<p>Yess!!!</p>
<p>Hofstra University broke into the first tier!!!</p>
<p>**** yea.</p>
<p>I’m glad Columbia is #4 now for the new acronym of 'PSYCH"</p>
<p>^ Actually CHYMPS</p>
<p>It looks like you can get free two day access to the complete rankings through this link:</p>
<p>[Best</a> Colleges - Education - US News and World Report](<a href=“http://www.usnews.com/usnews/php/poe-access/sign-up-form.html]Best”>http://www.usnews.com/usnews/php/poe-access/sign-up-form.html)</p>
<p>As always rankings are stupid and irrelevant.</p>
<p>It’s laughable at all the crappy little UC’s being so highly rated. They couldn’t hold the Big Ten School’s jockstrap.</p>
<p>You can make a school as low or highly rated as you’d like with a stupid methodology.</p>
<p>I always find it ludicrous that the rankings are so volatile from year to year, or that these schools are even ranked at all. The arbitrariness of the changes they make just underscores these rankings’ complete lack of substance.</p>
<p>There are certain metrics that USNews would have to start including before I start to even remotely think about taking them seriously. For one, student happiness and contentment - preferably measured midway through their college career to avoid freshman euphoria or senior exhaustion - ought to be central in their measurements. Being at a highly prestigious college does not necessarily mean you are happy at that college. Also, the inclusion of undergraduate academic reputation is slightly problematic. The idea that you are creating a ranking of prestige based on a priori knowledge of prestige that is in turn at least partially based on rankings of prestige is a bit circular to me. Essentially this metric produces a buffer to keep the already high-ranking colleges highly ranked, potentially obscuring recognition of any bona fide improvement of a “lower ranked” college. Anyway, that’s my thinking on the subject.
So far this has been a decent thread. People have been keeping level-headed about it, as opposed to years past when these rankings used to provoke such ire you’d think they were responsible for a kitten genocide.</p>
<p>“I always find it ludicrous that the rankings are so volatile from year to year”</p>
<p>“Essentially this metric produces a buffer to keep the already high-ranking colleges highly ranked”</p>
<p>hmmmmm</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>There aren’t too many people who believe that polling the HSGC would yield a better yardstick. Many here believe those people are rather clueless, and if they aren’t, they still know little to nothing about how schools should be “measured.”</p>
<p>However, a better question should be to ask if they are really more clueless than the people who have given that abomination called the PA. For starters, we can safely conclude the GC would be at least objective and … honest. Something that is not that EASY to do with the PA respondents.</p>
<p>Another question would ask if the statements that public got screwed are true. After all, should the new ARI not HAVE to be worse for a school to be screwed. Also, should taking it on the chops not be determined by comparing the PA score with the HSGC score? </p>
<p>So how does this particular group fare?</p>
<p>Caltech 4.6 (v. 4.9 for MIT?!) ==== PA 4.6 vs 4.6 GC = no change
Penn 4.6 (same as Notre Dame?!) ====== PA 4.5 vs 4.6 GC = OMG, that is a plus!
