It’s just something that I’m curious about (not that I care deeply about rankings or anything).
But what do you guys think will happen to the ranking of Emory University in the future?
With the lack of an engineering department and certain departments such as Computer Science (which are starting to be very prevalent in other colleges) not being very strong will this eventually take a toll on the overall ranking?
I want to hear your guys’ opinions. Thanks!
The ranking will go up or down one or two spots in the next several years. It’s hard to predict either way. The investment in light rail connecting Emory to metro Atlanta should help, but maybe the things you bring up will shoot it down. Hard to guess. What do you think?
In the WSJ rankings, Emory is #19 and CMU is #20. I can see those two changing places. But whether Emory dropped further, past Vanderbilt, Williams and Amherst, would depend on what those schools did, correct? It’s not like Emory can’t beef-up its CS offerings. How do you predict future rankings that’s not a pure guess?
Emory is more popular than ever according to how many are applying and the quality of students enrolling. I’m not so sure that it’s on the wrong track.
Does, UChicago have engineering? Is Brown any good at STEM? That should answer your question. If Emory can do what it does well even better the world will notice. Emory is in a solid place better than it was a 5 or so years ago. This is your second thread about rankings and prestige, you need to find a school of best fit and not worry about such things. Also if you want to work on the west coast then I suggest aiming for UCLA or USC.
@damon30
Emory is ranked 20 on WSJ, behind WashU and Vandy on WSJ, ahead of Willams, Amherst, Pomona, and Johns Hopkins. And 21 on US news, We are clearly in good company regardless of a few spots.
The 2018 WSJ list is behind a firewall, but this is what I see for those places: https://www.wsj.com/graphics/college-rankings-2018-tool/
So WUSTL has risen with respect to Emory from your list, and Pomona has dropped.
My bad if it seems like I only worry about rankings (which I don’t). I just tend to use College Confidential to talk about this kind of topic.
And I am definitely set on going to Emory if I get accepted because I did my research and I would love to attend. Plus, I talked to the track coach and I would love to be part of Emory’s track and field family 
@ryandryu : Uhmm…well it is possible to do well without engineering IF you have great marketing and several really strong undergraduate programs and super elite graduate programs. Basically Emory would have to follow a Chicago model to increase and this is hard work because Emory is a noob among serious AAU research Universities (it has come to pack a punch really fast: Look at when the top tier privates joined AAU: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Association_of_American_Universities) It can either market better and invest in making more departments even better than today and increase the undergraduate rankings, OR it can stay stagnant in the rankings and develop as more a niche strength school (right now Emory is really strong in biological sciences at the undergraduate level, now has a new chem curriculum, has a QTM department almost on fire, and also an elite undergraduate program) that has HUGE impact in terms of the types of students and leaders it produces.
This has been the model of several LACs and places like Georgia Tech (Georgia Tech ranks between 35-38 in USNWR, but in the areas that matter, the individual departmental rankings, they are all top 5-10 and several at 1-2. And the impact of Georgia Tech graduates as well as their tight relationship with industry is really clear) and Carnegie Mellon. I think Emory should focus more on productivity than it should rank. We have seen “certain schools” (you may know who I am talking about) who have increased their rank (hint: They used to rank like Emory) by heavy marketing and stats whoring, but their post-grad production and outcomes are essentially equal to or worse than Emory (and WUSTL for that matter which has decreased in rankings but has gotten better outcomes than the schools above it. For example, both it and Emory produced Rhodes, Truman, and Marshall Scholars in the last 5 years whereas an upwardly mobile peer did not or did so in lesser numbers) in several areas. This is something you should really think about. Emory should aim to continually increase its output by training students well, not playing a numbers game for the rankings. If Emory does continue to improve in important ways and it reflects in increased popularity, and rankings, great, but if not, cool too. Chicago was famous among employers and academics when it was ranked where Emory was/is now. It didn’t need to be in the top 10 to have truly top notch programs and serious students that went on to lead things in a manner that those at higher ranked peers couldn’t. Be concerned about IMPACT, not rankings. How will you allow your Emory education to help you and others have the impact you want to have and achieve your goals? That is what matters.
I would also advise or at least encouraged you to be engaged with the College and greater university and help it move forward/shape its future in whatever ways you can. That is what lots of the older, super elite schools/programs of very high rank and lower rank have that Emory needs to develop among undergraduates. Be aware of what is going on and your role in it. Demand excellence in every sphere of your undergraduate life (and no, we can’t just do “quality of life” complaints. We have to hold academic quality accountable too. It is not merely a vacation) and even after you graduate when you have time. You can take a look at some of the things it is working on now to improve its impact and experiences of Emory affiliates
Emory developing strategic pillars: https://provost.emory.edu/work/strategic-framework.html
Emory College (largest undergraduate unit) planning and documents can be found here: http://college.emory.edu/main/administration/strategic-planning/index.html
Either way, being in the know and understanding some of the details of its goals can help you understand a bigger picture more important than any year’s ranking. Big picture is necessary to keep it healthy and help it make REAL progress, and not just signal to USNWR. I know this is hard to grasp without being there yet, and because so many people conflate rankings with other things that they should not be, but just keep all of this in mind.
elite creative writing program*
As well as very strong history, political sciences, etc (and of course the B-school is strong).
