of Michigan at Ann Arbor 12
13 Rice University 12.75
14 California Institute of Technology 13
14 University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill 13
16 Johns Hopkins University 14.75
17 Columbia University 15.5
18 University of Virginia 16.25
19 Northwestern University 16.75
19 Carnegie Mellon University 16.75
21 Georgetown University 17
22 University of Pennsylvania 18
22 University of Notre Dame 18
24 University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign 18.75
25 University of Wisconsin at Madison 20.5
26 University of California at Los Angeles 21
27 Washington University in St. Louis 22
28 College of William and Mary 23.5
29 Emory University 24.25</p>

<p>Rank1990s
Universities 1990-1999
1 Harvard University 1.4
2 Yale University 2.2
2 Princeton University 2.2
4 Stanford University 4.5
5 Massachusetts Institute of Technology 5.2
6 Duke University 5.8
7 California Institute of Technology 6.4
8 Dartmouth College 7.8
9 Columbia University 10.5
10 University of Chicago 10.9
11 Cornell University 11.5
12 Brown University 12.1
13 University of Pennsylvania 12.5
14 Northwestern University 13.7
15 Johns Hopkins University 14.5
16 Rice University 14.6
17 Emory University 18.9
18 Washington University in St. Louis 19.2
19 University of California at Berkeley 19.8
20 University of Virginia 20.3
21 Georgetown University 20.7
22 Vanderbilt University 20.9
23 University of Notre Dame 21.1
24 University of Michigan at Ann Arbor 22.4
25 Carnegie Mellon University 23
26 University of California at Los Angeles 23.8
27 University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill 24.4
28 Tufts University 24.5</p>

<p>Rank2000s
Universities 2000-2009
1 Princeton University 1.4
2 Harvard University 1.5
3 Yale University 2.8
4 Massachusetts Institute of Technology 4.5
5 California Institute of Technology 4.7
5 Stanford University 4.7
7 University of Pennsylvania 5.2
8 Duke University 6.6
9 Columbia University 9.3
10 Dartmouth College 9.6
11 University of Chicago 11.1
12 Northwestern University 12.1
13 Washington University in St. Louis 12.5
14 Cornell University 13.1
15 Johns Hopkins University 13.9
16 Brown University 15.4
17 Rice University 15.5
18 Emory University 18.3
19 University of Notre Dame 19
20 Vanderbilt University 19.2
21 University of California at Berkeley 20.5
22 Carnegie Mellon University 22.1
23 University of Virginia 22.6
24 Georgetown University 23.2
25 University of Michigan at Ann Arbor 24.9
26 University of California at Los Angeles 25.2</p>

<p>"Since its inception in 1983, the orders of top 25 schools varied year by year, which makes the annual event so exiting and dynamic. "</p>

<p>Yes, because colleges really change in a measurable way year to year.</p>

<p>USNWR early rankings were all peer assessment based. If you look at the PA score today and the early rankings, little has changed…much to the chagrin of some CC posters…</p>

<p>umm… Im sure Emory ranked 9th once… i dont think you added that. nice to see Emory has moved up in the rankings over the years.</p>

<p>I don’t put much weight on USNWR rankings. It’s heavy on peer assessment, which favors states with more schools/larger population. Just look at the UC school rankings.</p>

<p>Based on findings presented in post #1, there were five distinguished tiers (levels) among US News’ favorite national universities (top 25):</p>

<p>Tier 1 (1-5). Universities ranked among top 5 for at least twice of the three periods (see post #1 tables for details) are:</p>

<p>HYPSM (5 in total)</p>

<p>Tier 2 (6-10). Universities ranked among top 10 for at least twice of the three periods are:</p>

<p>CalTech, Chicago, Columbia, Duke, and Dartmouth (5 in total) </p>

<p>Tier 3 (11-13). Universities ranked among top 10 once for the three periods are:</p>

<p>Penn, Brown, and Berkeley (3 in total) </p>

<p>Tier 4 (14-20). Universities ranked among top 20 for at least twice of the three periods are:</p>

<p>Cornell, JHU, Northwestern, Rice, UVA, Emory, WUSL (7 in total). </p>

<p>Tier 5 (21-26). Universities ranked among top 20 once for the three periods and/or Universities ranked among top25 for all three periods are:</p>

<p>Notre Dame, CMU, Michigan, Georgetown, UNC, Vanderbilt (6 in total).</p>

<p>The college rank in the U.S is so meaningless. I fully understand that Brown students are so proud of themselves, even if their ranking is low. See an article to explain in the trend of the acceptance rate of U. Chicago, which had sent an acceptance letter to 73 percent of applicants 20 years ago. </p>

<p>[U&lt;/a&gt;. of C. sees unprecedented jump in applications - Chicago Breaking News](<a href="BREAKING 100 – Chicago Tribune)</p>

<p>It means almost everyone was accepted if one applied. How could the rank of U. Chicago was 5th in 1980 and 10th in 1990.</p>

<p>To the internationals, University of Chicago is well recognized as the better school than some other Ivies.</p>

