<p>"you had a 3.3 and a 1700 SAT score. not to worry."</p>
<p>Now see, this is the NU spirit I've come to know and 'love'. When all else fails be a jerk.</p>
<p>brand_182,</p>
<p>It should be pointed out that Northwestern was #17 before they were #23. So it's not like their swing was in just one direction. They had a big drop prior to that.</p>
<p>True. It should also be pointed out that Chicago was #5 before it was #15. Things fluctuate. That's how they sell magazines. I'm just pointing out that Chicago isn't the first uni to jump 6 spots in a year - others have done it (jumping even more spots) and did not explain themselves. Perhaps they were the ones with something to hide? Or perhaps there's not really any foul play at all and USNews just shifts unis as it feels fit.</p>
<p>
[quote]
you had a 3.3 and a 1700 SAT score. not to worry."
[/quote]
</p>
<p>No need for ad hominems. Why not try and attack my argument instead of focusing on someone else's opinion, which wasn't necessarily rude BTW.</p>
<p>Well, the swing wasn't due to NU doing anything different. It's due to US News changing and "fine-tuning" its methodology.</p>
<p>I think part of the reason UChicago's move raises eyebrows is that people generally hold them to higher standard as they always seem to pride themselves being different. I think their move troubled some hard-core UChicago students who think the University shouldn't waterdown the core, adopt common application, and in this case, meet with US News. I know couple UChicago alums that told me the school, while still unique in some ways, is looking more and more "mainstream".</p>
<p>
[quote]
Well, the swing wasn't due to NU doing anything different.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>And in the case I quoted, I think you could say the same.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I know couple UChicago alums that told me the school, while still unique in some ways, is looking more and more "mainstream".
[/quote]
</p>
<p>True, but "not liking the way a school handles something" and "that school cheating the system" are two different things. It sounds like kk just doesn't like what UChi did, but in the end it is a perfectly legal move. If UChi wants to adopt the Common App and start focusing on their rank/image, why not? Alums may not like it, but unless the ones opposing the move are making hearty donations, I don't know what say they should have.</p>
<p>"I think part of the reason UChicago's move raises eyebrows is that people generally hold them to higher standard as they always seem to pride themselves being different. "</p>
<p>So, Chicago is held in such esteem that they are expected to meet a higher standard than any other school and yet it's expected that they shouldn't be in the top 10?</p>
<p>Ramses:</p>
<p>"Where's here? And seriously, are there really folk out there who feel that Chicago needs to 'cheat' to get into the top 10 or to be held as one of the top schools worldwide?"</p>
<p>"here" is Columbia. Please, don't get ahead of yourself. UChicago is certainly not an untouchable school. if anything, they way "I" and most people elsewhere see it, UChicago is pretty much along the same line as Northwestern in terms of academic prestige.</p>
<p>But let me just tell you, as someone who has no connection to either school and also has respect for both schools, people have talked about UChicago's rise in ranking outside of Northwestern, for starters, even here at Columbia.</p>
<p>"I think part of the reason UChicago's move raises eyebrows is that people generally hold them to higher standard as they always seem to pride themselves being different."</p>
<p>I wholeheartedly agree. UChicago makes it explicit that they refuse to be "common" like the other schools, but consulting USNWR is completely contradictory. That's why they receive a lot of criticism for this gesture.</p>
<p>i think all of this change in the rankings just undermines the credibility of USNWR rankings.</p>
<p>why don't we all just leave it at that and keep this thread from becoming an ugly debate between two schools. i'm sure people are sick of seeing these two schools fight all the time.</p>
<p>I agree. I tire of this debate quickly. I just don't like to see UChicago get the shaft for something that seems relatively harmless. People will have their opinions. Whatever.</p>
<p>brand_182</p>
<p>I totally agree.</p>
<p>
[quote]
There has to be a line, and to me, that line is crossed when colleges meet to discover tricks to raise their rankings, plain and simple. Everyone may not agree with this, nor does everyone have to, but Im going to continue to hold this view until either: all schools meet with USNEWS in the same manner, or none does.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>This is like saying that no one can ask questions unless all do. That's a curious standard. </p>
<p>It isn't clear to me how you--or anyone--knows with whom USNews has contact. Or that it involves "tricks." USNews has a major relationship problem with the colleges and universities whose cooperation it counts on. Therefore, they do tons of outreach. </p>
<p>At my professional conference Ithe USNews session tends to be packed--lots of institutions seek better understanding of USNews methods which makes for an SRO session. Lots of them! Are they all dishonest? If I skip that session and don't ask any questions of Bob Morse, is my institution more honest? </p>
<p>If my institution performed poorly on a measure or ranking or profile that most sensible people would assume it should do better than, it is my absolute professional responsibility as an institutional researcher to discover why. Particularly if it's a public matter, or something that will be relied upon by stakeholders. I am not supposed to shrug and say "how odd, what a bummer" and leave it at that. I have to find out what's going on. Did we report a number wrong, like leave off a zero? Is there something about the methodology that skews our relative position? So whether it's USNews or Academic Analytics or a bond rating or whatever, I find out more. If that's what Chicago did, then they were acting responsibly. And I would fully expect my fine colleagues at Northwestern to do the same thing, and I think as a student there you'd want them to as well. </p>
