See, this is where you are irrational. The quote refers to the 2009-2010 admissions cycle, which ended in May 2010 and the people from that cycle entered in Fall 2010. The class of 2014 is the one that just entered this fall, right? So you couldn’t possibly have statistics for a future class that hasn’t even been formed yet. So even though you do your mea culpa later, I point this out in the hope you will avoid this kind of thing in the future. Certainly I can understand confusing the median (the point where there are as many above the as below) with the mean, which is in fact the same thing as the average. You still got the terms wrong, but I know what you meant. The median could indeed be 1280 while the mean is 1249. That is not unusual, especially since the SAT has a floor of 400, I guess it is for the CR+M. In any case, at least now you know.</p>
<p>@informative, rankings aren’t the only thing that matter. post-katrina, Tulane students have opportunities that not many other college students have - they get to help rebuild the city they go to school in. Most top 25 schools don’t have this. While Tulane isn’t an ivy league caliber school, it is a good one with great opportunities, especially in pre-medicine and medicine, because it was one of the first medical schools founded in the South. Plus, it’s standards in recent years have really gone up because they’re trying to get back to what they used to be - they’re 51 in UsNews right now, and that is still pretty damn good.</p>
<p>also, high SAT scores shown on common data sets don’t necessarily depict how smart kids are. not all kids at an ivy league are super intelligent (despite what you might think by looking at their SAT score) and not all kids not at an ivy league school are stupid. SAT scores don’t show how smart students at a particular school are, just what their aptitude for test taking is. Tulane looks at more than just grades - they look at potential.</p>
<p>The median could indeed be 1280 while the mean is 1249. That is not unusual, especially since the SAT has a floor of 400, I guess it is for the CR+M.= Fallenchemist</p>
<p>fallen: being honestly mistaken is not even close to being irrational. And while I sincerely want this discussion to terminate as it is serving no purpose, I do have to quibble with you still. What Fr. McShane quoted was the average SAT score from that cycle (which I thought came from the previous year but I will take your word for it), which is different from the median score (or mean in many people’s vernacular…but again, I am not a mathematician or statistician). Whatever. My point, again, was to state that I was not pulling these numbers out of my …er…head…and was given this number from someone, and its supported by the range of scores in the 50th percentile. But we are picking here. It doesnt matter if Fordham’s average, or mean, or median or whatever you want to call it or utilize is 1249 or 1260 or 1279 or 1280…the important thing is that their scores are rising rapidly (partially due to demographics and the sheer selectivity of many peer schools and some trickle down effects from higher ranking schools). </p>
<p>But its not irrational. Irrational means without logic or basis in fact or delusional. My statements were based on facts, supported by a range of scores, though my terminology was inexact in the strict sense of the word and because avg means inclusion of all scores, whereas I was utilizing the range in the 50th percentile…meaning the majority of applications they review and for which students are accepted.</p>
<p>Nice try informative. That report is 10 years old. I want the last 5 years or so directly from USNWR…not some third party evaluating what they think the methodology at USNWR is. Try again.</p>
<p>What informative posted doesn’t begin to address what I said. Of course USNWR has their system of measuring. I agree that they have it, my point is they are using data that cannot possibly apply to Tulane. Tulane is in a unique situation and USNWR refuses to adjust for this. LOL, I mean using USNWR to corroborate USNWR is absurd. If you pick parameters for an equation that cannot be measured for a subject of the study, then it is useless, or at least not apples to apples for that particular subject. Besides, there is nothing sacrosanct about the parameters USNWR uses anyway. It certainly isn’t scientific. They change them from time to time and change the weightings. Very subjective stuff. The guy simply has no idea what he is talking about.</p>
<p>ghostbuster - You misunderstand what I think was irrational. Of course making an honest mistake is not. But you were acting like that 1249 was from what would be the current sophomore class at Fordham, and that you knew the current class had a 1280 average. So you came on all hot and bothered and proclaimed DEFINITIVELY
And you were 100% wrong, and yes I think it was irrational, because all you had to do is read the site I linked. This was all before you realized your mistake in confusing median and mean (average). However, the quote I posted and the link I gave was clearly regarding the current freshman class, and that is the very latest data. So what was “irrational” (maybe not the best word) was that you were hell-bent on making that data about a previous class when, if you had taken a few seconds to really read the post and the site I linked, you would have realized I was right and the 1249 was indeed the average for the current freshman class. I think we can indeed put this to bed, just please try reading more carefully.</p>
<p>Then go find the actual magazines, if you care so much. Its not like these are inaccurate figures, but if you want to insist that they are, prove it. You asked that I provide evidence of Tulane’s fall, and I did. Around 20 spots. </p>
<p>LOL, if you call one magazine’s arbitrary ranking system a fact, then be happy with your take on life. That is ridiculous. What I gave you in the link where I listed numerous things going on at Tulane are pertinent facts.</p>
<p>I should also point out that it is willful ignorance to simply cite the result of a calculation without regard to what goes into it and where it falls short (in this case Tulane’s highly misleading graduation rate stat) and still state that this calculation “proves” that a school is on the decline. That would be somewhat like saying a power hitter in baseball with an injury had a bad season because he only hit 10 home runs, while in fact after healing he might be every bit the ballplayer he was or even better. If the calculation used to “rank” the ballplayer continues to use the 10 home run season while ignoring the fact that he was out 3/4 of the year and that he has had 3 good years since then, that would be ridiculous. That is pretty much what USNWR is doing to Tulane.</p>
