USWNR 2008 Undergraduate Rankings

<p>From the concensus on Xoxoth, this seems to be the real deal. It could be complete and utter bs, but if the hardcore dudes on xoxoth think it’s credible, it probably is. And in any case, it’s more or less in line with what these colleges rank historically anyway. Duke dropped rather significantly though (as some expected). </p>

<li><p>Princeton University </p></li>
<li><p>Yale University </p></li>
<li><p>Harvard University </p></li>
<li><p>California Institute of Technology </p></li>
<li><p>Stanford University </p></li>
<li><p>MIT </p></li>
<li><p>University of Pennsylvania </p></li>
<li><p>Duke University </p></li>
<li><p>Dartmouth College </p></li>
<li><p>Columbia University </p></li>
<li><p>Cornell University </p></li>
<li><p>University of Chicago </p></li>
<li><p>Washington University in St. Louis </p></li>
<li><p>Northwestern University </p></li>
<li><p>Johns Hopkins University </p></li>
<li><p>Brown University </p></li>
<li><p>Rice University </p></li>
<li><p>Emory University </p></li>
<li><p>Vanderbilt University </p></li>
<li><p>Georgetown University</p></li>
</ol>

<p>Looks plausible.</p>

<p>uh...what do you mean?
duke is 8th in 07 rankings, and they would be moving up a spot to 7th (though it is a tie)
the fact that you say duke dropped significantly makes this list less credible.</p>

<p>This is actually what I predicted it would be.</p>

<p>I think he might have been thinking about when Duke was ranked 4th not too long ago...</p>

<p>This happens every year on XOXO, and I can't remember one time it was actually right. In fact, if you look back, the threads were more about how the rankings were acquired than the rankings themselves.</p>

<p>lol and harvard drops again</p>

<p>Well i like it, Gtown actually cracks the top 20 on this one. :)</p>

<p>The reason why I am supsicious is that the person listed Penn ahead of Duke even though they are tied. In other words, following alphabetical order, Duke should be first. That is suspicious.</p>

<ol>
<li><p>University of Pennsylvania </p></li>
<li><p>Duke University</p></li>
</ol>

<p>^^^ good point</p>

<p>sketchy...</p>

<p>


</p></li>
</ol>

<p>My thought initially, also. Except that the 2007 USNWR ranking does NOT list ties in alphabetical order (e.g., 4. CalTech, Stanford, MIT; 9. Dartmouth, Columbia, U Chicago; 18. Vanderbilt, Emory). </p>

<p><a href="http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/usnews/edu/college/rankings/brief/t1natudoc_brief.php%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/usnews/edu/college/rankings/brief/t1natudoc_brief.php&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>Not that this means that this '08 ranking is the real deal, just that you can't disprove its authenticity because of lack of alphabetical order in the tie.</p>

<p>I expect Duke will be a little farther down, outside of top 10 or tied for 9th or 10th.</p>

<p>redcrimblue, I think this has been discussed on another thread, but there is no actual reason to think Duke would go down. </p>

<p>The ranking is based on stats for class of 2010. Duke's class of 2010 had higher SAT scores than previous year, had more alumni contributions, and more kids in top 10% of class. I'm assuming other things equal Duke would go up, or stay the same, but not down.</p>

<p>Relative to other Top 10-ranked colleges for last year, Duke tied with U Penn for the second lowest PA score at 4.5 (Dartmouth was at 4.4, all others were 4.7 and higher). So, unless their PA slips further, Duke's ranking is unlikely to slip as their objective measurements are all ok despite the lacrosse team problem that thankfully will now recede into the past.</p>

<p>For the record, ex-PA, Duke would be ranked #3 (behind HP) and tied with Yale and U Penn.</p>

<p>PA shouldn't be that effected by the Duke scandal, i thought peer assessment was academics only.</p>

<p>"i thought peer assessment was academics only."</p>

<p>That's debatable.....</p>

<p>Let alone academics, its mostly graduate academics. </p>

<p>But the people responding might just look at the news, see bad stuff, and change their rankings - after all, the PA is full of bias and non-response, as well as being flawed in the sense that not every member of academia has knowledge of every other school.</p>

<p>What are "graduate academics?" Do you mean professors who also teach graduate level courses? The PA is a reasonable and sound evaluation by people who know a lot more than you or I about the actual quality of colleges and universities. One does not have to go far to infer that your allegiances are with a school that is not as well regarded as you hope and wish it were.</p>

<p>redcrim, I agree with what you said. However, you obviously have allegiances for Cornell, which I think is completely overrated when PA scores comes into play. Based on your post, you think that UW-Madison and UTexas @ Austin are just as good as Rice or Wash U? You would probably then hold that Cal Berk is better than Dartmouth, Brown, Northwestern, Penn to name a few for undergraduate education.</p>

<p>Let's be honest here, the PA scores is a way for us news to keep the top schools (historically speaking) at the top of the ranking charts. As far as Duke and Cornell go, I doubt many would hestitate when saying that Duke is just as good or better than Cornell.</p>

<p>I actually went to three Ivies, but yes Cornell is one and I think actually offers the best education in the country across the board so my biases are clear.</p>

<p>Duke, by virtue of a location that had kept it a regional school until the early 1980's when the country's demographic shift kicked in, has made great strides. In several areas, it is near or equal to many of the Ivies. I think UT and UWisc are actually better than Wash U, although Rice is in the same range as Duke, Cornell, Columbia and Penn, and therefore the better of the four schools you reference. </p>

<p>As to the other comparison, I think Berkeley can be as good as Penn or Northwestern for undergraduate education, not as good as Brown and Dartmouth for humanities or social sciences, tho far better in the sciences. </p>

<p>I do admit to being something of a provacateur on this subject...</p>