College Admissions Statistics Class of 2023

Applying to College
281

I’m going to take the liberty of removing Early application stats from the list. I personally find it makes the list look cluttered and confusing, but I will add them back if anyone wants me to.

Harvard REA + RD: 1,950 out of 43,330 (4.5%)
Columbia ED + RD: ~2,171 out of 42,569 (~5.1%)
Princeton SCEA + RD: 1,895 out of 32,804 (5.8%)
Yale SCEA + RD: 2,178 out of 36,843 (5.9%)
Brown ED+RD: 2,553 out of 38,674 (6.6%)
MIT EA + RD: 1410 out of 21,312 (6.6%)
Duke ED + RD: 3,064 out of 41,613 (7.4%)
Penn ED + RD: 3,345 out of 44,960 (7.4%)
Dartmouth ED + RD: 1,876 out of 23,650 (7.9%)
Bowdoin ED1 + ED2 + RD: ~831 out of 9,332 (~8.9%)
Colby ED1 + ED2 + RD: 1,295 out of 13,584 (9.5%)
Cornell ED + RD: 5,183 out of >49,000 (~10.6%)
Amherst ED1+ED2+RD: 1,144 out of 10,567 (11%)
USC: 7400 out of 67,000 (11%)
Tulane EA+ ED1+ED2+RD: ~5,400 out of 41,365 (~13%)
Pitzer ED1 + ED2: 532 out of ~4,409 (~13.2%)
WashU ED1 + ED2 + RD: ~3,556 out of ~25,400 (~14%)
Emory ED1 + ED2 + RD: 4512 out of 30,017 (15%)
Middlebury ED1+ED2 +RD: 1,547 out of 9,750 (15.9%)
NYU ED1+ED2+RD: 12,307 out of ~85,000 (~16% overall, 14.4% NY Campus)
Washington and Lee - 1,115 out of 6,178 (18.0%)
BU EA+ ED1+ED2+RD: ~11,260 out of 62,210 (~18.1%)
Georgia Tech EA+RD: 6940 out of 36936 (18.8%)
Emory Oxford College- 3432 out of ~18,000 (19%)
UVA RD+EA: 9,725 admits from 40,869 (23.8%)
Scripps ED1+ ED2 + RD: (29.8%)
Macalester ED1+ ED2 + RD: ~2,048 out of 6,598 (~31%)

Tulane source: https://tulanehullabaloo.com/45810/views/tulane-admissions-must-rethink-priorities/

282

@jin2000 , the NYU stat you listed is transposed - it’s 16% NYC campus (and guesswork overall, likely ~14.5%)
Sorry if my prior post was confusing

283

@jin2000 Amherst doesn’t have ED2. (at least not yet; if they want better yield they could add it though :slight_smile: if they did they could probably get to bowdoin’s level

284

@osuprof You are 100% spot on with that advice.

285

@bronze2 Thanks for the Duke clarification. I feel like an idiot criticizing their math when I had a wrong formula plugged in. :>(

286

@RockySoil Don’t have data going back 20 years. Nonetheless, I hope the following data may be interesting to readers.

Many of the comments about how and to what extent ED is used by schools will determine admit rates are of course correct. Use has changed over time (more of class is now filled by ED), some schools have gone back and forth between EA and ED, etc. With that caveat in mind…

IVIES
Year - applicants, admits, enrollment ('000s)
2001 124.1, 21.3, 12.3 (Class of 2005 - average admit rate of 17.2%)
2002 124.7, 21.0, 12.4
2003 135.3, 22.7, 13.5
2004 134.5, 22.8, 13.5
2005 150.0, 23.3, 13.7
2006 160.3, 23.3, 13.7
2007 168.8, 23.0, 13.5
2008 180.2, 24.1, 13.8
2009 195.4, 24.4, 14.0
2010 219.7, 24.6, 13.9
2011 232.0, 24.4, 14.1
2012 243.1, 23.8, 14.1
2013 245.7, 23.4, 14.0
2014 253.5, 23.0, 14.1
2015 261.8, 23.7, 14.2
2016 273.7, 23.8, 14.5
2017 281.8, 23.4, 14.8 (Class of 2021)
2018 306.9, 22.3, 14.8 (Class of 2022)
2019 311.9, 21.1, ~14.8 (Class of 2023 - average admit rate of 6.8% - data from this week)

ALMOST the lowest offers of admission in the past 19 years for the Ivies despite a 20% uptick in their class size. The higher number of admits up to 2011 were in line with an increased enrollment, but the absolute number of admits is now going back to what it was in 2001-02.

