<p>I love Brown. It’s a great school. I can’t figure out why is it ranked lower than Dartmouth and some of the others Ivy colleges??</p>
<p>open curriculum</p>
<p>A lot of it has to do with the fact that we've got less money than most of the Ivies, and since Brown cares less about test scores, we've got loser average SATs...A lot of the schools in the top 10 whore themselves(cough Duke, Penn cough) out to USNews to up their rankings, and to some extent, we're starting to as well.</p>
<p>Brown "cares about test scores" just as much as any other school, as its stats show. As SAT scores rise, the odds of admission to Brown rise geometrically. Its is also true that as the test scores rise for admits, Brown's yield rate declines. Again, this phenomenon is not untypical.</p>
<p>Of course Brown cares about its tests scores! Every good school does. </p>
<p>But Brown won't admit someone just because they have good test scores. It(/he/she? Can we assign Brown a gender?) cares about personality, intellect, enthusiasm for Brown, etc. All good schools pay attention to those qualities, but I believe Brown places a greater emphasis on them. That's why kids with SAT scores in the 1300s, even as far down as the 1000s, are admitted. Brown understands that SAT scores don't showcase ability, and Brown believes in the potential of every kid it admits. </p>
<p>If Brown were only concerned with boosting its yield, it would admit some students with scores in the low 1300s or the high 1500s, but it would mostly draw from the 1400s pool. Yet that's not the case. And, believe it or not, Byerly, there are many many kids with very high SAT scores who love Brown more than anything and would go there in a heartbeat.</p>
<p>Anyway, I believe one of the things contributing to Brown's lower (It's not low at all. Just lower than some other schools of its caliber.) US News ranking is it's "financial resources," as jnatkins pointed out. US News ranks Brown #27 for financial resources because, yes, Brown is pretty poor. But thanks to Ruth Simmons, her Plan for Academic Enrichment, and some recent alumni contributions, Brown's financial situation is improving.</p>
<p>On the other hand, Brown is ranked #4 for "graduation and retention." To me, that means that Brown students are so happy that they don't drop out or transfer out.</p>
<p>But I don't believe you can quantify colleges the way US News tries to. Brown is an amazing school, and you just can't measure amazingness. </p>
<p>So congrats on getting into Brown, joemama, and good luck with your selection! (Just don't rely too heavily on rankings to help you make your decision.)</p>
<p>Does anyone still have the URL for that US News ranking of undergraduate experience from a few years back? Dartmouth and Brown were ranked first in the country, if I remember correctly.</p>
<p>You have made the following assertion:</p>
<p>"If Brown were only concerned with boosting its yield, it would admit some students with scores in the low 1300s or the high 1500s, but it would draw mostly from the 1400s pool. Yet thats not the case,"</p>
<p>I beg to differ ... it is very much the case that Brown admits people with higher SAT scores far more readily than those with lower SAT scores, and that a majority of those enrolled (and an even LARGER majority of those admitted!) have SAT scores of 1400 or higher. This is BEYOND DISPUTE:</p>
<p><a href="http://www.asianam.org/2005.htm%5B/url%5D">http://www.asianam.org/2005.htm</a></p>
<p>There is NOTHING unique about Brown's reliance on SAT scores.</p>
<hr>
<p>Further, I find it interesting that you view Brown's #4 ranking in retention as evidence that "Brown students are so happy that they don't drop out or transfer out."</p>
<p>Could be. But what does this tell us about the level of euphoria that must exist at the school ranking #1 in retention!</p>
<hr>
<p>ps: I am a great admirer of Brown, but lets not go overboard with the "amazingness" stuff - at least to the extent it is based on Brown's approach to the use of SAT scores, or on its high retention rate!</p>
<h1>4? How about #51. That's where Brown was ranked on this site:</h1>
<p><a href="http://ed.sjtu.edu.cn/rank/2004%5B/url%5D">http://ed.sjtu.edu.cn/rank/2004</a>
It's worth reading.</p>
<p>Lawyerdad, how about getting us a website that's actually not forbidden to the general public?</p>
<p>check out the peer assessment grading. Apparently that's basically the averagine of experts' opinions on the school on a scale of 1-5. So essentially, if Brown was a movie, the peer assessment is the collective reviews of critics. So if you're trying to figure out what is "Best Picture," where do you look? Peer assessment</p>
<p>I forgot what Brown's peer assessment is, but it's higher than Cornell and Dartmouth, I recall, and less than HYP and Columbia.</p>
<p>It's lower because it's more concerned with athletes, legacies, children of faculty, minorities, and the wealthy.</p>
<p>And some smart kids get in once all of those spots are filled.</p>
<p>astro: you could probably make that statement about every Ivy. No?