<p>And citing a 2001 report? How irrelevant is that??</p>
<p>What is the point of bashing Tulane, a very good school? Why is this necessary? </p>
<p>There are so many good schools in this country, too bad people only focus on the ones in their geographical area or the Ivy League, etc. Some people have blinders on! </p>
<p>Pick up the Fiske Guide 2011 or Princeton Review’s Best 373 & read about some of the schools you may never have heard of or you have personal prejudices against, (perhaps your own personal prejudices go back 30 years or more?) You might be surprised!</p>
<p>I agree SLUMOM, no idea why this person refuses to learn what is really going on at Tulane instead of focusing on one rating that is highly flawed. While I am obviously a big proponent of Tulane, I have recommended literally dozens of other schools to people. Clearly there are numerous choices for different needs and wants, and sometimes Tulane would be a rather poor choice for an individual. Sometimes Harvard would be a poor choice even when they can get in. But it certainly makes no sense to spread misinformation about a school, or to give a one-dimensional assessment based on a single flawed piece of data.</p>
<p>Bashing schools is poor form, whether its Tulane or Fordham or any school. Which was my original point and raison d’etre of responding to the OP. We got all sidetracked in minutiae about statistics, which I was trying to avoid and got hijacked by another poster and then into an argument with fallen about definitions…when he is clearly a scientist with statistical paralysis (thats a joke fallen!) and numbers fixation. My point was that Fordham is a really good school with really smart kids and their numbers are vastly improved from 5-10 years ago (and commensurate ranking), such that its harder to get into by a magnitude than it was even 5 years ago. I had no intention of arguing definitions or statistics or whatever. I am a generalist and present myself as such. If I were an academician with a focus on stats and science, then people would have a right to criticize my comments (and me.) But we are really arguing apples and oranges here, which is in itself irrational. </p>
<p>Fallen: you might be better off not calling people names with strong language (like calling me “irrational” which in my neighborhood is an insult) or challenging their integrity. You are entitled to your opinions and you can support what you say with stats, fine. I presume you are at Brown, btw. On staff there, perhaps. </p>
<p>What I WANT to do is to provide helpful, beneficial and positive commentary about schools without denigrating a schools mission, its clientele/student body or its ubiquitous ranking in USNWR (which I agree with fallen, is an absurdity on its face). I also agree with fallen that just because you get into Harvard doesnt mean you would be a good fit there and should go. I can also say the same about Fordham. Its not about convincing a kid to forego one school so they go to your/my favorite school and we can strike another ‘victory’. That is a gross disservice to the student, family and school. I only want to enhance the public profile, meaning the level of awareness of a schools name and offerings, to prospective students…and recruit in a general sense the best and brightest. But in the end, its the student’s decision and they have to live there for four years. </p>
<p>Good luck to all on admissions as well as finding the right fit for you.</p>
<p>Well ghostbuster, after all that sturm und drang you and I very much agree on the main points. As a science type (no, I am not at Brown) irrational to me is not really a pejorative term, but more of a description of one’s logic or lack there of. Rather like Spock, lol. Not having any way to know that you were mixing up mean and median until the end, it did indeed seem irrational. But whatever. Now we know the facts and hopefully out of all this the OP and all other readers indeed have a better sense of Fordham, know the truth about Tulane, and can make appropriate judgments based on that and other information.</p>
<p>It was indeed interesting for me to see how much more competitive Fordham has gotten. I knew it was moving up in the world in many ways, but I didn’t realize the magnitude of it. Congrats to them, I always like to see all schools do better. Well, maybe not LSU. LOL, old rivalry joke. They can do better too, it is good for everyone.</p>
<p>Hey guys just giving you all an updated status.</p>
<p>So far I have been accepted to : Fordham (Gabelli) , James Madison University, Penn State (Smeal), University of Maryland (College Park), University of South Carolina, and Elon.</p>
<p>Waiting to hear back from : University of Richmond, Tulane, American, and Northeastern</p>
<p>Feel free to make suggestions based on my current status, id love for everyone to bump. = ]</p>
<p>It appears there are some fairly knowledgeable participants and I was hoping you could put forth ideas and suggestions about Elon and Northeastern in terms of:
Communications programs with emphasis on Broadcast TV
Perhaps minor in law
Accepted into Leadership program of 25 top students @ Elon vs reg program of NEU.
The big question is which will afford more opportunity in the field. Do you get more support at Elon because you are a chosen member of the elite (and is it really elite?) or NEU which has the coop program? I don’t really know what opportunites the Leadership get versus the regular students. Oddly enough my student got in to Leadership versus Communications which was a real surprise. Thanks for any insights.</p>
<p>FYI, Communications fellows have much higher stats outright than leadership fellows; there is a TON of information on the Elon website to answer all of your questions…</p>
<p>the issue of NEU v Elon communications may depend more on where one wants to be after graduation…than about the two diff programs</p>
<p>I know there is info on the Elon website but ijust like all information released from the colleges it doesn’t qualify the information. I am hoping someone who has a student or is a student at Elon actually can speak from experience as to what the opportunities are they were offered that the other nonFellows were not or vice versa.</p>
<p>go to parents on the left side of the page…go to top of page…new thread…let me know if you have trouble…I can start it for you if you can’t figure it out…</p>
<p>also, ncmentor and scoutmom have kids in fellows programs…do you know how to send a private message?</p>