What’s interesting about the next group of the “Plus” schools in “Ivy-Plus” is that their admits have trended sharply down, far below the 2000-02 levels - 20% lower - even though the class size has increased 20% this period.

“IVY-PLUS” schools (Stanford, Chicago, Duke, MIT)
Year - applicants, admits, enrollment ('000s)
2001 51.0, 11.1, 5.3 (Class of 2005 - average admit rate of 21.8%)
2002 51.4, 11.1, 5.3
2003 54.6, 11.5, 5.4
2004 56.1, 11.5, 5.6
2005 57.7, 11.5, 5.6
2006 59.5, 11.6, 5.6
2007 64.1, 11.8, 5.7
2008 68.8, 11.5, 5.8
2009 78.4, 12.0, 5.8
2010 90.3, 11.9, 5.8
2011 99.5, 11.9, 6.0
2012 108.1, 11.3, 6.2
2013 118.5, 10.5, 5.9
2014 119.5, 9.6, 5.9
2015 122.1, 9.7, 6.1
2016 126.2, 9.6, 6.2
2017 125.1, 9.2, 6.3 (Class of 2021)
2018 138.8, 9.1, 6.4 (Class of 2022 - average admit rate of 6.6%)
2019 - Stanford and Chicago not yet released, but expect lower admits and admit rates.

A further group of 5 top universities have also dropped their admits to a fresh two-decade low, although in the interim (around 2008-2009) there was a decline in their yield. There was already a big 10% fall in the number of admits they made last year, a change noticeably larger than the the drop in admits for the two groups above.

OTHER ELITES (Northwestern, Vanderbilt, Johns Hopkins, Rice, USC)
Year - applicants, admits, enrollment ('000s)
2001 66.7, 23.0, 8.1 (Class of 2005 - average admit rate of 34.5%)
2002 68.2, 22.8, 8.1
2003 70.9, 22.9, 8.3
2004 75.0, 22.4, 8.2
2005 78.8, 23.4, 8.2
2006 85.3, 23.8, 8.4
2007 90.5, 24.6, 8.7
2008 101.3, 24.7, 8.4
2009 108.1, 26.3, 8.9
2010 114.1, 26.3, 9.0
2011 123.6, 25.5, 9.0
2012 141.8, 25.3, 9.1
2013 147.3, 24.7, 8.9
2014 157.4, 24.3, 9.2
2015 158.9, 23.5, 8.9
2016 167.9, 22.6, 9.0
2017 170.6, 22.2, 9.3 (Class of 2021 - average admit rate of 13.0%)
2018 187.9, 20.3, 9.2 (Class of 2022 - average admit rate of 10.8%)
2019 - not yet released by all.

287

@bronze2 - Northwestern and Hopkins should be in Ivy Plus Group if Chicago and Duke are there. Vanderbilt, Rice, WUSTL, GTown and USC are in a lower tier by any objective measure. Northwestern and Hopkins are both ranked at #10 in US News and compete significantly with cross-admits with Duke, Cornell, Chicago, Dartmouth. I think it is safe to say that NU (and JHU likely) win against Cornell in cross-admits.

288

@bronze2 This is fabulous thank you. What jumps out at me is that applications to these schools have gone up 250-300% since 2001, even though a much higher percentage of the class gets in ED, so they only file one application.

It also seems probable that fewer students are turning down these schools to go elsewhere (maybe financial aid is better than 20 years ago?), so their RD yields have gone up as well, which in turn leads to fewer admits.