Brown worse than the others?</p>
<p>I know for myself there are people who were accepted from my area that I was much more qualified than. And I'm not just talking about SATs, GPA, etc. I'm talking about ECs, academic interest, and diverse background.</p>
<p>Some of the people that got in are just incomprehensible to me, but their parents teach at Brown, so tada they get a nice big envelope. And yea, sure I'm bitter. The admissions process is clearly not based on merit in many cases. And this isn't just about me. Many of the others who were rejected from Brown on this board were much more qualified than certain individuals I know who were accepted.</p>
<p>Sorry. Try this.
<a href="http://ed.sjtu.edu.cn/ranking.htm%5B/url%5D">http://ed.sjtu.edu.cn/ranking.htm</a></p>
<p>Brown is definitely less concerned with SAT's than other ivies. This was a consciously made decision.</p>
<p>Of course your statistical chances of being accepted increase "geometrically" as your scores go up. This is for several reasons. One is that SAT scores are still a marginal factor. Another is that high SAT's usually correlate with other important factors such as high GPA and rank.</p>
<p>However, Brown has the largest SAT range (25-75 %tile) in the ivy league.
In other words having a low score is less likely to close the door and having a high score is less likely to decidedly open it. Sorry Byerly.</p>
<p>Maybe your essays sucked.</p>
<p>Why is it necessary to make these phony arguments? And as an official of the University, you, more than anyone else, should be ashamed of yourself for chiming in to prop up this dubious argument that SAT scores are less important at Brown than elsewhere. It is not true, and you know it - or you SHOULD know it.</p>
<p>As I have conclusively shown, there is ZERO evidence that Brown takes a substantially different tack that its Ivy peers in relying on SAT scores as a key factor in admissions. ZERO.</p>
<p>To the extent that the 25-75 spread is wider, it is SOLEY due to the yield rate Brown experiences for admits at the various SAT levels.</p>
<p>Look: Brown is an excellent school - one of the nation's finest. Just stop this continuing silliness about Brown "caring" less about SAT scores that its peers.</p>
<p>wow, this really needles you, huh?</p>
<p>the 25-75 spread i'm referring to is obviously for admitted students not matriculated students--it is independent of yield</p>
<p>i'm hardly ashamed. i'm proud in fact. SAT's do measure something, but if i wanted to select the best students possible i certainly wouldn't stake my bet on them. it is widely accepted in higher education circles that SAT scores correlate more with wealth (family income) than any other relevant factor (a fact originally championed by none other than Harvard's Lani Guinier). de-emphasizing them is a progressive and deliberate decision.</p>
<p>Well if you see the breakdown of SAT scores and the perceont of those admitted who enrolled, it is clear that when brown admits a lower scorer, they are much more likely to enroll.</p>
<p>I'm not sure if this has much pertinence in this argument, but I thought it was interesting. Kind of common-sense, but interesting nonetheless.</p>
<p>Of course it's sensible.</p>
<p>In any event, it seems bizarre for a Brown official to be bragging - in a backhanded way - about the fact that those with higher SAT scores tend to reject Brown more frequently.</p>
<p>The downside, I guess, for living with a vintage rationalization.</p>
<p>I think Brown is good enough now to junk that rationalization. Somebody should pass the word to "dcircle."</p>