<p>Let's put it this way...If Standard and Poors gives Northwestern a bad bond rating, that has serious consequences. It's also probably not right! Chances are, S&P figured something wrong, or Northwestern reported some critical number wrong. What should Northwestern do? PURSUE IT, find the error, and fix it. It's not "tricks" to do that.</p>
<p>"here is Columbia. Please, don't get ahead of yourself. UChicago is certainly not an untouchable school. if anything, they way "I" and most people elsewhere see it, UChicago is pretty much along the same line as Northwestern in terms of academic prestige."</p>
<p>Is this your way of saying Chicago doesn't deserve to be tied with Columbia and Dartmouth?:)</p>
<p>"But let me just tell you, as someone who has no connection to either school and also has respect for both schools, people have talked about UChicago's rise in ranking outside of Northwestern, for starters, even here at Columbia."</p>
<p>Yes, I can imagine Chicago must have made a pact with the devil to tie with Darmouth and Columbia. And I can imagine Columbia students being bent out of shape about it. Let's disregard where Chicago falls in other rankings or where it traditionally fell in USNews until it slipped for what 3 years?(By the way, did it slip in the other rankings during that time, or just USnews? Because, maybe, just maybe the problem really was in the reporting) </p>
<p>To bring this thread back to topic, can we assume that you feel Chicago will drop again in the new rankings? What exactly are the schools beside WUSTL and Chicago that people feel don't deserve their ranking? Should say Brown be moved way up?</p>
<p>“If my institution performed poorly on a measure or ranking or profile that most sensible people would assume it should do better than,”</p>
<p>I don’t buy for one minute that Chicago just ‘naturally’ was better than the ranking that it was getting for the past few years. Of course it couldn’t be so that the school was just earning the ranking it was getting, no, no, there had to be years of statistical errors working against it: yea right. </p>
<p>It’s one thing to pursue a bad bond rating, but it’s another to assume that you belong above other schools for no other reason than because you believe so. That is, people from the school would have met with USNews ONLY if they believed that their ranking (12, 13, 14, 15) was just too low for ‘a school of that caliber’. </p>
<p>“This is like saying that no one can ask questions unless all do.”</p>
<p>No, it’s saying that no one should ask questions unless all CAN. There’s a big difference. Unless all schools can meet with the editors and twist and squeeze every possible datum- unless every school can reclassify classes and expenditures in the most favorable way possible, then none should. The system looses credibility (the little that it has) when it’s so easy to manipulate. </p>
<p>Take Cornell for example. In ’99 it was ranked 6, then, the very next year dropped to 11, and hasn’t been above 10 since. I’m sure many in the school believe it should be higher than it is ranked now, but are they having meetings with UsNews to ‘rectify’ the situation? It doesn’t seem so…..</p>
<p>"Let's disregard where Chicago falls in other rankings"</p>
<p>-What are these 'other' rankings to which you keep referring (not that it even matters, since we're talking about USNews)? You find me a ranking that lists schools one way, and I'm sure I can find you one that lists them another, but still, since you keep bringing them up, what are they?</p>
<p>"Chicago falls in other rankings or where it traditionally fell in USNews"</p>
<p>-Through both '96-'00 and '03-'06 Chicago was ranked 11-15. In fact, the only years in the past decade that Chicago was ranked ABOVE 11, were '01 and '02.....</p>
<p>KK, simple question. Where do you think Chicago belongs in the rankings?</p>
<p>Chicago does decent on THES (top 15 American) and WSJ I think...and it gets 40 national merit scholars a year which is just slightly behind Dartmouth and Columbia (60 - 70 usually)</p>
<p>"Is this your way of saying Chicago doesn't deserve to be tied with Columbia and Dartmouth?"</p>
<p>you must be suffering from a serious inferiority complex.</p>
<p>When I say "UChicago is pretty much along the same line as Northwestern in terms of academic prestige," no, that does not mean "Chicago doesn't deserve to be tied with Columbia or Dartmouth," it means "regardless of the recent rise in Chicago's rankings and recent decline in Northwestern's rankings, both schools are equally prestigious in terms of academics."</p>
<p>Now, unless you, for some reason, have a personal agenda against Northwestern, this should sound a compliment, if anything. MANY schools would regard it a positive thing to be compared to a school like Northwestern, a school highly regarded in academia; I personally would not find it offensive at all if my school were compared to NWU. The way I see it, schools at this level are of almost equal quality and prestige, and minor alterations in rankings hardly have any value in measuring the actual quality of the schools.</p>
<p>As such, what the issue is being made over is not UChicago's quality as a school, but the intergrity of the UChicago's gesture of explicitly consulting a group that is despised in academia while trying to convince other schools that they are "uncommon."</p>
<p>"KK, simple question. Where do you think Chicago belongs in the rankings?"</p>
<p>Where it's always been. Somewhere in the top 20. Ask me the same question for Columbia or Northwestern, for that matter. Same answer.</p>
<p>
[quote]
No, it’s saying that no one should ask questions unless all CAN.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Do you know for a fact that other universities CANNOT meet with USNews? I would imagine they can but not everyone takes advantage of this. If anything, Chicago meeting with USNews shows they care about their ranking and aren't so "uncommon" anymore, but they are still not committing any crime. You need to pick your stance because you've still yet to address my question: is Chicago doing anything technically wrong? Are they incorrectly reporting figures? </p>
<p>You may say that the USNews ranking loses credibility by meeting with Chicago but not all, but how is that Chicago's fault? If anything, the one we should be examining then is USNews, and many already hold that the ranking is losing credibility anyways.</p>
<p>topofthegame - then in the same sense one should be able to say Columbia is along the same lines as Northwestern as well, correct? I would agree with that - just want to understand your logic.</p>