@STEM2017 in addition to National Championships in basketball, Villanova’s business school has been getting a lot of publicity.
https://www.bloomberg.com/features/2016-best-undergrad-business-schools/
When stocks are mispriced based on new market knowledge, they quickly correct themselves to appropriate market value. USNWR rankings don’t have this self correction, so trends can be more predictable. For example, Northeastern has been rapidly increasing in USNWR rankings for decades. The increase doesn’t at all appear to be a random walk. The president of Northeastern called increasing in USNWR ranking “a life-or-death matter” and directed university researches to replicate the USNWR formulas and determine what policy changes would be most effective per dollar spent in improving rankings. As long as they continue to emphasize USNWR rankings more than other colleges and are spending a larger portion of budget to do so than other colleges, I’d expect they can continue to improve in rankings faster than other colleges.
Data10 the only thing I would disagree with is that there are only certain parts of that USNWR formula that can be influenced directly; at some point that will be maximized and have diminishing returns, and may take a lot of resources just to maintain.
I’m actually surprised that the academic chops of students at the military academies is even being questioned. I had the impression they only take academically accomplished students and put them through the academic and physical wringer once they’ve matriculated.
Am I wrong?
I know a few kids at military academies that weren’t in the top quartile either in terms of intelligence or academics. They tend to be very good athletes and good people. I also know a few that are quite bright. There is an academic range that I would say is broader than many top tier colleges and universities. A fair number do a PG year at the service academy prep schools to try to bring them up to speed academically prior to matriculating. The vast majority (all?) are athletes.
https://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/09/opinion/nocera-the-military-prep-school-scam.html
The average act score for Westpoint is a 28 which is at the 88% percentile of all ACT test takers. That would imply that most are in the top quartile.
Given that there can be ties on the list, I don’t think this statement holds up. Schools can go up without others needing to fall.
@bclintonk. While I agree with the general gist of your comments regarding MSU, let’s clear up some things:.
“Its undergraduate student body is 87% in-state.”
Not true. Until it’s most recent entering class, MSU’s in-state undergrad population had been around 72%. This year, with it’s largest entering class to date, along with a decline in international students, the in-state number jumped to 76%, which is higher than it’s been in over a decade.
“… although there’s some overlap, most of its students can’t get into its main in-state rival, the University of Michigan.”
Other than your own biases, what evidence do you have for this? The evidence is there are many MSU students who got into UM and chose MSU (as hard as it is for you to believe). Sure, a significant slice couldn’t get into UM. Most? Again, I’d like to see some evidence.
“There are second-tier directionals (Eastern, Western, Central, and Northern). Grand Valley State near Grand Rapids is a pretty decent school that’s lately attracting more attention from Michiganders, but these schools don’t have MSU’s instantly recognizable nameplate, national profile, and breadth of programs—not to mention Big Ten sports, a big part of MSU’s appeal.”
Breadth of programs is certainly a positive for MSU, but the quality of its academic programs is even a bigger plus, so much so it is considered a top 30 public nationally, and top-100 (public and private) internationally.
Here is the profile for the West Point class that graduated last Saturday for anyone interested:
https://www.usma.edu/oir/Class%20profiles/Class%20of%202018.pdf
Here are the stats for the class of 2020 (most recent I could find):
https://www.usma.edu/oir/Class%20profiles/Class%20of%202020.pdf
As @doschicos pointed out, there is a broader range of academics at the service academies due to the missions each is tasked with accomplishing.
UW not dead yet. Just announced
https://biochem.wisc.edu/news/2018/news-sussman-heads-uw2020-project-2018-05-24
https://news.wisc.edu/uw2020-warf-discovery-initiative-awards-announced/
Re: West Point and athletes, it is interesting to note from the links @ChoatieMom posted:
Class of 2020
Admitted: 1302
Varsity athletes in HS: 1294 99.4% of those admitted
Team Captains in HS: 826 63% of those admitted
Gosh, you’re defensive. I’m actually defending MSU here.
I’m relying entirely on Michigan State’s own most recent Common Data Set (2017-18), which states in section H1 that its percentage of OOS undergraduates is 13.4%. You’re correct, however, that this excludes international students. I doubt the international enrollment will be much affected by the Nasser scandal. So I think the percentage of U.S.-based in-state students is the relevant figure here.
