US News 2007 Rankings Leaked: UCLA 24th

Colleges and Universities A-Z University of California - Los Angeles
1

<p>Right on time, the US News 2007 rankings have now been leaked within College Search & Selection. However, this year they might be a hoax, judging from the fact that only the Top 50 have been posted (last year, the entire rankings were posted). UCLA is now ranked 24th, tied with Virginia and Michigan for second-best public university in the nation... Also, UCSD has noticeably surpassed USC in the rankings (as I predicted), probably due to their stronger academics and reputation. :rolleyes:</p>

<p>Summary of California universities:[list=0]
[<em>]Stanford: 5th (no change)
[</em>]Caltech: 7th (no change)
[<em>]UCB: 18th (up by two)
[</em>]UCLA: 24th (up by one)
[<em>]UCSD: 31st (no change)
[</em>]USC: 34th (down by four)
[<em>]UCI: 41st (down by one)
[</em>]UCSB: 44th (up by one)
[li]UCD: 48th (no change)[/li][/list]
Top 50:

[quote]

  1. Princeton
  2. Harvard
  3. Yale/Penn
  4. Stanford/MIT
  5. Duke/Columbia/Caltech
  6. Dartmouth/WUSTL
  7. Northwestern
  8. JHU/Brown
  9. Cornell
  10. Chicago
  11. Rice
  12. Emory/Berkeley
  13. Vandy
  14. ND
  15. Gtown/CMU
  16. UVA/UCLA/UMICH
  17. Tufts/UNC
  18. Wake/W&M
  19. Lehigh/UCSD/Brandeis
  20. USC/Rochester
  21. Wsiconsin
  22. NYU/Case
  23. BC/GTech
  24. Irvine/RPI/Illinois
  25. UCSB/Washington/Yeshiva
  26. PSU
  27. Davis/Syracuse
  28. Tulane/Florida/UT

[/quote]
</p>

2

<p>I don't get why UCSD remained stagnant.</p>

<p>Any thoughts Flopsy?</p>

3

<p>wow who cares</p>

4

<p>Not sure. UCSD hasn't really remained stagnant... technically, it's tied for 31st as well as 32nd (its previous rank). My guess is that US News has revised its ranking criteria in a way that doesn't affect UCSD, but is detrimental to USC. It's not that UCSD has stagnated, but rather that it has stood its ground while its adjacent schools have taken somewhat of a hit... :rolleyes:</p>

5

<p>


I'm guessing that you don't follow the heated rankings arguments over in the other forums... :rolleyes:</p>

6

<p>"wow who cares"</p>

<p>I was just curious more than anything.</p>

7

<p>why did berkeley climb 2 spots and UCLA only one! Why can't UCLA at least have the sole distinction of #2 public? I guess I have to wait one more year for that to happen...</p>

8

<p>Why would UCLA outrank Michigan?</p>

9

<p>if that's true, it doesn't look like much changed at all.</p>

10

<p>Why would UCLA outrank Michigan? because we have far more applicants, better research, better applicant pool, etc.</p>

11

<p>"Why would UCLA outrank Michigan?"</p>

<p>because it's in michigan...</p>

12

<p>UCLA has worse research than Michigan and the student body is comparable ( Mich has better scores, more UCLA people are top 10%).</p>

<p>State of Michigan > California </p>

<p>Why would a state school in Calfornia have more applicants than one in Michigan? Oh yeah, California is freaking huge.</p>

13

<p>"UCLA has worse research than Michigan and the student body is comparable ( Mich has better scores, more UCLA people are top 10%).</p>

<p>State of Michigan > California </p>

<p>Why would a state school in Calfornia have more applicants than one in Michigan? Oh yeah, California is freaking huge."</p>

<p>you are clearly delusional...to rebut just one of your claims UCLA receives the most undergraduate applications than any other university.</p>

14

<p>Hey, why is Princeton better than Harvard?</p>

15

<p>This doesn't look that bad. At least we're moving up the prestige ladder albeit slowly. In relation to other public schools, I really believe that UCLA deserves a sole spot at #2. Univ. of Virginia and Univ. of Michigan are good schools, but UCLA seems to be more prestigious and a better overall university. That's just my opinion anyway. In any case, on a national scale, being ranked #24 is pretty impressive.</p>