289

@StanfordGSB00 “Northwestern and Hopkins should be in Ivy Plus Group if Chicago and Duke are there. Vanderbilt, Rice, WUSTL, GTown and USC are in a lower tier by any objective measure.”

It is also possible to argue that GTown and USC should be in a separate group with Harvard, Yale, Princeton, Stanford and MIT as the private colleges that don’t have ED admissions and 100% of their admits have the freedom to decline their admissions. I know they aren’t in the same tier, just pointing out that it seems absurd to divide that way, or make judgements about whether NU and JHU would win cross-admits against Cornell. Does that matter?

290

@observer12 Hallelujah!

291

@StanfordGSB00 forgive my sectioning. It was roughly done by admit rate and Northwestern and Duke have almost the same so you are right.

Here are some more data on other universities and LACs.

Top 7 Elite LACs by admit rate for Class of 2022 (Pomona, Claremont McKenna, Swarthmore, Bowdoin, Amherst, Williams, Colby)
Year - applicants, admits, enrollment ('000s)
2001 28.4, 7.3, 2.9 (Class of 2005 - average admit rate of 25.8%)
2002 29.6, 7.2, 2.9
2003 31.2, 7.5, 2.9
2004 32.2, 7.6, 3.0
2005 33.9, 7.6, 3.0
2006 35.7, 7.6, 3.0
2007 38.6, 7.5, 3.0
2008 42.8, 7.8, 3.0
2009 40.2, 7.8, 3.1
2010 41.4, 7.8, 3.1
2011 45.0, 7.6, 3.0
2012 46.6, 7.5, 3.1
2013 46.7, 7.4, 3.1
2014 46.2, 7.4, 3.2
2015 52.9, 7.8, 3.2
2016 54.2, 7.6, 3.2
2017 61.1, 7.6, 3.2 (Class of 2021)
2018 67.9, 7.4, 3.2 (Class of 2022 - average admit rate of 10.9%)

Next 8 Elite LACs by admit rate for Class of 2022 (Pitzer, Barnard, Harvey Mudd, Colorado College, Middlebury, Wesleyan, Bates, Haverford)
Year - applicants, admits, enrollment ('000s)
2001 30.1, 10.2, 3.6 (Class of 2005 - average admit rate of 33.8%)
2002 29.8, 10.5, 3.6
2003 30.6, 10.4, 3.6
2004 33.0, 10.3, 3.7
2005 33.0, 9.9, 3.6
2006 34.7, 10.3, 3.5
2007 37.0, 10.1, 3.6
2008 39.5, 10.2, 3.8
2009 38.9, 10.3, 3.7
2010 41.5, 10.3, 3.7
2011 44.3, 9.9, 3.7
2012 45.3, 9.9, 3.8
2013 46.8, 9.4, 3.8
2014 47.4, 9.6, 3.8
2015 50.8, 9.6, 3.9
2016 53.5, 9.2, 3.8
2017 54.8, 9.3, 3.9 (Class of 2021)
2018 59.2, 9.6, 4.0 (Class of 2022 - average admit rate of 16.2%)

Several noticeable trends between these two groups of LAC’s -

  • Colleges in the upper group are admitting more students than they were in 2001, though they have been on a down trend lately.
  • Colleges in the lower group are admitting far fewer than 2001. The uptick of 300 from 2017 to 2018 in admits (from 9.3 to 9.6) was entirely due to Bates and Wesleyan increasing their admits by 200 each while others admits in the group have gone down slightly.
  • The increase in applications for the lower group has been less pronounced, whereas the upper group has much more than doubled, like the universities.
  • It seems that competition for the available places has become more fierce in the lower group, whereas competition amongst the candidates themselves is less in the lower group.

