Is US News complete bunk?

College Search & Selection
1

<p>I know how much power US news wields among high school seniors searching for colleges. Everyone quotes the US news for almost everything related to college comparisons, and even collegeconfidential itself used to have forums based on the "top 25 schools" ranked by US news.</p>

<p>But I have some serious questions about US news. First of all, why is UPenn ranked #4 above schools like Stanford, MIT, and Caltech? S and M (and to a certain extent C) are household names. They are schools lauded for their academic excellence, and are considered to be on par with Harvard. Upenn, although a good school, is not seen by employers, grad schools, and the public in general as an equal of Stanford, MIT, and Caltech. If anything, Upenn is perceived to be a tier below HYPSMC. By the same token, I don't think Duke belongs up there tied with MIT and Stanford. </p>

<p>A few years back, Caltech was ranked #1. Now it's ranked #8. Did Caltech really fall THAT much over the course of like 2 or 3 years? I mean dang, did all the labs over there spontaneously explode or something? I just don't get how a university can change that much in such a short period of time. </p>

<p>Perhaps US News is trying to generate some interest by mixing up schools like this? I mean, if they put Harvard, Yale, Stanford, MIT, and Caltech at the top spots all the time, maybe people will be like "yeah, big whoop. I already know they are the top schools. I don't need a magazine to state the obvious." But by putting some lower quality schools like Penn and Duke above certain superstar schools like MIT, US News geenerates interest among people who are shocked to see those schools up there.</p>

2

<p>The USNWR has its strengths and its weaknesses. One rating within the larger USNWR ranking that does not change much over time is the Academic Reputation rank, now called the Peer Assessment rating. I think that's a much more accurate indicator of academic excellence. It is a rating based on the opinions of thousands of top academic administrators and researchers from universities accross the nation. Obviously, it is not 100% accurate, but it is more reliable than the overall USNWR ranking, which, as you point out, varries significantly from year to year and sometimes has strange outcomes. According to the Academic Reputation rank, universities would fall in the following groups:</p>

<h1>1 (4.9/5.0)</h1>

<p>Harvard University
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Princeton University
Stanford University
Yale University</p>

<h1>6 (4.8/5.0)</h1>

<p>University of California-Berkeley </p>

<h1>7 (4.7/5.0)</h1>

<p>California Institute of Technology
Columbia University</p>

<h1>9 (4.6/5.0)</h1>

<p>Cornell University
Duke University
Johns Hopkins University
University of Chicago
University of Michigan-Ann Arbor
University of Pennsylvania</p>

<h1>15 (4.5/5.0)</h1>

<p>Brown University </p>

<h1>16 (4.4/5.0)</h1>

<p>Dartmouth College
Northwestern University</p>

<h1>18 (4.3/5.0)</h1>

<p>Carnegie Mellon University
University of California-Los Angeles
University of Virginia</p>

<h1>21 (4.2/5.0)</h1>

<p>Rice University
University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill</p>

<h1>23 (4.1/5.0)</h1>

<p>University of Texas-Austin
Vanderbilt University
Washington University-St Louis</p>

<h1>26 (4.0/5.0)</h1>

<p>Emory University
Georgetown University
Georgia Institute of Technology
University of Illinois-Urbana Champaign</p>

<p>Like I said above, those aren't 100% accurate and there is no difference between universities separated by 0.2 or 0.3 points.</p>

3

<p>If you want to see why a college is rated over the others, simply look at how the school is rated on the components that go into it. For example, Alexandre's example of academic excellence. Sometimes a good score on a factor will vault a school up. Read the details.</p>

<p>And of course US News has an interest in the ratings changing every year. No one would purchase the latest rankings if they were unchanged year to year to year. Of course CalTech didn't actually plunge in quality. Colleges rarely change that much in a short period of time.</p>

<p>There have been some big changes in methodology over the years. They tweak it a little bit every year. Those changes pulled other schools above CalTech. Now, they could argue that those additions and tweaks make the rankings more accurate, and they're probably right. But it's also true that tweaks that change the rankings help sell magazines.</p>

4

<p>WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT????????? </p>

<p>"U PENN NOT SEEN BY EMPLOYERS"</p>

<p>are you SERIOUSLY retarded??????</p>

<p>UPENN Wharton has one of THE best business programs in the WORLD. undergrad students might get hired even before they graduate. big companies "shop" for new employees there ALL the times. my mom's niece that goes there for grad school, she got hired after enrolled for TWO MONTHS!</p>

<p>seriously, if you don't how good UPENN is, then you need some help. Caltech, MIT they are ENGINEERING schools. while Sloan MIT is a good business school, it is nothing compared to UPENN.</p>

<p>anyways, who are YOU to say what school is good and what school is NOT? just cuz YOU know the name harvard, doesnt mean UPENN is no good. jus cuz the name Harvard is more "heard' it doesnt translate to prestige. I'm sure the bum on the street has heard of MIT, but he might not have heard of Whilliams or Amherst. Are you telling me whilliams is not as good?</p>

