<p>^I was just waiting for someone to say that!</p>
<p>I’ve read the US news college edition mag for the past three years, and it’s the same crap every year. Who cares what 2009 is, because most of the top colleges have been around for over a century and they’re certainly not gonna change in a year or two (even if “US News” says they did)</p>
<p>Yeah Rice should rise sometime in the near future…i think they will…they deserve it.</p>
<p>After spending almost a week at Duke.. I’m going to say that Duke deserves all the praise it gets from US News!</p>
<p>So do most other schools… not Caltech though… never Caltech… I don’t too much care for pretend “national universities”… :rolleyes:</p>
<p>I think that contrary to the opinion of some, schools change substantially over time. Entire departments can change over in a matter of a few years, the caliber of students can improve if sufficient money is invested in scholarships and financial aid, hundreds of millions can be spent on facilities in just a few years. New programs and new departments are created, new research buildings to lure faculty with money for their start up. The peer assessment may not change much, but changes are taking place at universities whether or not they acknowledge it. Universities should really be view more like fortune 500 companies in terms of their dynamic nature and the size and scope of their enterprises, blue chips are still blue chips but things change.</p>
<p>Harvard
Princeton
Yale
Stanford
U-Penn
MIT
Cal Tech
Columbia
Chicago
WUSTL
Dartmouth
Cornell
Northwestern
Brown
JHU</p>
<p>Georgetown and Tufts may be underrated every year by these rankings, but the good thing is that the students who apply and choose to attend there all seem to be able to look beyond these silly rankings. It’s also good to see that these two schools get really high “quality of teaching” scores. You’d think that would be a more important component of the USNWR rankings than “peer assessment” – gimme a break!</p>