Chicago 4.5 (same as Tufts?!) ====== 4.6 vs 4.5 === small loss
UVA 4.3 =========== 4.3 PA vs 4.3 GC ==== no change
Wisconsin 4.0 ======= PA is 4.1 = small loss
Illinois 3.9 ==== PA is 3.9 = no change </p>
<p>FYI, are public schools really hurt by the changes in PA? What if their scores actually increased?</p>
<p>Michigan PA 4.4 versus … GC 4.4
UC San Diego PA 3.8 versus 4.1 = a benefit
UCLA = 4.3 vs 4.3 = a benefit
UCD = 3.8 vs 4.2 = a plus
UCI = 3.6 vs 4.1 = a plus
UNC = 4.1 vs 4.4 = a benefit
VTech = 3.4 PA vs 4.1 GC - a large bonus</p>
<p>I think any school that has dropped in ranking should immediately be removed from your college list because that school is clearly on the decline.</p>
<p>A lot of people are unhappy about how high up Upenn is on the list. Why is this?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Think of the annual rankings as a sort of “sensitivity test” that USNWR performs every year on its own rankings methodology. Last year’s top 3, top 10 and top 20 schools apparently passed this year’s sensitivity test.</p>
<p>I asked this in an earlier post but did not get a response. Does anyone know if a schools acceptance rate is factored in to the USNWR ranking methodology? If a college has a higher acceptance rate than a prior year, does that have any impact?</p>
<p>
Yup, pretty much. Thanks for the perspective.</p>
<p>Guh I hate these rankings so much. Past a certain level, any school you go to is going to give you a good, solid education. We obsess so much over which one is the “best,” but no one has bothered to define what the “best” is, so the top spots inevitably go to the most famous (and expensive) institutions, even though there are hundreds and hundreds of smaller schools all over the country that routinely produce students who can think, write, and speak just as well. People go to the schools that are right for them, regardless of ranking. I wouldn’t trade any of the top 25 for my school, even though it’s way down at number 81.</p>
<p>I think that a lot of people put too much emphasis on these rankings and too little emphasis on so many other factors. I have a two year advanced, grade accelerated kid. He’s not going to school more than 2 hours from home. I suspect that a lot of parents of “outlier” kids have similar viewpoints. Regardless of a ranking. Thankfully, there are many very good schools within that drive. I think there continues to be far too much weight accredited to the Ivy League and the schools on the coasts, and schools that cost way too much for the average upper middle class American who doesn’t believe an undergraduate education should come with the price of a home mortgage. My opinion only.</p>
<p>BobbyCT: Acceptance rate is counted but it only accounts for 1.5% of the rating.</p>
<p>WTH, how did Illinois drop 8 positions?! Can someone explain?</p>
<p>And how did all the mid-tier UCs jump? I would expect to be lower due to the California budget crisis and how UC students aren’t getting the right classes they want and are going to need 5 years to graduate…</p>
<p>Well, at least UIUC’s still in the top 5 for Engineering, which is really the only reason why people out of state usually attend.</p>
<p>Can someone please compute what the rankings would be if the PA score was still worth 25% and there was no GC score? Or, if this has already been done, link me to where it is? Thanks.</p>
<p>“WTH, how did Illinois drop 8 positions?! Can someone explain?”</p>
<p>It pains me to see that many of the high quality public institutions in the academically superior Big Ten on the verge of falling out of Top-50. In the case of Illinois, my guess is that UIUC’s repuation suffered a bit due to the admission scandal which really had no significant if any bearing to the quality of the majority student bodies or the institution as a whole for that matter…Still, it was the headline here in Illinois and the school President was forced to resign…</p>
<p>PS. I actually predicted that Illinois would slip this year for the reason mentioned above due to all the negative publicities generated. But, I am still shocked that Wisky slips to #45… Speechless…!!</p>
<p>I love the ignorance in this thread about the UC’s. First of all, BUDGET CUTS are affecting every public university in the US. Even privates are having a hard time. Also, I don’t know why people think UC students can’t get the classes they want to. If you are a UC student and you are proactive, sign up for classes in time, pass all your classes, meet all requirements, and do everything you can there is no reason why someone shouldn’t be able to graduate in four years. The only people who don’t graduate in four years are those who fail classes, don’t meet the necessary requirements, and wait till the last minute to sign up for a class.</p>
<p>ProteinMan, it was what I heard when I was a senior in high school. I was attending school at California and there were a lot of people who opted out for out of state schools for the fear of the budget crisis (while other states are having budget cuts as well, no state is as severe as California; they have it the worst currently). </p>
<p>Being proactive is hard when there are limited amount of seats in certain gen-ed classes, thus forcing students to take that extra 5th year. </p>
<p>Plus, with the budget cuts to the faculty/students, how did the mid-tier UCs jump so high anyway? I don’t see anything completely drastic regarding improvements over this one year.</p>