<p>For 2008 Tulane is ranked 50 on the National Universities list. Prior to Katrina where did Tulane rank? I can't find this anywhere...</p>
<p>To answer your question, in the 2007 stats, they were also ranked #50. In 2006, they were ranked #43.</p>
<p>Ranked #50 is a very misleading number. That’s a national ranking which doesn’t include what the school is majoring in. Michigan State for example is slightly behind in National ranking at around 70 something. Which the University of Michigan is ranked nationally at around 25. Ohio State is almost dead even with Tulane. While the U.S. Air Force Academy is ranked #1 Baccalaureate Colleges (West). So, which one is better?</p>
<p>In my opinion, you are better off looking for the schools that have the academics you are looking for, the area you are looking for, the EC, Sports, etc… you are looking for, etc… Then compare these and go to places like here at College Confidential and make an informed choice. Going off ranking from US News is not accurate at all. A national ranking of 50 is not very impressive. Not when you consider how many public “University of (Wherever)” is ranked even higher. </p>
<p>When a person goes to college, I always recommend that they take at least 1 semester of statistics. Not so much that you know how stats are figured out, but rather so you know how inaccurate most of them are. You can make any number say anything you want them to.</p>
<p>Cc is right, these rankings are objectively based on # of books in library, % of profs PhDs, etc. Now, of course, a school ranked 200 is probably inferior in most ways to a top 10 school, but any ranked in the top 100 I’d consider viable and then base the decision on fit, like Cc said above.</p>
<p>As noted, these ratings are not meaningless, but neither are they necessarily terribly meaningful aside from illustrating some important mega-measures. Charlie has said it well. But even then, a prospective student needs to assess some of the “fit” issues, imo.</p>
<p>The U.S. News List is definitely not useless, but it should be taken with a grain of salt (6 UC schools are in the top 50). I understand this…I’m just wondering how Katrina affected Tulane’s ranking on the most widely recognized list. Please don’t jump to conclusions, I’m not choosing a college based on the list. take it easy everyone</p>
<p>Tulane ranked #45 in 2001 and ranked #43 in 2003.</p>
<p>They onli have value becasue people assign value to them-in and of themselves they mean nothing. The problem is that people love to have a way of saying x is better than y.</p>
<p>Well, katrina hasn’t had any real affect on the US News ratings. Tulane has been in the same rating of 40-50.</p>
<p>Some things that have changed however is lower enrollment; lower faculty; and smaller amount of athletic programs. I spoke with tulane about a month ago after my son got accepted. We were talking about also getting an athletic scholarship. Apparently, tulane had about 18 varsity/NCAA D1 type athletic programs prior to Katrina. Apparently, at this time, they only have about 8 of them up and running at full strength. So, Katrina has indeed had a lot of affects on the school itself, just not so much in the ratings.</p>
<p>With the lower student body and lower faculty, it’s been a wash. Meaning, it’s not like you have to wait a couple of semesters to get a particular class because there’s more students than faculty. Getting your classes and such should be the same post or pre katrina.</p>
<p>You’re right about the athletics, but as far as the student body being smaller, this year’s Freshmen class is around 1,400, which almost exactly what it was pre-Katrina. The previous two years have had smaller incoming Freshmen classes, which is why current undergrad body is smaller than usual. By the looks of things though, the upcoming Freshmen classes will be just as big as they were before Katrina.</p>
<p>Actually, my son who graduated this past May had 1700 in his freshman class. The school has talked about deliberately shrinking the undergraduate school from about 7000 then to about 6000 or so.</p>
<p>Before Scott Cowen came Tulane was ranked 34th, where schools like NYU and Boston College are ranked now. I don’t think it will ever be ranked that high again, although I also don’t think its ranking will slip below 50 any time soon. The school already absorbed the worst academic effects of Katrina in the class of 2010in the year when the school was allowed to not submit any new data. Who knows what it would have been ranked that year. Basically, if the school could lower its graduation underperformance (in other words by keeping more students sober) it would be golden, probably ranked in the top 40 or higher. I think this could be easily and costlessly accomplished by moving rush to fall.</p>
<p>I think tulane is underrated at #50.</p>
<p>just goes to show you how stupid USNews rankings are. Now that the endowment is (presumably) lower, and other frivolous factors, the ranking is lower. When your a ranking based on criteria like alumni contributions, you are NOT ranking the quality of the education.</p>