<p>Id appreciate it if anyone could post it. It would also be nice if someone could post Emory's statistics in the ranking. If not, no biggie - thanks!</p>
<p>The 30 or so most selective universities according to the latest USNWR are:</p>
<ol>
<li> Harvard University</li>
<li> Massachusetts Institute of Technology</li>
<li> Yale University</li>
<li> California Institute of Technology</li>
<li> Princeton University</li>
<li> Columbia University</li>
<li> Washington University-St Louis</li>
<li> Stanford University</li>
<li> University of Pennsylvania</li>
<li>Brown University</li>
<li>Dartmouth College</li>
<li>Duke University</li>
<li>Rice University</li>
<li>University of California-Berkeley</li>
<li>Emory University</li>
<li>Georgetown University</li>
<li>Northwestern University</li>
<li>Tufts University</li>
<li>University of California-Los Angeles</li>
<li>University of Notre Dame</li>
<li>University of Southern California</li>
<li>Cornell University</li>
<li>Johns Hopkins University</li>
<li>University of Chicago</li>
<li>University of Michigan-Ann Arbor</li>
<li>College of William & Mary</li>
<li>University of Virginia</li>
<li>Vanderbilt University</li>
<li>Boston College</li>
<li>Brandeis University</li>
<li>University of California-San Diego</li>
</ol>
<p>i think that's only by % admitted</p>
<p>I don't, else MIT wouldn't be 2nd. I honestly don't understand how they come up with that ranking. WashU is competitive, but it is not moreso than Stanford, Brown, Dartmouth, etc.</p>
<p>"Student selectivity (15 percent). A school's academic atmosphere is determined in part by the abilities and ambitions of the student body. We therefore factor in test scores of enrollees on the SAT or ACT tests (50 percent of the selectivity score); the proportion of enrolled freshmen (for all national universities and liberal arts colleges) who graduated in the top 10 percent of their high school classes and (for institutions in the universities-master's and comprehensive colleges-bachelor's categories) the top 25 percent (40 percent); and the acceptance rate, or the ratio of students admitted to applicants (10 percent). The data are for the fall 2005 entering class."</p>
<p>Thank you for that. WashU does have a very high SAT midrange, but I think in all practicalness Stanford, Dartmouth, and Brown are more difficult to get into. Such is the trouble with creating a ranking with numeric places as opposed to tiers or categories.</p>
<p>It is funny how people don't want to accept the truth.
WashU's SAT midrange is higher than many other top notch colleges. It just is.</p>
<p>U.S. News & World Report America's Best Colleges 2007, National Universities: Top Schools Selectivity rank </p>
<ol>
<li> Harvard University (MA)</li>
<li> Yale University (CT) </li>
<li> Massachusetts Inst. of Technology</li>
<li> Princeton University (NJ) </li>
<li> California Institute of Technology</li>
<li> Columbia University (NY) </li>
<li> Washington University in St. Louis<br></li>
<li> Stanford University (CA)<br></li>
<li> University of Pennsylvania<br></li>
<li> Brown University (RI)<br></li>
<li> Duke University (NC)<br></li>
<li> Dartmouth College (NH)<br></li>
<li> Rice University (TX)</li>
<li> University of California—Berkeley * </li>
<li> Emory University (GA)<br></li>
<li> Georgetown University (DC)<br></li>
<li> Northwestern University (IL)<br></li>
<li> University of Notre Dame (IN)<br></li>
<li> Univ. of California—Los Angeles *<br></li>
<li> Univ. of Southern California<br></li>
<li> Tufts University (MA)<br></li>
<li> University of Chicago<br></li>
<li> Cornell University (NY)<br></li>
<li> Johns Hopkins University (MD)</li>
<li> University of Michigan—Ann Arbor *</li>
<li> Vanderbilt University (TN) </li>
<li> University of Virginia *</li>
<li> College of William and Mary (VA) * </li>
<li> Brandeis University (MA)<br></li>
<li> Boston College<br></li>
<li> Univ. of California—San Diego *</li>
<li> Carnegie Mellon University (PA)<br></li>
<li> Lehigh University (PA)<br></li>
<li> Tulane University (LA)</li>
<li> U. of North Carolina—Chapel Hill * </li>
<li> New York University </li>
<li> University of Rochester (NY) </li>
<li> University of California—Irvine *</li>
<li> Wake Forest University (NC) </li>
<li> Univ. of California—Santa Barbara * </li>
<li> University of Florida * </li>
<li> Georgia Institute of Technology * </li>
<li> George Washington University (DC)<br></li>
<li> Univ. of Wisconsin—Madison *</li>
<li> Case Western Reserve Univ. (OH)</li>
<li> University of Tulsa (OK)<br></li>
<li> University of California—Davis *</li>
<li> Univ. of Maryland—College Park * </li>
<li> Rensselaer Polytechnic Inst. (NY) </li>
<li> University of Texas—Austin *</li>
<li> University of Miami (FL) </li>
<li> Univ. of California—Santa Cruz * </li>
<li> U. of Illinois—Urbana - Champaign *</li>
<li> Boston University<br></li>
<li> Brigham Young Univ.—Provo (UT) </li>
<li> Stevens Institute of Technology (NJ) </li>
<li> Miami University—Oxford (OH) *</li>
<li> University of Washington *</li>
<li> American University (DC)<br></li>
<li> University of Georgia *</li>
<li> SUNY—Binghamton *</li>
<li> Ohio State University—Columbus *<br></li>
<li> Worcester Polytechnic Inst. (MA)<br></li>
<li> University of Missouri—Rolla *</li>
<li> University of Pittsburgh *</li>
<li> Clemson University (SC) *</li>
<li> Marquette University (WI)<br></li>
<li> Texas A&M Univ.—College Station *</li>
<li> St. Louis University<br></li>
<li> Univ. of California—Riverside * </li>
<li> University of Denver
69.. University of Oklahoma * </li>
<li> Syracuse University (NY)<br></li>
<li> Illinois Institute of Technology </li>
<li> Northeastern University (MA)<br></li>
<li> Yeshiva University (NY) </li>
<li> Pepperdine University (CA)</li>
