<p>
[quote]
Mr. Kelly says he is thinking about changing the rankings because he has been struck by a number of surveys that show how important cost is in decisions about where to go to college. He says he has thought about adding a component to the rankings that would reward colleges that deliver a superior education at a low cost, a category that would help public institutions.
[/quote]
<p>Rankings are already stupid enough. Are they gonna calculate the ratio of the quality of education to how big the cost is...? Dumb...</p>
<p>it's not the matter of stupidity but if it can help, why not be glad about that. At least it can help.</p>
<p>This wouldn't be logical because cost is already indirectly built into the ranking system - through matriculation rates. If USNews wants to improve their rankings they should use more objective criteria: placement into top grad schools, starting salaries, acquisition of C-level positions at corporations and so forth.</p>
<p>lasker,</p>
<p>i don't see how matriculation rates have anything to do with the cost of a school, or schools rankings. most top 50 state schools have the same, if not lower yield than private schools. UVa happens to have a great yield rate--regardless of public or private--however. regardless, yield isn't even in the formula anymore.</p>
<p>for example.<br>
UCLA gets more than 50,000 applications, accepts 12,500 and 4500 enroll. a little over 33% yield
Berkeley gets about 42,000 applications, accepts 10000 and enrolls 4000. 40%ish yield
Michigan's yield this year was 46%.
UVa got 18000 applications, accepted 6000, and around 3150 are enrolling--52% yield.</p>
<p>as far as I know, UVa is the only top public witha yield over 50%. Many top privates have that.</p>
<p>Cost is a factor a lot of students consider when choosing schools. Because of this, low costs have a positive impact on matriculation rates. The matriculation rates are calculated into the rankings directly. Thus, indirectly, lower costs given an equal quality education should be expected to give a college a higher ranking.</p>
<p>
[quote]
The matriculation rates are calculated into the rankings directly
[/quote]
</p>
<p>As jags861 pointed out, matriculation rates are NOT "calculated into the rankings directly." U.S. News does NOT consider them at all.</p>