<p>Some of you guys make me laugh. You just assume that a school with a low acceptance rate should automatically rise above those universities with superior academics.</p>
<p>^^^YEAH, seriously. Acceptance rate is worth 10% of the 15% alloted for selectivity.</p>
<p>ok you’re right acceptance rate means anothing. thats why the top 3 schools have the 3lowest acceptance rates. selectivity and academics go hand in hand. you can’t have a great school if you let just anybody in.</p>
<p>^^^That’s very deceptive. Yes, those school have lots of applicants, but its because they have the academics and endowments to be ranked high. It’s those factors that in turn attract a lot of applicants (not the other way around).</p>
<p>Nevertheless, consider these schools and their acceptance rates:
Jarvis Christian College Hawkins, TX 4.5%
Rust College Holly Springs, MS 7.6%
Cooper Union New York, NY 9.3%
Alice Lloyd College Pippa Passes, KY 10.5%
College of the Ozarks Point Lookout, MO 11.7%
National-Louis University Chicago, IL 14.3%
Crichton College Memphis, TN 15.4%</p>
<p>These are a lot lower than many of the top 10’s!!!</p>
<p>there is one that doesnt belong on that list. Cooper Union is an excellent program in engineering, arts and architecture, and whats more, its free. Its no wonder it has a low acceptance rate. I am sure there were students who passed on ivies to go to CU</p>
<p>Oh wow. Sorry. Didn’t know much about it.</p>
<p>Of course another theory surfacing the past few years is that HYP will now always stay in the top three spots. The reason being that the typical USNWR reader who is currently more aware of college rankings would lose faith in any ranking source that doesn’t have HYP as the top three. </p>
<p>It is more important to please the reader than stay true to methodology. So the criteria can be changed at any time to insure HYP is at the top of the list. The prime directive is selling magazines. Mort’s alma mater is a second priority so Penn will never crack the top three.</p>
<p>45 percenter, two steps for you</p>
<ol>
<li><p>find out where Penn was in the rankings soon after the period when Mort purchased USNWR</p></li>
<li><p>find out where Penn is in the rankings now</p></li>
</ol>
<p>big big difference</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>^ Now THERE’S some Princeton/Stanford-worthy analysis. :rolleyes:</p>
<p>Here are two steps for you:</p>
<ol>
<li><p>Look up the logical fallacy, “post hoc, ergo propter hoc.” And consider that the purported effect follows the purported cause by a good 13 years.</p></li>
<li><p>Read my post #154.</p></li>
</ol>
<p>
</p>
<p>I am not sure if the sarcasm in my original post came through correctly!</p>
<p>45 Percenter, maybe this “analysis” might be worthy enough for you</p>
<p>Penn’s Mort Zuckerman and the biased rankings of USNWR towards Penn:</p>
<p>[U.S</a>. News Rankings Through the Years](<a href=“http://web.archive.org/web/20070908142457/http://chronicle.com/stats/usnews/]U.S”>http://web.archive.org/web/20070908142457/http://chronicle.com/stats/usnews/)</p>
<p>1983 - Penn not even ranked in top 15 universities</p>
<p>1984 - Penn’s Mort Zuckerman purchases USNWR</p>
<p>1988 - Penn ranked #19</p>
<p>1994 - Penn ranked #16</p>
<p>1997 - Penn ranked #13</p>
<p>2000 - Penn ranked #7</p>
<p>2004 - Penn ranked #5</p>
<p>2010 - Penn ranked #4</p>
<p>^^^^It looks jobbed to me.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Nope. Not even close. Selectively cherry-picking 8 years out of 25 to make it look like a straight path upwards isn’t my idea of “analysis.” Not to mention the logical fallacy on which your entire “analysis” is based.</p>
<p>Seriously, dude, did you really get through Princeton engineering courses and Stanford business courses with that kind of “thinking”? :rolleyes: Or are you just playin’ with me? :p</p>
<p>I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume it’s the latter. :)</p>
<p>Im guessing you’ll claim bias by Zuckerman on behalf of Caltech?</p>
<p>1984 - Harvard/McGill/Penn/Yale’s Mort Zuckerman purchases USNWR</p>
<p>1988 - CalTech Ranked 21</p>
<p>1989 - CalTech ranked 3</p>
<p>and yes…i did just learn how to bold words</p>
<p>
Yeah, you say that NOW–since ZUCKERMAN got to you. :p</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Of course, don’t we know that a very high acceptance rate equals superior academics? After all, that is soooooooo logical! By the way, do you have a school in mind that has a high acceptance rate but academics superior to most of the schools it competes against? Would a fair guess be that such school mostly admits students from its own state? Or a wild guess! </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>That is why one cannot blindly trust the figures posted on USNews unless he or she believes that there IS a person paid by USNews to actually check the submissions? </p>
<p>The schools listed above are probably oblivious to the fact that their numbers are way off. In the case of Jarvis, they probably have reported the students who were NOT accepted. Fwiw, the school has an open admission policy. Rust College admits far more than 7.6% … the USNews minimum-wage data processor probably dropped the one digit that would show the correct number, namely 57.6%. A bit different? As far as the College of the Ozarks, one ought to wonder what kind of admission system is used to deny acceptance to 91% of 3,000 applicants but have a yield of more than 90%. The adcoms from Point Lookout should license their system to plenty of more selective schools. Duke and Chicago would jump on that offering!</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Not certain how that happened or what you meant, but I’ll take it. Of course, you do know who got to me from Penn … that’d be the Houdini of Admissions! No other school has made me waste more time to find the “correct” data! And things have not changed much. For instance, how many Ivy League schools do you think have yet to disclose the number of admitted students in the EARLY decision round? :)</p>
<p>^ Penn always posts its final admissions numbers–including ED numbers–on its web site in late summer or early fall, after all the “summer melt” action:</p>
<p>[Penn</a> Admissions: Incoming Class Profile](<a href=“http://www.admissions.upenn.edu/profile/]Penn”>http://www.admissions.upenn.edu/profile/)</p>
<p>And the ED acceptance numbers are also reported in the Daily Pennsylvanian in December or January, in the middle of the admissions season (see the top of the first page for this year’s ED numbers):</p>
<p><a href=“http://www.thedp.com/files/pdfversion/2010/01/0127pdf.pdf[/url]”>http://www.thedp.com/files/pdfversion/2010/01/0127pdf.pdf</a></p>
<p>The RD numbers are similarly reported in April:</p>
<p>[2014</a> admits much like last year?s | The Daily Pennsylvanian](<a href=“http://www.thedp.com/article/2014-admits-much-last-year-s]2014”>http://www.thedp.com/article/2014-admits-much-last-year-s)</p>
<p>No Houdinis involved–you just have to know where to look. ;)</p>
<p>PAbank, thanks for the info on caltech.</p>
<p>did you know that Mort has an honorary degree from Caltech, by the way?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>45, not only do I know where to look, but also what to look for. Read my statement again about disclosure by … the school.</p>