<p>“I don’t put much weight on USNWR rankings. It’s heavy on peer assessment, which favors states with more schools/larger population. Just look at the UC school rankings.”</p>

<p>So just what makes a school great in your opinion?</p>

<p>Dynamics of Public Universities in the top 25 using Rank1980s, Rank1990s, and Rank2000s (see tables presented on post #1 for details)</p>

<ol>
<li>Y1980s: 6 in total. One in the top 10 and three in the top20</li>
</ol>

<p>Berkeley (10), Michigan (12), UNC (14), UVA (18), UIUC (24), and Wisconsin (25)</p>

<ol>
<li>Y1990s: 3 in total. Two in the top20</li>
</ol>

<p>Berkeley (19), UVA (20), and Michigan (24)</p>

<ol>
<li>Y2000s: 3 in total. None in the top20 </li>
</ol>

<p>Berkeley (21), UVA (23), and Michigan (25)</p>

<p>As I mentioned in post # 1, for easier observations of the dynamics of the top 25 schools, I subdivided the USNews’ rankings into three periods:</p>

<p>First periods fell between 1983 and 1989(Y1980s),
Second periods between 1990 and 1999(Y1990s), and
Third periods between 2000 and 2009(Y2000s);
And then averaged them to obtain Rank1980s, Rank1990s, and Rank2000s (see tables presented on post #1 for details).</p>

<p>By doing so, we may lose the excitements of the following:</p>

<p>Who was Number 1?</p>

<p>Number 1 races between Stanford (83-88) and Yale (89-90, 97, and 99), which were later replaced by the two finest academic powerhouses: Harvard (91-99 except for 97, the year of Yale’s first resurgence) in the Y1999s and Princeton (2001-2009 except for 2008) in the Y2000s. It was a tie race between Princeton and Harvard in the Y2000s. They share top spot four times (2004-2006 and 2009) in the Y2000s. Other worth mentioned is CalTech’s one year wonder (Number 1 in the year of 2000)</p>

<p>What happened in Top 5?</p>

<p>HYPSM
Since US News College Rankings’ inception in 1983, HYP never dropped out of top 5 and their lowest individual ranking was at Number 4. Stanford and MIT dropped out of top 5 six times and 7 times and their lowest individual rankings were Number 6 and Number 11.</p>

<p>Duke and Penn
Duke’s two consecutive years of top 4 breakthroughs for 97and 98, and 4-straight-year of top5 appearances from 2003 to 2006. Its best ranking was Number 3 in 98.
Penn’s six top 5 appearances in 8 years between 2002 and 2009.</p>

<p>thanks for all the trivia (: interesting stuff.</p>

<p>

Are you joking? If you have been a member of CC for more than 10 minutes you should realize that there are a large group of ranking-obsessed people and ranking-hating people. I fall into the latter for two simple reasons: 1) USNWR titles it America’s “Best” Colleges, and that term is non-quantifiable. The parameters are arbitrary, are subject to manipulation by the schools themselves (as has been documented ad nauseum), and 2) where you choose to go to school is a very individual decision. Harvard isn’t “best” for you if you can’t keep up with the other students, if you prefer a warmer climate, if you like major sports as part of your college experience, if you want classes taught only by profs at a school where the undergraduates aren’t considered an annoyance by a lot of the faculty, etc. I know that sounds like I am beating up on Harvard, but actually I am not. Harvard is absolutely the best for a huge number of people that go there and that would like to go there.</p>

<p>My point is this isn’t the NFL or something where we play it out on the field to determine who is “best”. Universities are extremely complex, dynamic places where quite often young people make the biggest transition of their lives in terms of becoming mature adults. The focus on rankings is a highly unfortunate, money-making scheme devised by a USNWR worker who didn’t even develop it ab initio based on principles, but instead has admitted he fudged parameters until he got the results the came out the way he thought they should.</p>

<p>Now if you want to rank most selective colleges, you can do that. If you want to rank most highly thought of by the general public, you can survey and probably get an accurate result in the sense of truly finding out what the general population thinks, although the results would be hysterical. You can do lots of things that tell you something about a college. But to focus on the USNWR rankings as being anything more than what they are is a real mistake and waste of time, IMHO.</p>

<p>What I want to know is why people insist upon writing those long acronyms like “HYPSM” or whatever. Why not just write out the name of the schol like you do with every other school?</p>

<p>In any event, the annual “event” of U.S. News is not really that exciting, or is the list dynamic. From year to year, the absolute pisitions might change, but the general positions are predictably boring. Yale, Harvard, and Princeton have been in the top 3 since I can remember reading the thing, and from this post it looks like that’s been the case since at least the early 1990s. The same schools are always near the top, in the middle, and at the bottom; only a few schools have changed significantly (like Emory being 29 once; it’s at 18 now).</p>

<p>Honestly, U.S. News has a vested interest in keeping the schools that they ranked at the top in the 1980s at the same place now, in the 2000s and 2010s. It’s more of a confirmatory report (confirming what everyone already “knew” about the relative quality of universities) than a relevatory report (actually imparting new information). Nobody is surprised when Princeton, Yale, or Harvard ranks in those top 3-5, closely followed by the rest of the Ivy League, Duke, Stanford, MIT, and the rest of the usual suspects.</p>

