<p>When you're King of the Hill for 8 straight years, people will take shots. It comes with the territory, but you at least hope they're informed shots. Here are the facts.</p>
<p>First, yield is no longer considered by US News in its rankings (it hasn't been for quite some time). Second, without ED, Princeton may have had, this year, its most selective year in history (and selectivity is indeed considered by US News). Third, admissions this past year saw yet another rise in SAT scores. And all indications are that these trends will continue.</p>
<p>I've actually been disappointed by this administration's handling of admissions, classes, etc. Just all in all, the new admissions director has made some bad decisions in eliminating ED and not keeping their financial aid policy up to date with Harvard's. Hopefully, this will bring about some changes.</p>
<p>Princeton at the #2 spot isn't that big of a deal. I mean, the general consensus is that Harvard and Princeton are the 2 best undergraduate schools in the country, and over the past decade that's what we've seen. Sure, they'll switch places occasionally, but being 7/8 is not bad at all.</p>
<p>I laughed out loud when I read this. Nothing about the actual quality of the school has changed. I had a great freshman year (when Princeton was #1). I expect my sophomore year to be just as good (when Princeton is #2). That's how I measure quality--by how much I can get out of the school. Yes I would rather Princeton be ranked first than second, but the shift in the rankings isn't really meaningful.</p>
<p>Hey, anyone who thinks this change is anything other than utterly meaningless - as to anything that really matters - should be spending a lot less time on CC and a lot more time reading books (though, yeah, that probably goes for anyone who realizes it's meaningless, too).</p>
<p>
[quote]
So how did Harvard edge past its Ivy League rival? A comparison of last year's numbers points to one category where it moved ahead of Princeton -- average class size. Harvard reports the percentage of students in classes under 20 students rose from 69 percent to 75 percent since last year's report, while the percentage in classes bigger than 50 fell from 13 percent to 9 percent.</p>
<p>Asked whether Harvard had made a particular effort to reduce class sizes, Mitchell said: "We have worked and will continue to work very hard to enhance the academic experience for undergraduate students." Since 2000, he said, Harvard has added 86 freshman seminars (which have fewer than 12 students), and more than 100 tenure-track faculty, while its student body size has stayed about the same.
<p>It's nice to see that Harvard is addressing one of its traditional weaknesses. But I stand by what I said earlier. If you think Harvard is a better fit for you, then it was probably a better fit even when it was ranked second. Ditto for Princeton.</p>
<p>wow, please relax everyone. i know it's utterly "correct" to diss rankings and all like everyone else is doing, but there's no need to be overly so. rankings don't matter much to me either, and I agree with what Weasel said, but it's always interesting to read about them and analyse them. and they do matter to many internationals who rely on them when making decisions from tens of thousands of miles away.</p>
<p>I can understand how internationals would find them somewhat useful, but only for dividing schools into tiers. Do internationals rely on them to the extent that a shift from 1 to 2 would affect their decision?</p>
<p>
[quote]
I can understand how internationals would find them somewhat useful, but only for dividing schools into tiers.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>where did you get that from?</p>
<p>
[quote]
Do internationals rely on them to the extent that a shift from 1 to 2 would affect their decision?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>i wasn't referring to Princeton's shift in particular, but to college rankings in general. but you never know how crazy some parents this side of the world may get. Also, although I never had the luxury of doing so, an international admitted to both H and P may choose to rely on such rankings.</p>
<p>What do you mean where did I get that from? I stated my own opinion--I didn't get it from anywhere. What I meant was that a difference in say eight spots in most cases reflects a difference in quality, but that to choose between HYPSM based on the rankings is downright stupid.</p>
<p>I completely agree with what Weasel just said.</p>
<p>I have always thought rankings in general though are prety useless, and perhaps more useful would be rankings of particular departments, like they do for graduate schools. Even then, though, I'm sure the differences between any adjacent colleges in the rankings would be ridiculously small to use as your college deciding factor.</p>
<p>Also, something else that's important. Harvard got a 100, Princeton got a 99, Yale got a 98 score...and then the next highest was 94. So there is a lot of hype regarding the differences between HYP, even in the US news rankings.</p>
<p>I understand that internationals often are unable to visit schools in the US, but there are still guide books, visit reports, and current students who are willing to answer questions. Do the internationals you know not realize that these universities are of virtually identical quality? I'm not trying to be critical of international students. If I wanted to go to school in Europe, I know I would have a hard time deciding which school I would attend. But I'd like to think I would base my decision on something other than rankings.</p>
<p>Well, from my personal experience, until I joined CC I didn't even KNOW that "fit" must be considered when considering a school :P I used to think in terms of rankings too, because that's the way things work in my country, where things work pretty simply from a young age: top primary school kids go to top secondary schools, and the best ones there go to top junior colleges, etc. So it's very easy for people around here to not seek out detailed information from guidebooks, etc, because usually nobody has told them to do so. There are educational fairs organized by current students, but they tell me that prospective applicants are mostly interested in stuff like "what's a good SAT score?", "what ECs do I need... what ECs did YOU have?" Even if the resources are there, the wrong mindsets prevail, and like it or not, rankings do seem important and significant to people. I can't speak for other countries though.</p>
<p>Yeah seriously,
If all you care about is rankings, then Princeton is not for you
You should care about what the school offers and how it matches what you're looking for</p>
<p>I think screwitlah mentioned an excellent point. Weasel's point is valid, though: the differences between these schools are negligible, and it's a shame that US News may be misused to choose between them. At the very least, US News should really make it clearer that the difference between #1 and #2 is practically nonexistent. But I guess it's more exciting to have a clear first than to have a whole first tier.</p>