I just sometimes wonder if current Emory students even have a clue about how strong some of these programs are at Emory versus some of its peer schools even. Emory is elite, but isn’t quite at the level of some Ivies that are very aware of their relative standing beyond the rankings and will do things like: hit up friends at another elite school/Ivy to compare syllabi or coursework. Emory is more like a bubble (and a lot of its near ranked peers are) so there is often lack of knowledge whether there is an academic (or other) shortchange or relative excellence.
But I’ve seen worse, as some at near peers are so much in a bubble that they are nearly delusional and actually think everything is the same level or better than say Harvard (it isn’t and every single piece of evidence will hint at it) and thus they deserve more respect/a higher rank. Emory students tend to have the opposite delusion (kind of self-denigrating like Harvard students almost who go out of their way to say: "Yeah I’m at Harvard but am still underwhelmed or was expecting something else…but in reality, if you compare it, it is much better than counterparts elsewhere, even its own near peers). I don’t know what makes some places like this and some others the opposite. All I know is that Emory ain’t Harvard so can’t afford to be delusional in a negative way or overly humble about some things as it often is (and this level of humility has historically reflected in the very modest marketing it tended to do). Admins and students both need to be aware of the big strengths so that they can be marketed effectively and aware of what can be improved and then seek a way to go about it. For undergraduate, the lack of student awareness and affinity (how attached is one to the university and would they do like…say me, and stick their neck out for it if necessary?) hurts the most in some ways, but I think they are working on that. But basically, if Emory’s own students act apathetic or are very modest in marketing or celebrating it, then it isn’t loud enough to outsiders considering becoming a part of the school.
Seriously, check the fervor (even when a bit delusional or completely one-sided) of some of these other CC elite threads (which I think are somewhat representative of how loud its affiliates are in real life) and how many folks contribute to the fervor. Emory really needs to develop this among undergrads (and I guess their parents) some how. I believe it does have an effect on both app. numbers and recruitment which is important for anyone concerned about a USNWR rank because it is basically a popularity contest/beauty pageant in many ways. Places that are already well ranked that are loud (via the marketing materials of the university and random affiliates on social media like this) in telling their story and celebrating the school will get more attention (and no doubt that counselor and peer admin ratings respond to this directly or indirectly). It is like a feed forward loop.
I shouldn’t have to get on here anymore and reply to threads about whether or not “X really good department or program/track is good”…at this point, people should know Emory’s strengths at the UG level, and it shouldn’t be questioned. What is worse is when someone actually thinks another schools’ is better because it has an overall higher rank. I don’t see folks do this to say, CS at Georgia Tech or Carnegie Mellon but it happens to Emory a lot, and I’m usually the only one to check some of this on CC and elsewhere because Emory students and alum are just very “quiet”. We’ll let those from elsewhere completely control the narrative with literally no nuance or evidence.
If you’d like a statistics-based response, Emory, based on factors related to its overall score, resides within a natural range of 21-24 in U.S. News. An analysis of fundamental aspects, as in reply #7, offers a more meaningful perspective. However, in terms of a near-term ranking in U.S. News, expect to see Emory at 21, 22, 23, or 24.
@bernie12 Thank you for the incredibly thoughtful response. Definitely deepened my outlook on rankings vs. results/outcomes of the students. It is unfortunate that all the competition nowadays only seems to result in the majority of people’s attention going to the “top” schools. Hopefully I get to attend Emory and personally experience what you described!
@merc81 : I honestly that is a very strong ranking range considering it is one the few private schools that truly takes a “risk” (you do likely, risk retention and graduation rate to some extent, and may have to be less stats based in admissions) on having a decent threshold of particularly low income students (and stretching the hell out of its resources to do so). The fact that it can have those ranks and ultimately perform like schools some ranking ahead is revealing to me and should be to others. Folks just need to learn how to not conflate the rank with progress/performance (as they are very input heavy, even the metrics that seem unrelated to inputs may be indirectly related). The metrics are what they are. On some older metrics, Emory was higher (perhaps much higher), on the current ones it is lower. But I’d definitely rather be at Emory in the current era (late 2000s and 2010s) than back in say the 90s or something when the metrics allowed it to be number 9. I’m not actually convinced that Emory back then was as similar in academic (especially in terms of research…undergrad. Somewhat debatable, but there are definitely more programs that are really strong now and a lot of innovation happening not happening at some other places) caliber to its current “near peers” which I basically take as the 12-30 group and maybe lower. It is much more similar as a research and academic powerhouse now than then.
