@StanfordGSB00 I definitely see the discrepancy and stand corrected. I agree then that duke will likely not see a rise or a noticeable one at that. Jhu has increased both sat scores and percent of freshman in top 10 percent for class ranking so I would hedge on them increasing.
Predicted graduation rates also depend on the “percentage of wealthy students in the cohort”. If I remember correctly, UChicago’s student profile was a lot less wealthier than its peer schools until recently. That may have also affected how their predicted graduation rate was calculated.
@pupflier - I’m not sure I believe that. Look at this - https://www.usnews.com/best-colleges/rankings/national-universities/economic-diversity-among-top-ranked-schools Although it shows 2014 data, I don’t think that the picture is drastically different in 2009-2011.
If your going to throw stats around take a look at this, among elite colleges UChicago has the lowest median family income ~ $134.5 K FYI Caltech ~ $146.3K
This was written in Jan 2017 so much more up to date.
Bottom line is that USNWR has no real reason to favor any one college over another, they just want their rankings to be as famous as the colleges they rank so they can make money off of the rankings. The colleges know the metrics used so they ALL try and maximize their scores It is what it is, and I doubt it will change.
@blueblue8787
Around where they are now they are maxed out on almost every metric tbh, SAT scores can’t increase much further, expenditure on students is a lot already due to having the best fin aid in the country. Faculty resources will be the same, grad and retention is 96 or 97%. So i really don’t know what they can improve on except their PR score. So I predict 14- 19.
Predicted grad rate isn’t just based off selectivity, but expenditures as well. As expenditures are lower, the predicted graduation rate decreases. That’s why UChicago has a lower predicted graduation rate compared to MIT/Caltech.
According to the Chronicle for Higher Ed, here was the per degree spending at various schools:
Caltech: $598,098
MIT: $421,146
Stanford: $407,865
UChicago: $313,403
Likely ranges:
Duke: 7-11 (currently 8th)
JHU: 8-13 (currently 10th)
Can you pls post the top 25 expenditures or provide the link
@merc81 What do you predict will be Dartmouth’s ranking?
http://collegecompletion.chronicle.com/
The top 25 among Research U’s, very high activity:
- Caltech
- Yale
- MIT
- WashU
- Stanford
- Princeton
- Harvard
- UChicago
- Dartmouth
- Vanderbilt
- Johns Hopkins
- Duke
- UPenn
- Rice
- Columbia
- Brown
- Emory
- UCLA
- Northwestern
- University of Miami
- University of Rochester
- Notre Dame
- Yeshiva
- USC
- Tufts
@nostalgicwisdom
What ranking is this exactly, the link you provided leads to a grad map??
A list of colleges sorted by average educational spending per degree completed.
The poster wanted a source for the numbers I posted on pg 3. You can search individual schools in the search box and scroll down to see this number as well as that of peer schools.
Dartmouth: 8-13.
UCLA’s place in that list is kinda striking. Average student at USC or NW pays less out of pocket for a UG degree than UCLA? (I think that’s what you’re saying that list is.) Surprised to see any public up that high. Wonder if UCLA gives less in-state aid than other UCs, 'cause it shouldn’t have that many more full-pay OOS/Internationals than Cal. Maybe more take a 5th or 6th year?
No, it’s the amount that is spent by the school on education and related expenses per degree completion. The exact definition is: “Estimated educational spending (expenses related to instruction, student services, academic support, institutional support, operations and maintenance) per academic award in 2013. Includes all certificates and degrees.” It’s not based off the finances of the students attending.
Very interesting discussion. This has been going on for about 20 years. The US News ranking is all about prestige and allowing bragging rights to parents. However, we need to admit that all the colleges/national universities ranked in top 25/30 are very good in terms of quality of education and campus life - the two most important factors for experiencing and benefiting from college education. Indeed it is true that many above average students are deprived of studying in these “highly ranked” colleges due to lack of financial resources. And that is very unfortunate. However, tweaking the ranking methodology or some changes in the numbers will bring in very little cheers to those who can’t get in due to lack of funding from parents. About how the ranking will look like in US News 2018 or how the colleges and unverisites will react is any body’s guess. I don’t think, Berkeley or Michigan will be over excited to see them a few notches higher than the present or for that matter Stanford will go in an ecaststic mood if it is ranked no.1.
@nostalgicwisdom
That’s interesting, WUSTL, Vandy, U Miami, and U Rochester seem to spend a lot relative to their actual US news rank.
The top 25 universities have been posted in alphabetical order: http://www.usnews.com/education/best-colleges/articles/2017-09-11/2018-best-colleges-preview-top-25-national-universities
Brown University (RI)
California Institute of Technology
Carnegie Mellon University ¶
Columbia University (NY)
Cornell University (NY)
Dartmouth College (NH)
Duke University (NC)
Emory University (GA)
Georgetown University (DC)
Harvard University (MA)
Johns Hopkins University (MD)
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Northwestern University (IL)
Princeton University (NJ)
Rice University (TX)
Stanford University (CA)
University of California—Berkeley
University of California—Los Angeles
University of Chicago
University of Notre Dame (IN)
University of Pennsylvania
University of Southern California
University of Virginia
Vanderbilt University (TN)
Washington University in St. Louis
Yale University (CT)
There’s no change from last year. Everyone who was in the top 25 then is in the top 25 now. Again, don’t expect any huge movements in the rankings.
@Much2learn concerning your post #15. Perhaps USNews could put WashU on a waitlist for being in the top 20. It could put about a hundred colleges on that waitlist just to say it didn’t completely ding them.
@StanfordGSB00 - regarding your earlier comments (#22 and #30), I would suggest that what you’re highlighting is the US News need for change, more than a bias or desire to manage outcomes. The outcome they desire is here…a bunch of above average intelligence individuals theorizing about the process, accuracy, and outcomes of their very fluid and very theoretical annual ranking methodology. The only thing they can’t allow is for the same list year after year.
Something I didn’t see mentioned in the methodology is the inclusion of high school class rank: what percent were in the top 10%, what percentage in the top half. I would suggest to you that high school has a LOT to do with that metric. This metric reinforces the reputational inputs for the elite schools, but it becomes a false normalization as kids from good schools in the middle of their graduating classes and the top kids from average or below average schools begin to shuffle for prestige and money. I don’t think you can manipulate the outcomes too much as an institution, but the real impact of HS ranking compared to test scores and other readily available metrics is negligible. I would suggest the real value of this metric is complexity. The more categories you throw into the mix, the harder it is for anyone to disprove the results.
Theoretically, this is interesting (and sadly fun for many of us), but we all know that the theory becomes perception, and perception becomes reality. UChicago moving up or down 10 stops shouldn’t impact a students decision to apply or attend. A student should only believe that a school is their best option to achieve their goals within their means. Sadly that’s not the case.