As we get lower in selectivity, we do not see the same trends in total admits. The next tiers of 12 LAC’s have had to make many more offers than in 2001 and have been treading water in the total admits lately. Their admits are have plateaued and have yet to show signs of decline from the peak admits like other elite universities. They did not see as much of a surge in applications as the other top schools over the 2001-18 period. Therefore their yields have come down over time. The admit rate was down slightly, simply by virtue of receiving more applications but there were more admits in absolute number. They are squeezed by the Common App - not having as many additional applications as the top schools to see the admit rate go down enough to be as desirable as others, they are perceived as back-ups by many candidates with a shot at more selective schools. Even in the last few years, the total admits have stayed flat.

Selective 12 LACs by admit rate for Class of 2022 (Carleton, Davidson, Wellesley, Washington & Lee, Hamilton, Grinnell, Scripps, Vassar, Colgate, Skidmore, Wake Forest, Boston College)
Year - applicants, admits, enrollment ('000s)
2001 62.9, 24.0, 8.4 (Class of 2005 - average admit rate of 38.2%)
2002 66.3, 24.4, 8.4
2003 70.0, 24.8, 8.3
2004 72.6, 25.7, 8.5
2005 77.1, 26.2, 8.6
2006 79.7, 26.4, 8.6
2007 84.2, 24.7, 8.6
2008 94.0, 26.5, 8.6
2009 91.3, 28.3, 8.6
2010 91.9, 29.7, 9.1
2011 95.5, 28.5, 8.9
2012 99.5, 29.0, 8.9
2013 94.1, 27.6, 8.8
2014 96.0, 28.1, 9.0
2015 104.1, 28.7, 8.9
2016 105.5, 29.3, 9.1
2017 105.5, 28.5, 9.2 (Class of 2021)
2018 115.0, 28.5, 9.2 (Class of 2022 - average admit rate of 24.8%)

292

Some interesting numbers, but when did Wake and BC become LACs?

293

Here is a link to an article about analyzing college acceptance rates over time that looks at specific schools: a study comparing 2006 to 2018 acceptance rates:

https://www.businessstudent.com/topics/college-acceptance-rates-over-time/

Chicago went from a 38% acceptance rate in 2006 to a 7.2% acceptance rate in 2018. How does that happen?

Then look at this article listing US News College rankings for 57 leading universities from 1983-2007:

https://publicuniversityhonors.com/tag/u-s-news-historical-college-rankings/

Consider Chicago’s 2006 acceptance rate of 38% and its 2006 US News College ranking at #15. During the period of 2006 to 2018 when its acceptance rate fell to 7.2%, Chicago’s US News College ranking went up from #15 to #3. Gosh, is it at all possible there is a correlation?

One has to wonder and ask why and how the criteria that US News has used over the years has changed and how colleges have used that criteria to game the rankings. Regardless, the criteria of the rankings and many of the top colleges certainly seem to feed off each other. Certainly, one of the obvious conclusions of looking at this data is that if the acceptance rates of the Top 25 universities continues to decline at these rates, it’s only a matter of years before their acceptance rates will all hover in the 4-6 percent range, making the observations of StanfordGSBOO and others like him or her, completely irrelevant, as if they aren’t already, when they wish to make such petty distinctions between Top 25 universities such as: “Northwestern and Hopkins should be in Ivy Plus Group if Chicago and Duke are there. Vanderbilt, Rice, WUSTL, GTown and USC are in a lower tier by any objective measure.”

294

One more post on this topic.

Elite Publics and Large Universities (9 in the group with admit rate < 29%. UCLA, UC Berkeley, UNC-CH, UVA, Michigan, UC Irvine, NYU, Boston University, Georgia Tech).

