<p>Best</a> Colleges Preview: Top 25 National Universities - US News and World Report</p>
<p>Huge moves. </p>
<p>UMich drops down to at best fourth-ranked public, (or fifth if you count Cornell’s contract colleges). Where is Hawkette and the Old Blues? Let the fightin’ begin.</p>
<p>lol, what is state of MC(for Wake)?</p>
<p>Congrats to Wake, it beats out many worthy schools, Chapel Hill being one, Ann Arbor beign another.</p>
<p>Wow, Michigan got raped. There is no doubt in my mind that Michigan > Wake, perhaps USC.</p>
<p>if i read it right U michigan only went down one spot (maybe) which I thought we all agreed was not statistically meaningful.</p>
<p>Only news here is Wake Forest moving up, to be in the top 27, and since Wake was already tied for 28, thats not really a big change either.</p>
<p>This won’t end well.</p>
<p>U Mich was #27 last year…Nothing really new here…just enough to keep observers interested…or as USNWR says, “whet out appetite”… Wake looks like a big mover - up at least 3 spots; USC moved up at least one spot.</p>
<p>
Probably enjoying a summer break…</p>
<p>Hmmm. USNWR 2011 ranking includes USC as a top 25 school…but CC still won’t list USC as a “top college”.</p>
<p>Hey go Deacs! I wonder the cause of the jump.</p>
<p>the CC top college thing is so dumb. they should list the top 25 schools, minus the 8 ivies (since they already have their own special section). so all non-ivy schools up to rank 33 should be the CC top universities.</p>
<p>Just because you spend $250k/year on your AMEX card doesn’t mean you automatically become a Centurion Card member…</p>
<p>I am sure the admin at CC will make those switches. Its been less than a few hours, for crying out laud… Give them some time.</p>
<p>What is the difference to put 33 schools or 50 schools in the “Top CC Schools” section? Every year there will be a shuffle.</p>
<p>
Last time I checked, this was the College Confidential forum – not the USNWR forum. </p>
<p>Who determines what a “top 25 school” is? Wabash is ranked #12 by Forbes but #54 by US News. According to Washington Monthly, South Carolina State and Alabama A&M are top 25 universities, as are Texas A&M and Michigan State according to the Webometrics ranking. To which ranking’s whims should CC cater? And why?</p>
<p>Regardless of where CC draws the line, people will complain. Every university can’t be listed as a top university, and if you start adding schools, you’ll have to add quite a few. After all, there are several contenders for the CC top universities category (e.g. Wake, NYU, USC, Tufts, Wisconsin). It’s really more of a matter of pride and recognition than convenience; it takes precisely two clicks from the main page to reach USC or any of the CC top universities.</p>
<p>It’s good to see a positive thread about Wake Forest. It’s one of my very favorite schools and terribly underrated.</p>
<p>LOL. The 2010 US News ranking is based on 2009 admissions data. Coincidentally (NOT!), 2009 was the first year that Wake Forest admissions was SAT-optional. It won’t be the first time a school has used that ploy to get a bump in its reported SAT scores and, derivatively, its US News ranking. Nor, probably, will it be the last.</p>
<p>Also, it’s not clear yet whether USC and Wake Forest “moved up” or UCLA and UVA moved down in the US New scoring system. The US News “rank” is derivative of a score assigned by US News on a 100-point scale, with the top school getting 100 points and all other schools getting some smaller number, based on all the factors that go into the US News formula. Last year the #23 school, Georgetown, had a score of 74; the #24 schools, UCLA and UVA, had scores of 73; the #26 school, USC, had 72; #27 Michigan had 71; and the #28 schools, Tufts, UNC-Chapel Hill, and Wake Forest, had 70. It could be that USC went up 1 point and Wake jumped 3 points to tie UCLA and UVA for the #24 spot (note that there are 27 schools in the “top 25”); or, equally likely, UCLA and/or UVA could have slipped a point to USC’s level at 72, while Wake (with its SAT-optional ploy) leapfrogged Michigan to join the others in a 3-way tie for #25 or a 4-way tie for #24. </p>