And your statement about the current in-state number being “higher than it’s been in over a decade” seems to be just plain wrong. In its 2012-13 CDS, just 5 years ago, MSU reported an international enrollment of 3,959 or 11.5% of its undergraduate enrollment, and an OOS percentage (excluding internationals) of just 9.2%. You do the math, but that’s a higher percentage in-state than in 2017-18.
Again, I’d refer you to the CDS. According to section C4, MSU’s middle 50% ACT scores for the class that enrolled in the fall of 2017 were 23-28, and according to C9, only 17.8% had ACT scores of 30 or higher. Michigan’s middle 50% was 30-33, and 78.5% had scores of 30 or higher. ACT scores aren’t everything, but they do matter, and if 82.2% of MSU students had ACT scores below 30 and only 21.5% of Michigan’s enrolled freshmen were below that mark, I think it’s fair to infer that most MSU students couldn’t get into Michigan. But as I said, there’s some overlap, and no doubt some cross-admits, including some who chose MSU.
Michigan State’s student body has gotten stronger over time, but Michigan’s even more so, and consequently there’s less overlap than back in the day. In 1998-99, MSU reported middle 50% ACT scores of 21-26 and 42% in the 24-29 range (but only 7% with 30 or higher). That same year Michigan reported middle 50% at 25-30 and 58% in the 24-29 range, with 30% at 30 or higher. So it looks like perhaps as much as half of MSU’s class would have been competitive for admission to Michigan at that time. I think that’s no longer the case.
LSU has had significant problems due to losses in state funding. I’d steer clear.
If it helps anyone, West Point’s class of 2021 profile: https://www.usma.edu/oir/Class%20profiles/Class%20of%202021.pdf (It’s fascinating that this provides the number deemed academically and physically qualified - wish regular colleges would do something like that)
Between the Class of 2018 profile and the one for 2021, applications to West Point have decreased 14% in that 3 year period, the vast majority of it occurring over the past year. It’s especially noteworthy given the increase most selective colleges have seen.
My bet is that if you were to track applications to all the military academies they would show cycles which correspond pretty neatly with economic cycles. So during recessionary years, applications increase (parents unable or unwilling to pay; reluctant to borrow, uncertain outcomes in some professions) and during boom periods applications decrease (labor markets are pretty tight right now). I don’t think it has ANYTHING to do with selectivity, SAT’s, or academic reputations.
I would have thought it had more to do with leadership concerns and the potential for engaged conflicts than SATs, etc. I don’t think academic reputation is a factor here. The quality of academics is strong at the academies regardless of the stats of the incoming class.
A 14% swing year over year seems pretty hefty to think it is purely due to economic cycles, IMO.
Interesting because athletes are physically fit and know how to work hard? Or because athletic captains are generally very strong leaders? Or maybe you think being athletic and intelligent tend to be mutually exclusive? It takes a special student to go to West Point - one which arguably requires a more complex and varied skill set than many other high achieving high school graduates possess. I am fairly confident the USMA knows which attributes to look for in their accepted students given the academy’s demands. It’s low acceptance rate and a 93% freshman retention rate (following an incredibly demanding plebe year) suggests they are doing something right.
As for the Times article you posted, the author just sounds like he has an ax to grind against athletes and athletics in general. A NCAA violation for a stipend? No. The accepted students, whether they attend the prep school or not, are given a stipend. They aren’t paid as a benefit for participating in athletics; they are paid because every academy student is paid according to his or her rank. Additionally, the use of a prep school doesn’t appear to be any different from many other gateway programs out there.
“Or maybe you think being athletic and intelligent tend to be mutually exclusive?”
You’re jumping to assumptions that weren’t in my post and attributing biases that weren’t represented. As a mother of a child who was always a strong athlete as well as very bright, I harbor no such beliefs.
I find the stats interesting because it is a very unique factor to service academies and therefore of note. I can understand why athleticism and the leadership of captainships would be desirable traits in a cadet and future military leader. 99.4% is an overwhelmingly huge number not found in other colleges and universities so yes, it is interesting and noteworthy.
Bottomline, though, the service academies do take some athletes with lower academic standards. Whether one agrees with the author of the opinion piece or not, it is informative of the existence and usage of prep schools by the academies. I found that many people aren’t aware of them at all.
@doschicos thank you for the clarification. The link to the Times piece and the following statement had me wondering what your position was. For me, both left a fairly large window for interpretation. I was typing while you posted #56 -noting you were not concerned with academics.