<p>Rankings are one data point - some people put much credence into that data point and think it’s more important than other data points, but these are always individual decisions. For some people ranking will be placed in importance ahead of other data points and others will have different data points in the #1 spot. It’s not really all that complex. Some people care very much what “other people” think about their decisions…but not all people care about what ‘other people’ think. Some people need outside validation on decisions, some people rely solely on their own personal convictions. Some people take a long view in their decision making, some take a short view. All of this is human nature. </p>
<p>Well, I’ll come out and say that we had a “floor” beneath which I wouldn’t have paid full price for, absent some unusual circumstance, because our state flagship (Illinois) is a better educational deal. </p>
<p>PG, I didn’t accuse you of being prestige-driven. </p>
<p>Restating the obvious, everyone values different things–but also some of the same. I’m pretty sure most of us here want our kids to be intellectually engaged, happy and successful, and (in college at least) surrounded by stimulating, like-minded peers. Rankings don’t measure those things, which is why many of us don’t pay them any mind. There are better ways to discern educational quality and fit for our kids.</p>
<p>I think they do, to some extent. There are engaged, happy and successful kids everywhere, but they tend to be “thicker” higher up in the rankings. As an introvert and parent of two introverts, it’s easier to feel at home socially in an atmosphere where you can naturally find them around you vs an environment where you have to try to make a huge effort to find that tribe. But don’t confuse this with the pretentiousness of “precious will just up and die if she’s at Tufts or Brandeis instead of Harvard.” That “thickness” extends way past the Ivies, but it doesn’t go all the way to the floor IMO. </p>
<p>Both rankings and fit can be important. I wanted my S to like a particular top LAC soooooo much because I thought it would be perfect for him on a host of different dimensions. I sent him on two different visits! But he didn’t click with it, so off the list it went. </p>
<p>Considering rankings doesn’t mean ignoring fit, or force fitting someone somewhere. </p>
<p>oldfort, my daughter’s choices came down to Smith and Florida Inst. Technology. I don’t know what Smith’s ranking is, but I know it is a lot higher than FIT’s. We (she) didn’t care, she didn’t like Smith and loved FIT. Cost might have been less at Smith. My family was pushing Smith because of the history and name. She was also recruited by a lot of LAC’s (most in Ohio and Indiana). Not interested, no matter what the offer or rank. She liked FIT.</p>
<p>Why shouldn’t she go to the school she liked, even if the prestige (in your eyes) isn’t there? She just didn’t care what USNWR thinks is important.</p>
<p>I’m finding this all very interesting, it’s kind of like politics, some people are vehemently left or right but lots of people are middle of the road. To be clear, my beef with rankings has more to do with US News than some of the others. I do not think USNWR is objective data, as one poster suggested. As I helped my son compile his list of safeties, I looked for information on how the alums of those schools did out in the world-where they went to grad school, what kinds of jobs they were getting, how respected those institutions are in his field of interest, and I found some very interesting info. Some of his possible safeties have really top notch outcomes, better than some schools ranked higher by USNWR. They may not have the endowment or the percentage of alums who donate annually or the most widely known reputation outside of their regions, but in terms of educating their students who go on to do great things, they should be very highly ranked. They all have very high rigor ratings according to Princeton Review as well, higher than many of the “top” schools and they all require a senior capstone or thesis, something that has actually been dropped by some schools in the top 50. BTW, to me, “great things” doesn’t necessarily mean half the class goes to work in jobs that pay $100K out of the gate. So now my kid’s top two choices are from that group, he loved them when he visited and felt like he could do really wonderful work there. But I still have people asking me why he doesn’t aim higher, meaning “top 25” or “top 50” according to USNWR. He can articulate why he loves the schools he does but he still gets, “but you might get into LAC18 if you tried.” And having read “The Price of Privilege”, “The Price of Admission,” “Beyond the Ivy League,” and “Excellent Sheep” in the past few months, I’ve started to think these more obscure options might really be better for my kid, even if he did squeak into a top ten LAC (he does have one on his list but it’s not his first choice.) He may not have the same power network later in life or be constantly surrounded by all brainiacs, but I think he will have a better educational experience (for him, some kids at higher ranked schools will have great experiences too.) I’m not suggesting lower ranked is better for all, so nobody go there. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I don’t think that’s true. The NSSE measures student engagement, and plenty of lower-ranked schools score very high there. I’ve seen various surveys on “happiness” but I don’t know how scientific they are. Graduation rates certainly don’t tell the whole story. There are perhaps more “successful” kids going INTO higher-ranked colleges (meaning, they had more academic and other accomplishments in high school) but that doesn’t mean they are necessarily more successful coming out. As has been debated ad nauseum on this site, plenty of successful people didn’t go to elite colleges.</p>
<p>The point is…it’s not an either-or thing. You want to look at rankings? Great. But just because other people don’t does not mean they are not doing their homework on the colleges their kids are considering, or that they don’t value a lot of the same things you do.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>It would be interesting to see salary-outcome rankings that exclude the financial services sector. When a third or more of the graduating class at HYP go to work on Wall Street, that is going to skew the salary numbers substantially. And there is no question that for kids that want to pursue that avenue, it makes sense to focus on the small group of feeder schools preferred by finance-related recruiters. (Not to say that graduates of other colleges can’t get work in the field…just that there IS a clear preference for elite-school graduates.)</p>