<p>In short, you can’t assume that moving up one spot in the US News ranking, as USC apparently has done, necessarily means you’ve done “better” by US News’ metrics. It could be that you’ve held constant in your score but moved up in the ranking, i.e., relative terms, only because someone else who was previously above you is now doing worse. We’ll just have to wait and see which it is.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>This is no change. In last year’s US News ranking UC Berkeley, UCLA, and UVA were ahead of Michigan. As was, obviously, Cornell, though for this purpose I don’t think you can fairly count Cornell as “public” insofar as its US News rankings are buoyed by its “private” colleges like CAS and Engineering which have the most selective admissions standards.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Well, the Hawk had Michigan in the right group. Now, let’s the Ann Arbor voices be heard. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>“LOL. The 2010 US News ranking is based on 2009 admissions data. Coincidentally (NOT!), 2009 was the first year that Wake Forest admissions was SAT-optional. It won’t be the first time a school has used that ploy to get a bump in its reported SAT scores and, derivatively, its US News ranking. Nor, probably, will it be the last.”</p>
<p>bclintonk, nice catch. I completely forgot about Wake Forest going SAT optional. It is a great college, and it may truly deserve the bump in the ranking. I have 2 questions about their strategy:</p>
<ol>
<li><p>How much of an impact do you really think the SAT optional policy had on the rankings? Would it be so dramatic that fast? </p></li>
<li><p>If Wake SAT policy accounted for the bump in rankings, do you see their policy becoming a trend?</p></li>
</ol>
<p>I know you have not seen the data to draw any conclusions but I would be interested to hear your opinion. I have nothing against Wake Forest at all and agree that they have probably been underrated, I am just curious if you think their strategy played a primary role in the bump. Thanks.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I took some of Wake’s peer schools in North Carolina and found the following…</p>
<p>School and their SAT/ACT submission rate. </p>
<p>Wake Forest:
68% SAT
39% ACT
Total: 107%</p>
<p>Davidson
90% SAT
44% ACT
Total: 134%</p>
<p>Duke
87% SAT
43% ACT
Total:130%</p>
<p>North Carolina
97% SAT
33% ACT
Total: 130%</p>
<p>On average, the total SAT/ACT submission rate for Wake’s peer schools in North Carolina is ~131%, meaning that 31% of the student on average submitted both the SAT and ACT.</p>
<p>Lets assume that 31% of the Wake students submitted both SAT and ACT
This allows us to estimate the percentage of Wake students submitting a test score.
37% SAT Alone
8% ACT Alone
31% SAT/ACT
Total: 76%
Which means that a whopping 24% or around of the quarter of Wake students did not submit either. By admitting these students, Wake can essentially trim off presumably the lower 24% of their class scores.</p>
<p>Thus we can also infer that the minimum percentage of Wake students submitting both SAT and ACT would be 8%. I do not need to perform construct a confidence internal for the average both SAT and ACT submission rate to know that the minimum 8% is not within the confidence interval with a mean of 31% (even on this very small ‘data set’)</p>
<p>Anyone have Wake’s SAT/ACT scores from Class of 2012?</p>
<p>Sources:
[College</a> Search - Wake Forest University - Wake Forest - SAT®, AP®, CLEP®](<a href=“College Search - BigFuture | College Board”>http://collegesearch.collegeboard.com/search/CollegeDetail.jsp?collegeId=2266&profileId=6)
[College</a> Search - Davidson College - SAT®, AP®, CLEP®](<a href=“College Search - BigFuture | College Board”>College Search - BigFuture | College Board)
[College</a> Search - Duke University - Duke - SAT®, AP®, CLEP®](<a href=“College Search - BigFuture | College Board”>College Search - BigFuture | College Board)
[College</a> Search - University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill - UNC - SAT®, AP®, CLEP®](<a href=“College Search - BigFuture | College Board”>College Search - BigFuture | College Board)</p>
<p>Wake’s numbers (down with score choice?)</p>
<p>Matriculating Fall 2008:</p>
<p>SAT (72% reported)
CR 610-690
M-630-710</p>
<p>ACT (28% reported): 27-31</p>
<p>Matriculating fall 2009 (with score choice):</p>
<p>SAT (68% reported)
CR 580-690
M 600-700</p>
<p>ACT (39% reported): 27-31</p>
<p>CDS:
<a href=“Home - Office of Institutional Research”>Home - Office of Institutional Research;
<p>Good for Wake. I agree about the impact of their new SAT-optional policy, but I’ve always thought that they were a very underrated school with great programs. Go Deacons!</p>