<p>I guess UChicago will stand alone at #4 or at least tie with one or a few others at #4. The result will come out on September 10.</p>
<p>now that so many universities are learning to game the system… to get into the Top “10” or Top “20” or Top “whatever”… there will always be movement each year.<br>
Universities know that to get money, you have to be highly ranked and so they spend a lot of effort playing the USNWR ranking game for bragging rights. It’s always interesting to see which school bumped another one out of a spot in any particular year. That’s why students shouldn’t get too crazy about choosing colleges based on rankings. If Obama’s rating system goes through, that will probably mix things up, too, as it will have a direct relationship to cost of schooling.</p>
<p>Well, US News shifted its methodology this year to de-emphasize class rank. Admittedly, this was a smart move, since giving 6% of the ranking to such a trivial measure is rather silly, in my opinion. However, this will hurt Chicago, whose class ranking is the best out of any other university.</p>
<p>I think Chicago will still be able to keep #4 this year, but will probably be tied with Columbia and/or MIT. Caltech will make a big jump this year too, probably. I think Penn will be a bit hurt by the shift in methodology.</p>
<p>I think U of C will go down slightly. Less emphasis on class rank hurts it (not by much) and more emphasis on graduation rate hurts. The 6 year graduation rate pales peers.</p>
<p>Well, if you had to bet, you’d say fall, if for no other reason that there’s much more room in that direction!</p>
<p>The best case is UChicago will stand at the 4th position alone; the worst is it will tie with Columbia again.</p>
<p>The weight of student selectivity overall declines from 15 percent to 12.5 percent.</p>
<p>[Preview:</a> Methodology Changes for 2014 Best Colleges Rankings - Morse Code: Inside the College Rankings (usnews.com)](<a href=“http://www.usnews.com/education/blogs/college-rankings-blog/2013/09/03/preview-methodology-changes-for-2014-best-colleges-rankings]Preview:”>http://www.usnews.com/education/blogs/college-rankings-blog/2013/09/03/preview-methodology-changes-for-2014-best-colleges-rankings)</p>
<p>“……We reduced the weight assigned to the high school class standing of newly enrolled students……” and “……the weight of high school class standing drops from 40 percent to 25 percent……” </p>
<p>The change is -15% compared to last year. This will slightly hurt UChicago and MIT, moderately favor Stanford.</p>
<p>“……and gave slightly more weight to SAT and ACT scores……” “……and the weight of SAT and ACT scores rises from 50 percent to 65 percent……”</p>
<p>The change is +15% compared to last year. This will largely favor UChicago; and largely hurt Columbia, Stanford and moderately hurt MIT, and slightly hurt Harvard, Yale, Princeton.</p>
<p>The weight of graduation and retention rates was increased to 22.5 percent from 20 percent.</p>
<p>This will moderately hurt UChicago and MIT, and largely favor Columbia.</p>
<p><a href=“BigFuture College Search”>BigFuture College Search;
<p>Princeton
Class rank top tenth 96%
SAT 700-800 RMW(%) 76,81,81
98% Returning for sophomore year
96% graduate within six years</p>
<p>Harvard
Class rank top tenth 95%,
SAT 700-800 RMW(%) 77,80,80
97% Returning for sophomore year
97% graduate within six years</p>
<p>Yale
Class rank top tenth 96%
SAT 700-800 RMW(%) 76,80,81
99% Returning for sophomore year
96% graduate within six years</p>
<p>Columbia
Class rank top tenth NA
SAT 700-800 RMW(%) 73,76,73
99% Returning for sophomore year
98% graduate within six years</p>
<p>UChicago
Class rank top tenth 97%
SAT 700-800 RMW(%) 83,81,78
99% Returning for sophomore year
92% graduate within six years</p>
<p>Stanford
Class rank top tenth 94%
SAT 700-800 RMW(%) 69,77,76
98% Returning for sophomore year
95% graduate within six years</p>
<p>MIT
Class rank top tenth 98%
SAT 700-800 RMW(%) 67,94,70
97% Returning for sophomore year
93% graduate within six years</p>
<p>Why do you care?</p>
<p>It’s an excellent school, one way or another. Also, it’s a good fit for some students and not others.</p>
