My last post is probably a bit of an exaggeration because the employers that recruit at Harvard are probably more conscious of the prestige of the institution than most. That’s one of the reasons they are there. They would notice if it dropped to 20. I’m not sure it would make a real difference in recruitment though.
@LBad96 I have one friend who went to montclair for a year and is about to start at our community college, another friend who transferred to her community college after one or two semesters and is going to transfer to Oklahoma City in the spring, and the girl I bought my car from transferred from montclair to alabama after one semester. But then again, my cousin was dying to go to Rutgers but missed the deadline so she had to go to montclair and was planning on transferring out but is absolutely in love with the school now… so I guess it depends on the person.
It’s so true that recruiters don’t pay attention to rankings. If they’re there, they’re there. Not gonna change the next year if that college goes down in the ranks
Or maybe Goldman Sachs got a pre-release of the rankings and that is why they have stopped recruiting at Harvard and Yale 
http://www.wsj.com/articles/goldman-rethinks-campus-recruiting-efforts-1466709118
When the first version of the new Carnegie Classification system came out for comment, Wesleyan was classified in a manner that would map to a “Regional University” for US News. When the final classification came out, they were back to being classified in a manner that would map to a “LAC” for US News.
I am assuming that they appealed their original classification…
The Service Academies in the LACs is the silliest thing.
Where should the Service Academies be classified?
They don’t produce sufficient PHDs to be in the national category?
That’s actually a problem with calling that category “national”, really—that’s actually the set of research-high universities, many of which are, really, primarily regional in their reach.
@ClarinetDad16 They had their own category prior to last year. They should be put back.
They are too different from entrance to field of study to career goals to be grouped with traditional lacs. They don’t even have an open application process.
When Haverford requires 5 years of service upon graduation and congressional appointment to get in and placement potentially on the front line then perhaps they can be grouped together.
One of the very first versions of the USNews poll also classified Wesleyan as a “National University”. In that particular year (1985) they only listed the top ten schools in each category, but Wesleyan, along with MIT, Michigan and Virginia all received an italicized, "Noteworthy"at the bottom of the box.
There will be a new variable, titled “Student Social Activity”, which will count for 10% of the overall score. It measures Drinks and Drugs per Student, Parties Attended per Student, and Non-Relationship Hookups per Student.
Speaking to the press, the USNews PR rep says, “Public universities have long been complaining that our formula favors private schools. Well, the “Student Social Activity” metric favors them. This year, as you can see, schools like UW-Madison, UIUC, Iowa and Florida State rose at least five positions primarily because of it.”
LOL Does a high score on “Student Social Activity” raise the school’s standing or lower it? =))
Haha good question.
On Monday, Times reporter Norma Brindleburgton asked USNews & World Report’s Brian Kelly about the new Student Social Activity metric. A high score on this metric helps a school’s overall score and ranking.
When Norma described her interpretation of the variables, Kelly blushed. After composing himself, he repsonded, “We seem to have caused some confusion: we meant drinks of water and other soft drinks, drugs like aspirin and acetaminophen, hook-ups like bowling and concert dates, and non-alcoholic parties. We would never intentionally promote unethical, irresponsible or illegal behavior.”
Ah! Now I understand! 8-}
“bowling . . . dates” (#53)
Positive weighting of this factor would tend to diminish private LACs, particularly Northeastern ones. Though since they are all in the same category, it may not matter much. Some CTCL schools may rise, however.
@prezbucky Thanks for the early morning chuckle!!! Too bad The Onion is shut down…
@prezbucky I just googled Norma Brindleburgton. Not sure I’d trust her objectivity on her reporting of this. She’s a grad of a large Southern university with an ‘A’ in it. (Auburn, Alabama, South Carolina, Georgia?) and a lifetime member of a ‘top tier’ sorority. In her report she was badgering Mr. Kelly about dress codes and how at some ‘highly regarded though obscure colleges’ young ladies go to classes in their PJs and without ’ a dab of make-up!’ At her ‘alumni mater’ girls went to class in dressers (sweaters in winter) even when these were the same clothes they had worn the day before, and the day before. (In a separate article in Seventeen mag Norma cautions college-bound girls to avoid hook-ups, unless the dude is from a ‘top tier’ fraternity and drives a new SUV (black preferred) and is very clean.)
When asked about the feud with Reed College, Mr. Kelly said, “Well, we tried reaching out to them with a gift: some hemp seed, for making ropes; and an old Soviet flag, for their art collection. They didn’t respond favorably. But I can say we did try.”
(Seriously, I googled “Student Social Activity” because I thought it was real). I cannot believe my naivety. That would be as silly as a metric using HS guidance counselors in Alabama to weigh in on Lawrence vs St Lawrence, or Wheaton vs Wheaton.
Is there a list somewhere that shows the universities that have changed categories? We all know about Villanova, but what about others? The Carnegie site does not show the changes - only the new classifications.