not true. i have enough experience to know us news criteria is not it, not even close.
1 Like
I agree. I too am not aware of the history behind why “NEU” is offensive to Northeastern alums (it somehow seems to be), but it’s hard to change common usage.
Another example is “USC”. People typically think that means University of Southern California, not University of South Carolina.
4 Likes
-
They had no choice. Most schools do not rank students. Most schools have dropped mandatory testing. So what is left?
-
Sure, this change is not relevant to upper middle class or wealthy kids, but SES is big in Academia, so they are responding to the market/industry. And schools with an increasing number of first gen - low ec students are sending a positive message to kids in that category; that message is that we are not exclusive to top 5 per centers.
-
Too difficult to quantify. (Colleges had been fibbing by including med school teaching numbers into thier undergrad reporting.)
1 Like
I don’t see people “hitting” Northeastern.
I think people point out - why they get so many apps.
People from all sort of schools go to grad school at Harvard - from low rated Cal States to Fairleigh Dickinson to directionals like Ga Southern to so many state schools like Arkansas to South Dakota, etc. So that they send students to Harvard and Northwestern isn’t monopolized by great schools.
One simply has to look at their admission stats to know that you have to be really smart to go there and that the school has a strong niche and presence in society, with its co op strategy.
But that does not deflate the fact that many of their apps come from their previous high ranking in combination with being a simple application to complete.
I read more about that then Northeastern not being a good school.
2 Likes
Those seems like excuses to me. If US News can survey colleges on who comes to mind (and make that 20%), they can certainly do some work and do this better,
The ratings have always been suspect. That’s what some of us have been saying for years.
If people could realize (finally?) how arbitrary the criteria is, maybe they could also realize that the rankings aren’t really at all meaningful, unless you are looking for outside validation for your/your child’s school choice.
3 Likes
I agree - you have a 4.0 and some APs, you’ll apply to Harvard.
If Harvard required tests and you had a 28 SAT or 1300, you wouldn’t.
2 Likes
That seems inconsistent to me. Folks are critical of USNews peer ranking for obvious reasons, but yet then say they should survey the same Deans for ‘quality of the class’? That is just more self-serving opinion.
Again, the only independent hard numbers (SAT/ACT) have been dropped by colleges, so the data of incoming students no longer exists. And high school ranking has been declining for years.
I think one thing rank misses is cost - because not all schools cost the same and all don’t pay the same.
At Charleston, I’m refunded money off of tuition - so it’s an expensive city but maybe I’ll spend $70K over four years. Full pay would be well over $200K - so the value is different kid to kid.
My son’s school - I paid $60K and others over $200K.
The value proposition is different.
Is Charleston, ranked #9 regional South worse than Washington & Lee, at the time when my daughter applied, ranked #9 or 10 in LACs. On paper - yes.
But does that change if W&L would have set me back $325K full pay as she got no money vs. maybe $70K for Charleston?
Rank doesn’t account for that.
Each person has a different mathematical equation.
And yes, the value of each program has to be determined by each family - some are willing to pay and some, like me, aren’t.
But a rank in essence is saying one is better than the other - but without factoring in major choice, direct admit majors or not, and to me, most importantly, what a student will have to spend at one vs. another- how can it really be accurate?
Some spend $0 at Harvard and some spend $80K+ - a rank doesn’t factor that in. But to each person individually, how could it not?
3 Likes
you act as if there is no way to further determine how strong or how competitive a college might be.
Boston University enrolls 600 students in January to CGS, they are not included in their published stats. Their fall enrolment in Boston is 3100.
4 Likes
Northeastern has a $75 application fee. They offer a variety of waivers, as do virtually all colleges. You may be thinking of Tulane that has no application fee.
And what is wrong with having a simple application? Does everything have to be complicated? McGill and virtually all Canadian universities have bare bones applications, and they seem to be doing well.
4 Likes
It’s true - tons of schools send waivers - including Chicago and WUSTL in our case - of which mine didn’t have interest - but some might.
1 Like
Oberlin at 49 is a head-scratcher. They are generally considered – even with the community issues they have had and resulting reputation – to be a top-notch LAC, aren’t they? Certainly they are one of the top Midwest LACs.
5 Likes
I don’t think that anyone here questions Northeastern’s quality as an institution. It’s excellence, especially around Co-op is often pointed out in this forum. My niece is thriving as a junior there and chose Northeastern over Yale, Cornell, and Vassar so they won some pretty impressive cross-admit battles for her. My D has it on her list as well after a visit in the Spring. I think that they are an excellent school.
However, Northeastern’s acceptance rates stats (as well as Tulane’s) are also fair game for questioning. I did a quick check of my D’s high school acceptance numbers over the past 4 years. The average acceptance rate is 51%, never dipping below 35% and going as high as 70%. A far cry from the 5-6% number published.
9 Likes
Some people mistakenly conflate criticism of an admissions office and their tactics with criticism of the school overall. The admissions office operates independently for undergraduate admissions.
10 Likes
Not sure it’s an “act”; since standardized testing has all but been eliminated (with TO), I know of no independent quantifiable data sources to measure the 'strength" of an incoming class. Admission/yeild stats are easily game-able, so I understand why USNews dropped class strength.
1 Like
Spot on. Test scores used to function as a first order filter for kids deciding where to apply. Some people liked than and some didn’t. In the current environment TO is the no risk approach with a side benefit of increasing application volumes.
Reminder that CC is supposed to be a welcoming and friendly place. It’s also not a place for debate. State your position and move on.
I didn’t say anything was wrong with that. I merely pointed out that decreasing barriers to applying, like offering free apps/easy to get waivers, and/or not having a supplemental essay increases application volume. And some schools have used those types of tactics to help them rise in the rankings. I don’t think that’s necessarily a bad thing either.
Again, I think Northeastern is a great school for many students.
3 Likes