<p>One of the bizarre factors in the US News ratings is the percentage of alums who contribute to the college. That factor helps privates with wealth alums. Many alums of publics are less likely to contribute because they feel their tax dollars are funding the college. </p>
<p>To game this part of the ranking, I wonder if colleges are requiring that people have to first make an annual donation to the college before they are eligible to buy football or basketball tickets?</p>
<p>Knowing my Alma mater, the annual “donation”, that has to be paid when you buy your football season tickets, has nothing to do with rankings and everything to do with the $$$. >:P </p>
<p>But your right, it may be included in the “Alumni giving” metric.</p>
<p>I got a text this morning from my son he just typed We are 42! So yeah people pay attention-and it matters if nothing else than for marketing-and campus morale?</p>
<p>@TomSrOfBoston you are right this school annoys some people to no end-which is kind of entertaining when you step back and look at it-I mean really there are schools on this US News list who have been caught cheating outright-I hope people are all over them too.</p>
<p>Meanwhile the kids are happy. I did ask him just now since he has materialized about the tenure denial-he knows all about it-doesn’t think it isn’t part of some large sinister plot.</p>
<p>The President should get his well deserved bonus-that guy is amazing. He came from USC so he learned his lessons well.</p>
<p>Are you assuming the CDS is a federal government form? It was created by USNews, Petersons, et al to go … beyond the de minimis government surveys. </p>
<p>There are no justifiable reasons why data should not be collected and used for deferred applicants. And VERY dood reasons why adjustments should be made. </p>
<p>If you are annoyed by NEU marketing, you would be livid by the endless crowing in West Texas and New Mexico. UTEP and NMSU are repeating BEST in the NATION over and over. Admins are lining up for pay raises. Yet, they are temples of planned mediocrity. </p>
<p>@Xiggi No, I wasn’t assuming the CDS is a federal government form. In fact, US News could ask any questions on the survey, but the schools do not have to reply (however, the schools don’t have that option with the federal government). </p>
<p>Gator, schools CANNOT be forced to answer the questions they do not like, but most are trying to be responsive to the questions. In this case, it is the LANGUAGE of the questionaire --just as the moronic and simplistic PA survey-- that causes the problem. The USNews specifically asks for “Provide the number of degree-seeking, first-time, first-year students who applied, were admitted, and enrolled (full- or part-time) in Fall 2013.”</p>
<p>It would be a cinch to add a line for students admitted to Spring. A line that should be … instructive to applicants, don’t you think? </p>
<p>What the Boston Magazine article failed to mention is that Northeastern has doubled its research funding under President Aoun. The new ISEC building under construction will be primarily a research facility and the university is planning a $50 million research building at its Marine Sciences campus in suburban Nahant. Since these initiatives have nothing to do with the USNews rankings the author decided not to mention them. </p>
<p>I heard that segment as well. As a student planning a science research career, it’s anxiety-inducing. I’m preparing myself for a career of grant-writing.</p>
<p>Notice that most of the schools that have moved up greatly in the last 4 years are public? </p>
<p>I think one of the criteria in the USNWR rankings is admit rate. Why should a school get a higher ranking because it turns more kids away? I can see that using quality of the student body as a criteria makes sense. But the admit rate criteria has created a lot of gaming. As a taxpayer I do not want my state schools, which my taxes help fund, spending money just to lure more applicants for the sake of getting a lower admit rate to up its rankings. Plus secondarily then more admissions officers are needed for processing all those applications. Smart, cost effective recruiting of high quality students makes sense, but trying to get the number of applicants up regardless of quality does not. Public schools also have the mission to educate kids from their state, not turn down as many kids as possible. </p>
<p>The other criteria which is used in the rankings is alumni giving. This is also being gamed. A top 15 USNWR university is currently asking for donations of any amount which will be rewarded with a university logo water bottle. So their deep pockets are allowing them to buy their way up in the rankings in a way which does not increase the quality of the education the school provides. </p>