<p>We definitely knew the “selectivity” of the schools S applied too and his reachiest school was definitely his top choice. Given that all the schools he applied to were all in the same price range, except the state school, and all were they pretty much the same type of school (small LAC) he was hoping to get into his reach school (which was the ranked the highest) and would attend without question over the other schools on his list. He did get in and it is were he went. </p>
<p>FWIW, I don’t even know what NSSE is. </p>
<p>ebmam, I always made a point while all three of my kids were “touring” colleges to look at the alumni news, and see what alumni were doing during. I think outcomes in the area of interest the kids had at that time. As i said earlier mine were particularly focused on specific industries so that made it easier for our family. None of my kids would have been happy on a campus where the strongest concentration of kids were in econ or finance and gunning for IB banking. They were much more interested in a diversity of kids and strength in their particular area of interest. Granted there is a diversity of majors on every campus, but like Pizza says there can be, but not necessarily always is…a feeling that pervades some campuses. I spent time during my undergraduate years on Harvard’s campus and while it was a 'fun" time, I was happy to get back to “my” campus but I don’t think in the 70s I was very focused on whether that school was “better” than my school so I’m sure that carried over to my attitude about the kids. </p>
<p>That’s probably a difficult example since presumably she’s interested in engineering, and Smith has engineering but it’s kind of a patched-together program IIRC. </p>
<p>“Why shouldn’t she go to the school she liked, even if the prestige (in your eyes) isn’t there? She just didn’t care what USNWR thinks is important.”</p>
<p>You don’t have to impress oldfort with your choices. You don’t have to feel bad about your own choice if you know that oldfort might have made a different choice if she were in that circumstance. </p>
<p>Rather than rankings, our kids tended to look for a set of schools that fit their preferences for size, location, and intellectual climate (including majors available). Then the list and search process basically involved finding schools that met those preferences but differed in the degree of difficulty of admission, i.e., selectivity. </p>
<p>So they each ended up with a basket of 6-7 colleges that all appeared to fit their profile but differed in chances of admission (using the typical reach, match, safety categories). Both wanted to go out of state; one didn’t apply to any in-state college. Together, they got into all but one of the colleges they applied to, so there wasn’t any agony or second-guessing. The college search was all about fit and the degree of difficulty of admission. Visits to the colleges helped to confirm their choices either before or after admission.</p>
<p>Of course, it helped them a lot that we did not put any cost constraint or location constraint on where they might attend. (As the old joke goes, they chose their parents well.) Nor did we put any constraint on what they could major in. In all this was a painless process.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Exactly. Or just “gunners” in general. Some very smart kids just prefer a more laid-back environment where they can explore ideas and interests with others like them. My son didn’t like many of the super-driven, competitive kids at his high school, even though he was every bit as academically talented. He certainly didn’t want to go to a college with even MORE kids like that.</p>
<p>I tend to agree with your posts sally. My oldest son was the kid that no one could figure out what he was doing in the AP classes 
the scruffy kid in the back slouched in his seat looking slightly “dazed.” I could no more imagine him in a college with gunners than I could imagine him walking on the moon. Smart kid and he’s doing well (career-wise) post college. I never worried a minute about him…well maybe a fraction of a minute. </p>
<p>
This is not true. Silicone Valley is where the pay is. A lot of them tend to start their own companies too. No, I know 50% of graduates do not work on WS, but they do continue to command top $$ no matter where they work. </p>
<p>Smith and FIT are two different schools. If my kid was interested in engineering, no sure why I would consider Smith even if it was ranked higher. Silly comparison.</p>
<p>I don’t think that’s the case in real life. You see it on message boards but it’s a very small fraction of kids we know in real life that stress over college rank. Most stress over finding an affordable school. You see some stress over quality of major choices. We’ve seen kids cross off schools with no Greek system. My D isn’t attending the higher ranked schools she was accepted into. She’s attending the one that was the best fit for her and for our pocketbook. We wouldn’t change a thing.</p>
<p>During the search, I looked at the ranking with a grain-of-salt. I think it’s natural to look at all the info provided and when it’s a school 2000 miles away that you may not get to visit until after decisions come out, sure… that stuff can at least give you some ideas. My own D didn’t seem to care about over-all rankings but she did pay attention to things like “best classroom experience” which the Princeton review offers. Those seemed more important to her.</p>
<p>oldfort, I don’t understand your post. But anyway…</p>
<p>
</p>
<p><a href=“The Ivy League Has Perfected The Investment Banker And Management Consultant Replicator”>http://www.forbes.com/sites/michaelgibson/2014/02/07/the-ivy-league-has-perfected-the-investment-banker-and-management-consultant-replicator/</a></p>
<p>Ah…yes. Engineering. Our DD was interested in this major, and DH (also an engineer) scrutinized the colleges course offerings, facilities, and ABET accreditation. </p>