<p>its HYPSM, there is no C in the five. UPenn is the next best ivy after HYP. you should REALLY do some research. they have amazing 7 year programs that will get you a better job than perhaps caltech can get you.</p>

5

<p>well alexandre, if you think that there no real difference between schools with 0.2 to 0.3 difference. then your refuting your past argument that Columbia was a "lower ivy" , But you now put it in that range of between HYP. Just thought I would point that out.</p>

<p>But you should note that schools have admitted in the past to ranking peer schools lower on that survey in order to boost their own school in the ranking.</p>

6

<p>The reason USNews has validity is because large numbers of people believe it does. It is not USNews' fault that people believe that the ranking of colleges has something to do with quality of education. In fact, its critics, like those in this post, just add to its validity because they too believe that rankings are necessary and have importance and relate to quality but they just disagree with USNews list. Moreover, USNews is delighted, for its sales purposes, that somehow people actually believe that there is a difference between No. 1 and 3, or No.s 4 and 6, when in fact the real difference between any college in the top 20 is miniscule and USNews does not even claim it is a difference of any significance when it comes to choosing a college.</p>

<p>The USNews list was created as a public interest item to sell magazines. There is a reason that Harvard, Yale, and Princeton are always at or near the top--the whole evaluation system was based on the assumption that factors those schools scored the highest in were the only factors of importance to any rankings. In other words, those three have always been the model to which all others are compared. Ever notice that low cost of tuition has never been a factor in the rankings even though it is undoubtedly a far more important factor for families and students to consider than most of those used? Those who created the USNews list rejected that factor because Harvard, Yale, Princeton were not good at it and using it would have placed public universities at the top. The plain fact is that public universities have never broken the top twenty because they cannot possibly excel in all the Harvard, Yale, Princeton factors.</p>

<p>CalTech became No. 1 one year because the USNews group that creates the rankings changed the weighting of certain factors for that year. When that resulted in Caltech being No. 1 and not Harvard, Yale or Princeton, the higher up supervisors were aghast and ordered the return to the prior weighting system.</p>

<p>Upenn is where it is because it excels in the factors that are considered. In the late 1980's, Upenn was ranked lower constantly (just barely in the top 25). The powers that be at Penn decided that they did not want Penn to be be considered as only a back up choice anymore to other ivies. They put together an internal committee to try to figure out how to do that. Many suggestions were made about recruiting methods, changes to the college, etc., but one idea trumped all the others -- a genius recommended that Penn do everything it can to improve itself in the precise factors considered by USNews so it could raise itself in the rankings which would result in more applications and becoming a first choice school. That began basically a campaign designed to do just that with the result that Penn is now No. 4. People sometimes criticize Washington University of St. Louis as doing things simply to raise its rankings. Well, WU simply learned from the master of doing that, UPenn.</p>

7

<p>wow. i cant believe this person. trying to say Upenn is not as good. first I heard! good luck on becoming in an engineer when you graduate from mit or caltech. maybe ill hire you after i become CEO upon completion of Wharton</p>

8

<p>on second thought... u DID think caltech was better
sux to be you if that ends up the case!</p>

9

<p>Ivyleaguer, I never said there was such a thing as a lower Ivy. It is others on this forum who seem hell bent on using that term. All Ivies are great. Admitedly, some have better faculties and better resources, but all of them are excellent. And I do in fact believe that there isn't much of a difference between a peer assessment score of 4.6 and 4.9 or 4.3 and 4.6. I also believe that the peer assessment score is the only useful part of the USNWR ranking.</p>

<p>Secondly, although I am sure that a tiny number of the raters have been less than flatering to some of their peer schools, let us face it, it is obviously not hurting most of the schools. I mean, you would expect H,P,S,Y and M to have lower scores than 4.9/5.0 if there truly was a deliberate attempt to downgrade peer universities. If a handful of raters decided to act unethically, it clearly has not altered the outcome in any significant fashion.</p>

10

<p>US News is successful just like American Idol:</p>

<ul>
<li>both generate dialogue and controversy</li>
<li>both generate anticipation for the next issue or episode</li>
<li>both generate tons of free advertising/marketing,
just like the governorator does here in California</li>
<li>bottom line, all of the US News controversy sells more magazines</li>
</ul>

<p>Someone at US News is a marketing genius, because no matter how schools are ranked, someone will be upset, but never upset enough to stop buying the magazine and arguing about the rankings year after year.</p>

11

<p>Alexandre,</p>

<p>Peer Assessment is also the only non-objective part of the overall score. It is easily misinterpreted, has widely varying results and, as has often been suggested, more reflective of what grad schools have accomplished, not undergrad education per se. It’s flaws are best experienced in the middle rankings, not just the top tier. </p>