<p>Agreed juillet. But as far as the HYPSM, it denotes a category of school. Could just as easily say “USNWR top 5” or whatever. Just a way of saying highest ranked and most well known, rather than writing that out every time. After all, people don’t always write out the names of schools either. Very few write Massachusetts Institute of Technology instead of MIT. Could say the same for UCLA, Cal Tech, etc. etc.</p>

<p>

Fixed for accuracy.</p>

<p>Top 25 did vary year by year. So far, I don’t observe any repetitions or duplications of Top 25 rankings but similarities should be expected if same methodology utilized. I guess that is one of the reasons why we see many modifications in methodology to make their rankings not so predictable (boring) which help magazine selling. </p>

<p>USNews did sell a great number of copies on their annual College Rankings Issues, which implied or indicated that people “need” these rankings whether they agree or disagree with USNews results, according to “Supply and Demand” theory. There are no perfect methods or models to quantify true values of quality of education. USNews rankings were derived from survey data and simple empirical formula, with exception of few earlier issues e.g., 83 and 85. I guess they did great jobs in defending their results, convincing the readers based on contemporary data collected and selling their ideas which was reflected in good magazine selling. Like many CCers, as alumni of one (or multiple) of the top 25 national universities, we always wonder if our Alma meters could improve in their academic quality as years go-by and USNews rankings is one of the references that serve such need (purpose).</p>

<p>Well, if your “Alma meter” taught you that level of logic and economic theory, I suggest you demand a refund. First get a dictionary, then get an economic history book and look up the Tulip Crisis. Or maybe Pet Rocks is a closer analogy. I rather doubt anyone “needed” a pet rock, other than as some silly psychological salve. I would suggest the USNWR rankings serve approximately the same purpose. But at least pet rocks were harmless other than parting with a few bucks. People (read obsessed parents and students) often take the USNWR rankings as some kind of measure of success and failure, losing sight of reality very quickly. There have been numerous family rifts, feelings of profound failure, and other harms caused by this toxic sham of theirs.</p>

<p>As far as repititions and duplications, moving up or down a slot or two hardly represents a real change. More like statistical variance within a range. They could do this every five years and get mostly the same results, but given the pace of changes at universities (excepting a natural disaster like Katrina), doing it every year is piling absurd on top of ridiculous.</p>

<p>

Geez, fallenchemist. Next you’ll be saying we don’t need horoscopes. Blasphemy!</p>

<p>Quoted from UCBerkeleyChemEGrad
“USNWR early rankings were all peer assessment based. If you look at the PA score today and the early rankings, little has changed…much to the chagrin of some CC posters…”</p>

<p>Good point. I believe USNWR’s first two rankings, top 10 rankings published in 1983 and 1985, should be peer assessment based. Starting from 1988, the list was expanded to 25 universities (top 25). The 10 universities listed on 1985 received similar rankings on 1988 which appeared also derived from peer assessment survey. In 1989, USNWR introduced new empirical formula, which weighed in other important academic criteria e.g., faulty resources, acceptance rate, class size, etc. and eventually resulted in one of its biggest changes to the order of top 25. Such adjustment had profound impact on top 25 and top 25 had never been the same ever since. The following are summary (stories) from my observations before, on, and after 1989:</p>

<p>Overall trend 1: rising of Non-HYP ivies versus falling of big name public universities:</p>

<p>Before 1989: Dartmouth leading Non-HYP ivies evenly matched with Berkeley leading big name public universities</p>

<p>Dartmouth (6-10), Brown (7-13), Cornell (8-14), Columbia (8-18), Penn (15-19)
Berkeley (5-7), Michigan (7-8), UNC (9-11), UVA (15), UIUC (8-20), Wisconsin (13-23), UTAustin (25)</p>

<p>On 1989: Dartmouth leading Non-HYP ivies outraced all big name public universities lead by UVA </p>

<p>Dartmouth (7), Columbia (8), Brown (13), Cornell (14), Penn (15)
UVA (20), UCLA (21), UNC (23), Berkeley (24), Michigan (25), UIUC (N/R), Wisconsin (N/R) , UTAustin (N/R)</p>

<p>In the 1990s: Dartmouth leading Non-HYP ivies out-completed Berkeley/UVA leading big name public universities</p>

<p>Dartmouth (7-10), Cornell (6-15), Columbia (8-15), Brown (8-18), Penn (6-20)
UVA (17-22), Berkeley (13-27), Michigan (17-25), UCLA (16-28), UNC (18-27), UIUC (40+), Wisconsin (30+) , UTAustin (40+)</p>

<p>In the 2000s: Penn leading Non-HYP ivies outraced all big name public universities lead by Berkeley </p>

<p>Penn (4-7), Columbia (8-11), Dartmouth (9-11), Cornell (10-15), Brown (13-17)
Berkeley (20-21), UVA (20-24), Michigan (22-27), UCLA (24-26), UNC (25-30), UIUC (30±40+), Wisconsin (30+) , UTAustin (40+)</p>