<li> Fordham University (NY)<br></li>
<li>Univ. of Minnesota—Twin Cities *</li>
<li> Southern Methodist University (TX)<br></li>
<li> Rutgers—New Brunswick (NJ) * </li>
<li> University of Delaware *</li>
<li> University of Tennessee * </li>
<li> University of the Pacific (CA) </li>
<li> University of Dayton (OH)<br></li>
<li>University of Connecticut *</li>
</ol>
<ul>
<li>denotes a public school</li>
</ul>
<hr>
<p>Student selectivity (Fall 2005 entering class) Undergraduate ranking criteria and weights</p>
<p>Subfactor / Subfactor Weight</p>
<p>Acceptance rate / 10%
High school class standing—top 10% / 40%
SAT/ACT scores / 50%</p>
<p>
[quote]
WashU's SAT midrange is higher than many other top notch colleges. It just is.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Reread my post and you'll see that I did not deny that. I do question the assertion though that WashU is harder to get into than Stanford, Dartmouth, or Brown, and I'm sure many others do as well. FWIW, this is coming from someone that was accepted to WashU.</p>
<p>
[quote]
It is funny how people don't want to accept the truth.
WashU's SAT midrange is higher than many other top notch colleges. It just is.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Is that with or w/o merit scholarships? (And yes - a FEW of the other schools also give out merit schollies.)</p>
<p>with merit scholarship and waitlisting to ensure they only admit students with high SAT scores who want to come to their school.</p>
<p>Don't make this thread about WashU... such a tired topic.
Better discussion... Class Standing is worth 40% of the selectivity rank yet Princeton (94%), Yale (95%), Dartmouth (87%), Brown (90%), John Hopkins (81%), and Emory (90%) used data representative of less than 51% of the entering freshman class... leaving room for possible manipulation??</p>
<p>also class standing gives an advantage to places like berkeley that accepts the majority of its students from noncompetitive california schools, and hurts schools like harvard, etc. who accepts many students from highly competitive private schools</p>
<p>elsijfdl,
Help me understand why merit aid is a bad thing. If you are a top student and weighing your acceptance to Columbia and Wash U and Wash U steps up and offers you a significant amount of cash, why is that a bad thing? They have made an institutional decision that they want to attract a high quality student body and they are putting their money where their mouth is. The student is a clear beneficiary, but in the competition for top talent, so is Wash U if the student decides to come to St. Louis. Businesses make these kinds of decisions on a daily basis when they make hiring decisions. Why should the college system be any different?</p>
<p>I agree with hawkette on this one. It's well known that the top law schools that aren't quite the cream of the crop (Michigan, Penn, etc.) give out merit aid whereas HYS do not, yet no one views this in a negative sense. I'm not sure why merit aid would ever be viewed badly UNLESS the school is falling short in its duty of meeting financial need. WashU, however, has a lot of money.</p>
<p>The point isn't that merit aid is a bad thing, but that merit aid can manipulate the selectivity score to make a school appear to be more competitive than it actually is.</p>
<p>How can selectivity be manipulated when the criteria is acceptance rate, high school standing, and SAT/ACT scores? Merit aid works in WashU's favor because it helps a relatively new top school compete with the old order; merit aid helps schools like WashU with regard to yield, but yield is not a factor in the USNews formula.</p>
<p>Well, merit aid also helps attract the high SAT student and that is a factor in the rankings. But, so what??? If Wash U has determined that that is an institutional priority, then this makes perfect sense. The Ivies and other top colleges won't respond until they have to and will denigrate such strategies as beneath them, but this is IMO, pretty close to Business 101. </p>
<p>As any business would do when competing with an entrenched and historically powerful competitor, you need to change the nature of the game. If Wash U or others want to gain market share with those top students, they have to take actions to bring those students to their campuses. Otherwise, the historic patterns will prevail and those all work to the benefit of the long-time players and the status quo. Merit aid is one of the tools that they have decided to use. Another school might use a great basketball team (hello Georgetown) or football (hey there, USC) or another school may use great new instructional facilities (eg, barrons frequent posts about building projects at U Wisconsin). It's all about attracting the talent, students and faculty and giving the alumni a school that they can be proud of and to which they will devote their spirit, their time and their money.</p>
<p>The end result is (hopefully) a stronger institution that has better students, a better national reputation (which helps in student and faculty recruitment) and a stronger financial position.</p>
<p>No one is saying there is anything wrong with merit aid per se - but there is also nothing wrong with pointing out that some schools "artificially" boost their scores (esp. when others point to it).</p>
<p>Btw, the poster child of using basketball to boost ranking/prestige is Duke (not that there is anything wrong with it).</p>
<p>WashU and Penn are particularly scrupulous about avoiding acceptances of applicants below the top 10% of their class. Playing by the rules, of course. But this elevates their selectivity rating beyond what most people intuitively think makes sense, looking at some of the schools they rank above. I think it is method of rankings manipulation.</p>