The only things that diverged some were admissions related metrics I think (increasing yield and decreasing the admit rate via getting similar application volume and buy-in as peers has been hard, but it must be questioned if this should be a very important end versus educating well. The SAT/ACT range lagged for quite a while, but the new SAT results in convergence of SAT scores between all elites, and the ACT range remains a little lower than some peers as would be expected I guess). I have a feeling that these also correlate with the peer rankings because admins and whoever at peers probably rarely know but so much about the intimate details of a school. They may be able to see its momentum and overlap with their own school in the admissions arena (and based on other USNWR metrics) in addition to each schools media/PR presence and messaging/marketing and research infrastructure/prowess. In such a case, I imagine it is hard for Emory to move up without a bunch of things happening that affect the admissions (it may have to abandon its current model for example) or something miraculous happening and a bunch of faculty winning Nobel Prizes soon (which is often irrelevant to UG education, but again is something a peers admins and faculty may pay more attention to) lol. Nonetheless, the current model works in terms of keeping up in meaningful areas, so I don’t know what they have planned (if anything) to deal with the ranking.
@ryandryu : I wish you the best of luck! Anyone who does Emory right will have an awesome experience. I just hope more people will be willing to outwardly celebrate or share the awesome time they had in the future. It is like hitting a “like” button or commenting something encouraging//offering constructive criticism or feedback to a Youtuber or Social Media personality who provided content you enjoy (yes, sad that I am basically conceding that higher education is now based on a consumer model so is analogous to content providers on social media lol). It is important and it costs no money.
@ryandry I don’t think anyone has taken shots at you because you never seemed as if you are hunting for prestige in choosing a college, but actually care about Emory’s national standing. As alumni, students, and parents, it’s always nice to see Emory recognized. I’m optimistic and that’s based on both the little things that I see, but also about the vision of leadership. Oh, by the way, good luck.
@merc81
don’t know why you assume that but Emory hasn’t ranked at 24 in A WHILE, AS IN DECADES. US News changes there formula all the time as UCLA was ranked 25 2 years ago. Emory has the lowest graduation/rentension rate in the top 25. Along with some of the lowest test scores. That shows it has a lot of room to grow, unlike some others. Also, Emory’s historical rank is 20, and that’s likely to remain the case. I’m honestly not worried about Emory’s ranking as it is clear to be near the top of its peer group.
@damon30
https://www.timeshighereducation.com/rankings/united-states/2019#!/page/0/length/25/sort_by/rank/sort_order/asc/cols/stats
WashU is 18 now, Emory is 20 now. JHU fell a few spots. Vandy went up a few.
@emorynavy Thanks!
@emorynavy: My own answer to the question relates to technical ranking factors only. Emory, with an overall score of 79 in U.S. News, resides in the the same statistical vicinity as the three schools below it, which currently tie with scores of 78. Any of these schools could, even in the absence of significant change, show a position of 21, 22, 23, or 24 in a future year. However, for Emory to go up in position, it would need to reach at least one of the colleges tied above it, which currently show scores of 82, which would be less likely. However, with fundamental changes, which could arise from either the schools themselves or the ranking methodology, these technical aspects could be superseded.
@merc81 I understand what you are saying. But last year UCLA has a score of 78, so that overall score can be arbitrary. We can guage if things will change when the new CDS profiles are released.
@emorynavy : Why are you worried about this? The idea is that the CURRENT metrics and Emory’s performance in them put Emory closer to that range of schools than the others. It isn’t about what it did historically. Again, it has ranked number 9 before and was in the top 20 for a very long time. Wherever it goes, it will go. We can’t predict how USNWR will change their metrics and how other near ranked schools will perform in all of them versus Emory each year. Citing a range is all you can do. There is no need to get butt-hurt about someone who compared the numbers versus the near ranked school and cited a possible range. Saying, “well it hasn’t ranked X in a while” is not data nor how data works. We could have also said: “It hasn’t ranked below 20 in a while” back in 2014 or so. I mean come on! Seriously? Johns Hopkins rarely ranked in the top 10…should we have assumed it would be placed there 2 years ago? Or should we assume that it will stay there? No, we should assume nothing.
And the CDS profiles alone do not provide enough data to predict any change or maintainance. You look at the data and find a range. Honestly, unless Emory’s yield changes a lot, or there is some unforeseen shift in graduation rate, this is its range with the current metrics. The SAT/ACT range will have little effect because they are now so similar across schools and Emory’s is actually higher or identical to a couple of schools ahead of it right now. Much as how it traditionally ranked above Georgetown with a lower old SAT range than it and a bunch of schools. There is no need to get overly invested in what you think the rank should be and the minuscule changes that will occur on a CDS in the next year or two. That is basically like expecting stuff to change overnight (2 years is overnight in terms of development of a university’s brand or seeing large shifts in admissions philosophy. Even the schools that went to stats whoring did a lot of planning before making that decision).