<p>You are right, it is a top school. I love the institution, that is why. The University president and board of trustees will care more than you and I do.</p>
<p>Even if UChicago dropped out of the top ten to like 11, I would still kill to go there haha!</p>
<p>The only one of S1’s class of '12 that I know of that did not graduate in 4 years (about 20 people) was the one that took a sabbatical in his second year, came back and graduated in his 5th year. If you didn’t graduate because of change of majors/interests I think it’s money well spent. If you had some kind of scholarship that extended to the extra time, even better.</p>
<p>There isn’t much change in the National Liberal Arts Colleges from last year (Vassar knocked out of Top 10, Davidson in). USNWR is offering a sneak peak of top ten for some categories without specifically ranking them. </p>
<p>U Chicago is not in the top ten for Best Value National Universities List for 2014:</p>
<p>Best Value Schools among those in the National Universities category. National Universities emphasize faculty research and offer a full range of undergraduate majors, plus master’s and Ph.D. programs.**</p>
<p>Brigham Young University—Provo (UT)
California Institute of Technology
Columbia University (NY)
Cornell University (NY)
Dartmouth College (NH)
Harvard University (MA)
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Princeton University (NJ)
Stanford University (CA)
Yale University (CT)</p>
<p>How do you know Vassar will be out of the top 10?</p>
<p>This is the ‘sneak peak’ for the Top Ten Liberal Arts colleges that will be announced on Sept 10:
[2014</a> Best Colleges Preview: Top 10 National Liberal Arts Colleges - US News and World Report](<a href=“http://www.usnews.com/education/best-colleges/articles/2013/09/06/2014-best-colleges-preview-top-10-national-liberal-arts-colleges]2014”>http://www.usnews.com/education/best-colleges/articles/2013/09/06/2014-best-colleges-preview-top-10-national-liberal-arts-colleges)</p>
<p>This is the 2014 List (not in order; and there is a tie)
Amherst College (MA)
Bowdoin College (ME)
Carleton College (MN)
Claremont McKenna College (CA)
Davidson College (NC)
Haverford College ¶
Middlebury College (VT)
Pomona College (CA)
Swarthmore College ¶
Wellesley College (MA)
Williams College (MA)</p>
<p>Oh, I thought you were talking about their being out of the big top 10 (where Vassar is #10,) not the best value schools.</p>
<p>^^^ Vassar is out of the top ten national liberal arts college as of 2014.</p>
<p>And how do you know that?</p>
<p>Edit: ah, I see</p>
<p>Tied to Stanford, #5, behind PHY and Columbia.</p>
<p>[National</a> University Rankings | Top National Universities | US News Best Colleges](<a href=“http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-colleges/rankings/national-universities?int=a557e6]National”>http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-colleges/rankings/national-universities?int=a557e6)</p>
<p>Not bad at all, it is one of the best universities in the world.Congratulations !</p>
<p>Tied with Stanford. That’s good.
Maybe next year Columbia will slip so UChicago can move up. It’s tough to pierce the top 3 since PHY are ensconced in there and are not showing any signs of weakness. </p>
<p>UChicago needs more marketing to increase its name recognition to solidify into a 4 instead of a 5. So let those direct mailers fly! Expand to the West, South and internationally! And avoid scandals at all cost. Improve student experience and job prospects! Ignore those alums complaining about the “good old days” as if those old days were really <em>that</em> good and who know nothing about what the modem world needs from college grads and what support students really need from the university.</p>
<p>I like Princeton the most among the top 3, so I agree with this ranking for the most part.</p>
<p>^^ I don’t. No offense to Chicago peeps, but we all know that Stanford is superior to Chicago - as an institution. It is also superior to Columbia - as an institution. </p>
<p>There is something wrong with USNews’ methodology, obviously.</p>