Year - applicants, admits, enrollment ('000s)
2001 225.9, 88.3, 32.7 (Class of 2005 - average admit rate of 39.1%)
2002 227.0, 91.9, 34.6
2003 237.6, 94.1, 35.1
2004 242.5, 96.6, 35.8
2005 244.8, 97.7, 35.3
2006 250.2, 103.8, 36.9
2007 268.0, 109.2, 38.5 (average admit rate was 40.7%)
2008 284.0, 108.7, 37.9
2009 304.7, 113.8, 38.6
2010 312.1, 115.8, 38.3
2011 336.1, 121.3, 38.8
2012 354.9, 125.5, 40.8 (average admit rate was 35.3%)
2013 400.0, 126.1, 40.6
2014 469.8, 132.1, 43.5
2015 496.9, 134.6, 43.5
2016 529.0, 142.1, 46.4 (Class of 2020 - average admit rate of 26.9%)
2017 565.0, 138.0, 46.4 (Class of 2021 - average admit rate of 24.4%)
2018 619.2, 129.0, 45.5 (Class of 2022 - average admit rate of 20.8%)
2019 many have not yet released.

Note the steep decline in admits in the past two years just before this cycle, contrast with the equally steep rise in applications. The increase in applications from 2016 to 2018 far outstripped the growth in apps to all groups except the most elite LACs - it is a sign that applicants were trying to “find value for money” only to be countered by a wave of declining offers at the same time.

During 2001-2018, for this group as a whole, the number of increased admits has only slightly outpaced the increase in the number of spots available in the class.

And a final category, 10 universities (all private) with admit rates between 14% and 29%. These are Georgetown, Tufts, WUSTL, Carnegie Mellon, Tulane, Notre Dame, Emory, Northeastern, Lehigh, Villanova.

Year - applicants, admits, enrollment ('000s)
2001 129.3, 50.0, 16.6 (Class of 2005 - average admit rate of 38.7%)
2002 131.3, 50.8, 15.9
2003 137.8, 52.4, 16.2
2004 142.9, 51.7, 16.5
2005 155.7, 55.8, 16.3
2006 167.8, 56.0, 15.8
2007 178.3, 54.9, 16.0
2008 205.6, 57.9, 16.3
2009 201.0, 60.8, 16.3
2010 210.7, 62.8, 16.7
2011 220.6, 60.7, 16.8
2012 214.9, 58.0, 16.5
2013 227.7, 59.4, 16.7
2014 229.2, 60.9, 17.1
2015 232.8, 58.7, 17.1
2016 243.8, 58.3, 17.1 (Class of 2020 - average admit rate of 23.9%)
2017 261.6, 58.5, 17.9 (Class of 2021 - average admit rate of 22.4%)
2018 287.4, 53.0, 18.0 (Class of 2022 - average admit rate of 18.4%)

There was almost a 10% decline in admits in a single year last year. Schools in this group are being more parsimonious as students reach for elite schools at a time but are getting frozen out. This group also includes many schools that can use ED to achieve a greater yield and lower admit rate.

This set of tables should have included all institutions below admit rates of 29% for the Class of 2022. I think there are 65 schools in all, presented in the data here. I have excluded very small schools like Caltech, Olin, Cooper Union, music conservatories and our military academies.

Bringing it all together for the most selective 65 schools with admit rate under 29% last year, here is the overall picture. The decline in total admits started to be noticeable last year.
ALL 65 SCHOOLS
Year - applicants, admits, enrollment ('000s)
2001 718.4, 235.4, 89.9 (Class of 2005 - average admit rate of 32.8%)
2002 728.1, 239.7, 91.7
2003 768.1, 246.2, 93.3
2004 788.9, 248.5, 94.7
2005 830.9, 255.5, 94.3
2006 873.3, 262.7, 95.4
2007 929.7, 265.9, 97.7
2008 1,016.1, 271.4, 97.6
2009 1,057.8, 283.7, 98.9
2010 1,121.7, 289.2, 99.7
2011 1,196.6, 290.0, 100.3
2012 1,254.3, 290.2, 102.4
2013 1,326.3, 288.5, 101.9
2014 1,419.2, 295.0, 105.7
2015 1,480.4, 296.3, 105.7
2016 1,553.7, 302.4, 109.3 (Class of 2020 - average admit rate of 19.5%)
2017 1,625.5, 296.7, 110.9 (Class of 2021 - average admit rate of 18.3%)
2018 1,782.3, 279.1, 110.2 (Class of 2022 - average admit rate of 15.7%)

Looking at this another way, there were 2.62 offers per seat (per enrollee) in 2001, 2.77 offers per seat as recently as 2016, but only 2.53 in 2018. This is the lowest number in 18 years. Getting an offer of admission from the Admissions Office is the hardest it has been in a generation. On top of that, these statistics do not distinguish the increased use of ED to fill more of a class, by more schools, etc. The effect of that, leveraged to apply to the RD applicant, means that an offer of admission is even harder today than these numbers suggest. Unfortunately, many schools do not release ED data.

