<p>Interesting study, although it also says students typically apply to three or four schools, which if you believe all the postings on here, anecdotal evidence and recent articles certainly doesn't seem to be the case.</p>
<p>That's why they are anecdotes--aka sometimes total BS.</p>
<p>It did note the northeast is different in many regards.</p>
<p>Overated: UC's, NYU</p>
<p>the only people who are saying that great schools such as Penn, Duke and Cornell are overrated are those that got denied from them and thus hold a grudge and say that the school they attend now is underrated. Just accept the fact that these places are better and that you're upset that you yourself didn't get in.</p>
<p>OVerated: NYU
Underated: Boston U, U Miami, Syracuse U, Haverford</p>
<p>lalala: I don't know how relevant that argument is because I know a lot of people including myself who never applied to WUSTL yet we all think it is a bit overrated.</p>
<p>for me, i tend to call certain colleges 'overrated' when i see the caliber of students that i know who went/go/are going there. likewise, i call other schools 'underrated' when their ranking doesnt justify their selectivity, caliber of students, and successes of alumni.</p>
<p>it really is a joke, there aer so many Duke kids that didnt get into cornell...there are even a bunch who are gettin in off the waitlist at Duke, who were going to cornell...idk their decision, but it goes to show u, that these places are very selective</p>
<p>I agree with jakem333: "and you ask why USNEWs uses admission %? It's because USNEWS means absolutely nothing. That's what you have to understand. You can't base true factors of a good school on what USNEWS is using, because simply put, it's BS."</p>
<p>and huskem55: "for me, i tend to call certain colleges 'overrated' when i see the caliber of students that i know who went/go/are going there. likewise, i call other schools 'underrated' when their ranking doesnt justify their selectivity, caliber of students, and successes of alumni."</p>
<ul>
<li>It's logic. Separation of reality from media.</li>
</ul>
<p>I cannot agree with that observation. I have met just 7 students from Western Michigan University and all 7 were brilliant, highly motivated and productive people. I met 4 Dartmouth students and all 4 were less than impressive to say the least. If I were to judge universities based on my limited experience, I'd say Western Michigan is a better university than Dartmouth. But I would never be so arrogant as to assume that my personal experience is more accurate than that of the experts, even if I were exposed to a lareger sample size. And that's a good thing too, because as we both know, Dartmouth is much better than Western Michigan. </p>
<p>The fact of the matter is, a university produces thousands of alums. None of us will ever get to know more than a dozen or so of those thousands of alums. Judging a university based on our individual exposure to the alums of that university isn't the best way to go.</p>
<p>so alexandre, how would you determine whether or not schools are over/under rated?</p>
<p>A school is overrated if the general public thinks more of it than the experts. A school is underrated if the general public thinks less of it than the experts.</p>
<p>FSU is underrated. It is a Carnegie Research I rated university with some significant programs in the Arts as well as the Sciences and Professional programs. For a major public university with it's programs it is considerably underrated, especially with regard to other major public and private schools in Florida.</p>
<p>It has taken a hit in the USNWR for undergrad stats due to, apparently, the hiring of an ex-politician as opposed to a pure academic as university President. While the goals of the FSU Trustees with such a hire was probably to garner additional monies from the Florida Legislature, this has hurt them in academia, at present at least. </p>
<p>It's just wrong. This illustrates perfectly the problem with rating services.</p>
<p>Alexandre,</p>
<p>Your statement makes perfect sense - on the surface. However, 'experts' have the same biases and private motivations as do the public. They are still human, after all. Additionally, such experts are, perhaps, better at concealing and implementing their prejudices than the public and thus more corrosive to the system.</p>
<p>So, accepting this issue, what's to be done?</p>
<p>Frankly, the system is just not going to be perfect, no matter whom the expert du jour may be. A system of (forgive the American expression) checks and balances should be implemented with vetting by the market place. Finally, a healthy skepticism of such rating services is warranted at all times. Caveat emptor.</p>
<p>Additionally, even the data provided by the various schools should be viewed with some skepticism, especially the private schools. Publics less so.</p>
<p>Wayne State University is probably the most underrated in my opinion. Very good at the grad level, good theatre and med programs. Very high peer assesment (<a href="http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/showthread.php?t=152068&highlight=Wayne+State+University%5B/url%5D">http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/showthread.php?t=152068&highlight=Wayne+State+University</a>) Overshadowed by MSU and UM due to a lack of selectivity and a lack of DI Sports.</p>
<p>parent2noles, how would the hiring of an ex-politician over an academic result in a negative rating for FSU?</p>
<p>I think it caused a loss of confidence in the academic ranks thus adversely affecting the subjective portions of the USNWR ratings. It was political, in other words. He was not well received by academia (even though he has a PhD) and rated poorly. </p>
<p>This negative effect was even suggested by those opposed to the hire even before it happened.</p>
<p>I recall that FSU was rated about 64 in Nationals in 2002 and fell to 112 in the span of a year or two. This loss of USNWR 'stature' caused a ripple-effect downward trend in the quality of FTIC kids. For example, about 58% of all freshmen at FSU were in the top 10% of their hs class in 2002. In 2005 that figure fell to 26%. Equal losses in SAT scores and more also resulted. </p>
<p>While those of us out of college sneeze at such ratings, they influence kids and parents greatly. All, apparently, due to the hiring of one individual - who by the way is a former Speaker of the House in the Florida Legislature and widely known as a wily politician. For example, he skillfully took Florida State through the Mascot issue with the NCAA, and guess what? Of all the schools in the US who were so afflicted with the issue, FSU gets to keep the noble Seminole as it's symbol and even negotiates excellent relations with the two Seminole tribes who had standing to be heard.</p>
<p>Further, he negotiated or greatly influenced the transfer of the Applied Superconductivity Center from the U Wisconsin (Madison) to Florida State. I would suggest that UWM have preferred to keep that progam. Instead, it will now be coupled with the NHMFL at FSU in a synergistic arrangement. That took a bit of finesse as president.</p>
<p>More recently, we see that FSU and UF both gathered large monies from the Florida Legislature, over and above the approval of the Board of Governors, in a time when education dollars are hard to garner. Again, the FSU trustees receive a payoff from their investment in a 'recovering' politician. The USNWR now begins to creep back up...despite Wetherell.</p>
<p>Then again, we have a $630M fund raising campaign recently completed from the alumni; 63% of a billion dollars amounts to a lot of donation-type phone calls.</p>
<p>Lots of stuff like this...I recently have looked at all sorts of ratings and came to my own conclusion after analysis that the USNWR is underrating Florida State and it appears to be political in nature.</p>
<p>So the US News rankings didn't hurt because it was a politician, but since US News weights academia opinions and academia looked down on politicians it indirectly hurt it?</p>
<p>Will that statement wind up in The Onion?</p>
<p>I love how The Onion deals with politics:</p>
<p><a href="http://www.theonion.com/content/node/45793%5B/url%5D">http://www.theonion.com/content/node/45793</a></p>