<p>Based on the Peer Assessment score:</p>

<p>--Ohio State (Peer-3.7, USnews-#62) and
--Indiana (P.A. 3.8, USnews-#71)
…………..........................................…are better than:
.......................Tufts (3.6/#28)
........................Brandies (3.6/#32)
........................Boston College (3.6/#37)
........................Wake Forest (3.5/#27)
…………………………..Case Western (3.6/#35)
…………………………..Lehigh (3.1/#37)
…………………………..Tulane (3.5/#43)</p>

<p>According to Peer Assessment alone, the rankings would change to allow</p>

<p>--Indiana #33 instead of #71</p>

<p>--Arizona #40 instead of #100</p>

<p>--Oregon #57 instead of #117</p>

<p>--Kansas #58 instead of #90</p>

<p>-Notre Dame will be tied with U-Washington
-Rice#17=Wisconsin #32
-Texas#46=WUSL#11, Vanderbilt#18,
-Indiana#71=William & Mary#31, NYU#32, UCSD#35
-Minnesota#66=William & Mary#31, NYU#32, UCSD#35
-Arizona#98=Case Western#35, Boston College#37, Brandies#32, ......................and Tufts#28</p>

<p>Texas#41>Georgetown#25
Berkeley#21>Cal Tech#8</p>

<p>I wouldn't advise anyone to follow the above peer assessed advice, unless you really believe Arizona is cut from the same cloth as Tufts, Case Western, Boston College, or Brandies overall.</p>

12

<p>For many business, science, enngineering and other technical majors I would have no problem selecting some of those schools over the higher ranked generally private northeast schools.</p>

13

<p>Kalidescope, the peer assessment score is not perfect. I stressed that point above. It is true that to a degree, the Peer Assessment score is a reflection of the quality of a university's graduate programs. But that also means that undergrads have access to better faculty and research opportunities, It is a balancing act. Tufts is a fine university...but so is Arizona. Do not underestimate Arizona. In Business, the Sciences and Engineering, Arizona has some of the better programs in the nation...both at the graduate and undergraduate level. If you do not know Arizona well...or if you do not respect it, it does not mean that academics and recruiters do not respect it either.</p>

14

<p>Barrons, </p>

<p>no reason not to choose any of them, however, that has nothing to do with the OP, or Peer Assessment as an overall indicator of the undergraduate education any particular school will supply--allot of students are not tied into a specific major on entering college, therefore many of us are looking at overall undergraduate education not a specific field. Peer Assessment seems to be a pretty skewerd indicator, especially in the mid-range. </p>

<p>If you have in-state tuition to a good school it is probably a good idea to go there (mich, vir, wis, carolina, berkeley, etc.), if you are not going in-state the cost is exorbitant more or less everywhere.</p>

15

<p>I think UPenn is definitely overrated by US News. But if they maintain their overrated rank, then who knows, maybe one day they will earn that rank when kids choose UPenn over other schools. That might mean that US News is a self fulfulling prophesy. Weird how they have so much power!</p>

16

<p>Kalidescope, most people chose to major in something sooner or later. You may decide to major in "undergraduate education", but most people actually want to majro in a discipline, be it Economics or Physics ot Engineering and to that end, those students will spend 50% of their time studying purely that field.</p>

17

<p>Alexandre,</p>

<p>I would love to be a fly on the wall as a GC recommends Arizona or Ohio State over Tufts or Brandies or Case Western or Boston College when in-state tuition is not an issue--unless, as Barrons says, one of those two partricular schools offers a specific program that transcends the school as a whole, but of course, that is not what peer assessment is supposed to indicate, is it.</p>

<p>Really.</p>

<p>Edit:</p>

<p>Alexandre you seem to imply that you will need a lucky guess when picking schools. Of course you will need to pick a major eventually, but not always during your senior year of high school while being forced to pick your college. Therefore, for many students it makes sense to go to a school that offers an across the board premier education--to the degree that they qualify to go to that school. For me, I'm leaning toward pre-law type majors, but I like bio and chem, so I might want to go Med. On the other hand, I'm thinking about government. I want to see during life after high school what I want to do. I think this is common.
I suppose if you qualify for Ohio State and Tufts of BC or Case West, you may pick Ohio State, but I'll bet not to many GC's or parents would recommend it (if money is not an issue). However, the Peer Assessors might!</p>

18

<p>I would recommend Arizona or OSU over Case or Brandeis most of the time. Not over Tufts or BC though...unless the student wishes to study Business or Engineering, in which case, I would recommend OSU and Arizona over BC, Case, Brandeis and Tufts.</p>

19

<p>random fact from my education professor: the US News ranking issue generates profit equilvalent to 5 or 6 months of magazine issues. in other words, this is their version of the "swimsuit" issue. no way US news will give up their rankings issue. haha</p>

20

<p>By the way, in answer to the original OP, there's some useful info in the USnews, but only a true slacker (fool and his money) would base their college choice on the USnews ranking (or any other)...even if only remotely!</p>

<p>For some real humor, check out the Times of Libya ranking!</p>