Another aspect not revealed by the data is the value of a “hook” - how many of these offers are reserved for institutional needs? How many are reserved for certain demographics (URM, Pell grantee, geography, first gen)? This further hurts some applicants while helping others. Strategy becomes paramount when applying to one of these schools.

This admission cycle will probably see 55 schools with an admit rate of below 20%. Just three years ago, there were only 39 schools.

295

@foosondaughter I know it’s not authoritative but I used wikipedia to see when the public thought…

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_liberal_arts_colleges_in_the_United_States

I think you are right on those two though. I should have thought better of it!

296

Harvard REA + RD: 1,950 out of 43,330 (4.5%)
Columbia ED + RD: ~2,171 out of 42,569 (~5.1%)
Princeton SCEA + RD: 1,895 out of 32,804 (5.8%)
Yale SCEA + RD: 2,178 out of 36,843 (5.9%)
Brown ED+RD: 2,553 out of 38,674 (6.6%)
MIT EA + RD: 1410 out of 21,312 (6.6%)
Duke ED + RD: 3,064 out of 41,613 (7.4%)
Penn ED + RD: 3,345 out of 44,960 (7.4%)
Dartmouth ED + RD: 1,876 out of 23,650 (7.9%)
Rice ED + RD: 2,364 out of 27,084 (8.7%)
Bowdoin ED1 + ED2 + RD: ~831 out of 9,332 (~8.9%)
Colby ED1 + ED2 + RD: 1,295 out of 13,584 (9.5%)
Cornell ED + RD: 5,183 out of >49,000 (~10.6%)
Amherst ED1+ED2+RD: 1,144 out of 10,567 (11%)
USC: 7400 out of 67,000 (11%)
Tulane EA+ ED1+ED2+RD: ~5,400 out of 41,365 (~13%)
Pitzer ED1 + ED2: 532 out of ~4,409 (~13.2%)
WashU ED1 + ED2 + RD: ~3,556 out of ~25,400 (~14%)
Emory ED1 + ED2 + RD: 4512 out of 30,017 (15%)
Middlebury ED1+ED2 +RD: 1,547 out of 9,750 (15.9%)
NYU ED1+ED2+RD: 12,307 out of ~85,000 (~16% overall, 14.4% NY Campus)
Washington and Lee - 1,115 out of 6,178 (18.0%)
BU EA+ ED1+ED2+RD: ~11,260 out of 62,210 (~18.1%)
Georgia Tech EA+RD: 6940 out of 36936 (18.8%)
Emory Oxford College- 3432 out of ~18,000 (19%)
UVA RD+EA: 9,725 admits from 40,869 (23.8%)
Scripps ED1+ ED2 + RD: (29.8%)
Macalester ED1+ ED2 + RD: ~2,048 out of 6,598 (~31%)

Added Rice: http://www.ricethresher.org/article/2019/03/acceptance-rate-hits-record-low-of-8-7-percent

297

During that period, UChicago started accepting the Common App; prior to that applicants had to submit a UChicago specific app; as with most colleges that resulted in thousands of additional applications submitted. It also recognized that although its academics had always been world renowned, the undergraduate experience left something to be desired, so undertook big initiatives to improve the undergrad experience including closing the decrepit collection of rag tag dorms, building new dorms and improving/switching dining services. It improved overall campus services, undergrad coordination and especially beefed up career placement services. Although UChicago used to be somewhat of a hidden gem, open secret known mostly to academics and people in-the-know with a certain hard-core self-selecting population, it started marketing itself as a top notch college to people who previously had been unaware of what it offered. Completely out of its control, but the college also benefited during that period from the huge increase in the trend of students seeking an urban, city college experience.