16

<p>if quality of undergrad education was taken into account, princeton would blow harvard out of the water. really. if we're talking prestige and research, then harvard > princeton. </p>

<p>i'm curious to find out what the theorized change in criteria is that helped keep UCSD in place but made USC fall.... especially since both are making efforts to improve. </p>

<p>anyway, wow look at WUSTL go!</p>

<p>*edit: to all those comparing ucla vs. virginia vs. michigan: the three basically shuffle for #2 public every year, so dont take one ranking over the other seriously. when one of them outrank berkeley, then that's probably something more substantive.</p>

<p>*edit #2: ok lets just wait for the real rankings to come out....</p>

17

<p>Princeton treats its undergraduates like gems. But then these rankings are based on graduate programs and there's much more on how they rank. Maybe they do the same to the graduates? I'm shaky on this. Feel free to correct me.</p>

18

<p>Hi. I am an 18 yr-old Japanese lady who has lived in 4 countries (mostly in the Pacific except England) and this is what I have to say. In my personal opinion, this US News ranking is bogus...flawed... and shouldn’t be taken very seriously. why?</p>

<ol>
<li><p>I seriously don't think there is a school anywhere in the world that's better than Harvard. </p></li>
<li><p>Berkeley is just ranked number 18 while Stanford is number 5. Helll-oooo??? If Stanford made it close to the top 3, I think Berkeley seriously deserved to be up there too. Berkeley is a globally famous university and I cannot believe some unknown, less popular, poorer resources schools would outranked a mighty, giant, world-renown school. </p></li>
</ol>

<p>I Believe Berkeley should be ranked higher than these schools:
Brown, Dartmouth, Vanderbilt, Emory, Rice, Washington, Duke, Cornell, and maybe, Stanford. </p>

<ol>
<li><p>Both UCLA and Michigan are better schools than Brown, Dartmouth, Vanderbilt, Emory, Rice and Washington, and should be ranked higher than those schools. </p></li>
<li><p>The US News ranking game is pro private institutions.</p></li>
</ol>

<hr>

<p>In countries where I once lived, here are the most well-known.</p>

<p>Japan:
1. Harvard
2. Berkeley/MIT
3. Stanford/UCLA/Columbia/NYU</p>

<p>The Philippines:
1. Harvard
2. Berkeley/Yale/MIT/
3. Stanford/UCLA/Michigan/NYU/Columbia</p>

<p>Singapore:
1. Harvard
2. Berkeley/MIT
3. Stanford/UCLA/Columbia/Chicago/Duke/Johnshopkins</p>

<p>United Kingdom:
1. Harvard
2. Yale/Columbia/Chicago/Nerthwestern/MIT
3. NYU/Michigan/JHU/Berkeley/Stanford/UCLA</p>

19

<p>^ Why cant a school be a TINY bit better then harvard? Just because a school has more name recognition does NOT mean that its better than others. In asia the UCs, especially berkeley may be heralded moreso probably because those schools have a large percentage of asians. In addition, they both are located in areas that have larger asian populations, which helps the name recognition. Lastly, schools like berkeley are great in engineering and the sciences, which many asians go into.</p>

<p>Also, name recognition has more to do with research accomplishments. Your more likely to hear about a medical breakthrough at UCLA than you are about a Harvey Mudd professor winning the 'professor of the year' award.</p>

<p>I like the UCs, especially UCLA, but saying that Berkeley belongs ABOVE schools like Brown, Cornell, Duke? Cmon now.</p>

<p>You cant believe that some "unknown, less popular" school got ranked higher? Since when did popularity = caliber of school. If that was the case, then USC would be a top 5 school here in Southern California.</p>

20

<p>I think she was taking into account the quality of the faculty, in which case Berkeley is way, way better than Duke, Cornell, or Brown.</p>

<p>I am not saying that these schools are worse for undergrad, just interpreting.</p>