Of course. But the #3 ranking isn’t so far off the ranking it held when rankings first started. The first year USNWR published rankings 1983, UChicago clocked in at #6, even with all the aforementioned warts (crappy facilities, unpleasant undergrad experience, known only to academic elites); the second year that rankings were published UChicago was ranked #5. In between 1983 and 2006, UChicago had ups and downs as they failed to focus on the undergrad portion of the uni, but when they turned their attention back to improving that undergrad experience, it’s not surprising that the college rose as it did. The academics have always been there, they just needed to have an undergrad experience that matched the high quality of the academics and better marketing so it wasn’t a secret.

298

milee30, in my view Chicago has always been one of the top universities in the country and the world. I seriously considered attending Chicago, and think it’s an amazing university with wonderful students and professors. Why it ever had a #15 US News College ranking in the first place is a mystery to me. And your explanation sounds exactly like the one I received as a high school senior when I was applying to colleges and asked an admission officer from Chicago about the huge increase in applications and decline in admission rates in the previous decade. Nice explanation, and I’m sure much of it is true, but what you and the admission officer left out is the fact that Chicago made a concerted marketing effort to reclaim its rightful high ranking in the US News rankings and one of its strategies was a laser-focussed effort to increase the number of applications. Why? College acceptance rates were part of the criteria in the US News rankings. It is now well known that Chicago did indeed engage in a concerted marketing effort to increase its application numbers and lower its acceptance rate. I offered Chicago as an example of how universities used US News criteria to manipulate outcomes because Chicago reaped startling results. Chicago, of course, is not the only one that did this. And I was also trying to point out how arbitrary, not to mention squirrelly, US News College rankings are. I’m sure even politics have also been involved in these rankings when you get down to it. And yet Americans look upon them as the Gospel and they look upon Robert Morse, who oversee the U.S. News College rankings and who refers to himself with the header Morse Code in his articles, as the oracle of college rankings. Look at Caltech’s 1988 ranking at #21 and its 1989 ranking at #3. What!!?? Or Johns Hopkins 1995 ranking at #22 and its 1996 ranking at #10 and in subsequent years fluctuating between #15 and #16 and now its #10 again. Or Rice’s 1988 ranking at #9 or its 1989 ranking at #10 and for all subsequent years its rankings went down, remaining in the high- to mid-teens (maybe because it never made any effort to manipulate the US News College ranking machine). But I think the most harmful thing about all this ranking business is that it takes away from what college should be about: an adventure in learning about the world, ourselves and our place in it, discovering beauty, truth, living the life of the mind and finding not only our place in the world but how each of us can contribute to making it better. Attending college, isn’t just a means to other goals, though it will lead one to other goals, it’s a worthy goal in itself. And so choosing a college, given the opportunity, shouldn’t be about how high it’s ranked by US News but about choosing the school that will best help you find the better you.

299

@Maximilias The problem is you’re not doing the math. The admit rate was always a VERY small part of the rankings so that alone cannot explain it. BTW UChicago retained its ranking even with admit rate eliminated from the criteria. In the end it was a combination of things as described by @milee30 that really helped UChicago climb up the rankings. I would add that all these top colleges are accepting so few students in comparison to the pool of applicants, students are looking to find those hidden gems and UChicago just isn’t hidden anymore.

As to the wide movement of rankings look at the changing criteria during those years. Change the criteria and you’ll get different rankings.

An excerpt from how you should use USNWR below (try to get past the number in front of the school and use the information appropriately)

“The rankings provide a good starting point for students trying to compare schools.”

“But the best school for each student, experts say, is one that will most completely meet his or her needs, which go beyond academics”

“Together, the rankings and profiles can help students learn about a range of school options – public and private, large and small – throughout the country, some of which they might not have considered before. They are valuable tools that can help you find a college or university that’s right for you.”

300

It is an interesting phenomena.