Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Actually in order to understand why US News' undergrad ranking is now an utter joke, you have to go back to their very first rankings...
In 1988, US News published a top-25 list for the first time. It was again based simply on a survey of 1329 college presidents who chose the ten best colleges in their same Carnegie classification. There was a 60% response rate in 1988. In 1983 the response rate was 50%.
What happened?
In the beginning, US News' ranking was determined by a survey sent out to university presidents and they ranked the schools and then US News simply combined all those surveys and came up with the result.
Its amazing to see how highly thought of the elite public schools in the US are by college presidents.
Well, at the behest Ivy League officials put out of sorts over the fact that so many public schools ranked so highly, US News changed the criteria and gave more weight to alumni giving rates, faculty-per-student ratio and per pupil spending and other things that would heavily sway the findings in favor of private schools.
That effectively and henceforth has shut out all public schools from the top 20.
Otherwise, Berkeley would still be 5th or so. And its easy to see how wrong the Undergrad ranking is just by looking at the Grad School rankings, where publics do STELLAR.
Unfortunately for the Ivies, they have no way of manipulating the rankings for grad schools because that is almost all academic based. Poor babies.
I get where you're coming from, but there's a few things:
1. You're starting by talking about something almost 30 years ago. Higher Education and the schools themselves, individually and comparatively have changed a LOT since then. eg: NYU wasn't on anyone's prestige radar in the 80's, but look at them now. And a lot of their success has had to do with being really skillful at growing their endowment and real estate cache (I'll get back to this later).
2. Any method of ranking institutions is going to be flawed based on methodology. Is a survey of University Presidents using voluntary response not going to be problematic in some way? Does it have some of the same problems as the BCS? (ha)
3. In the 80's, the USNews ranking wasn't nearly as big a deal as it is now. There were other rankings at the time, like Barrron's, that people looked to for reference. The USNews ranking started out as a lightweight stunt to sell magazines. And basically it still is, BUT as their ranking gained prominence, and it grew to comprise the majority of their business, and it got more complex, with a bigger researching staff etc, it did change in character, as you say.
Nowadays, the USNews ranking is so important that it drives universities to blow budgets in order to keep up with the joneses in maintaining or improving their USNews Rankings. I actually think it has directly contributed to the disproportionate rise in the cost of higher education in the past few decades.
4. One thing about the USNews rankings in the "big" categories nowadays is that it has an awful lot of correlation with a list of schools by endowment - which is not really surprising, since big endowments allow schools to buy perks and fancy faculty positions, and build crazy facilities. This does tend to favor the universities that have been around the longest amassing their money piles, hence the Ivies.
One thing that I think the USNews rankings have going for them, for better and for worse, is that I think they actually are a pretty good gauge of institutional power & associated prestige. By whatever means one ranks "academics" (however one does that), is that really a better ranking of National Universities as institutions? Rhetorical question. But students at some of those top Liberal Arts schools have higher average admitted SAT scores than most of the ivies, but for example, should they be ranked higher than them as National Institutions, based on that chosen academic criteria? I say no, and I even went to one of those schools, so I should have an axe to grind!
In addition to those: LaSalle, Ursinus, Rider, West Chester, Widener, Swarthmore, University of the Arts, Peirce College, Philadelphia U, Rowan, Arcadia, Chestnut Hill, Lafayette, Neuman, Lincoln, and Wilmington (sure I forgot some)
Well, I think Princeton is definitely DVR, even though it's not Philly Metro. It's kinda like how DC and Baltimore are part of the same region, but not in the same MSA.
Yea exactly. I mean i know people who calculate metro areas have very precise formulas and all but sometimes to best way to figure out which way a region lies is to go into a sports bar and see if they're showing the sixers or knicks. i mean honestly as someone who spent some time up at princeton, the place is delaware valley all the way. feels far more like philly area than new york area and i can't imagine anyone being familiar with the area disagreeing.
If anything the argument could be made that Princeton counts for both the Philly and NY metro area. I could see that argument, but to argue that Princeton is more NY than Philly? Just not true.
Wow - either way, those are some sad fans! How bout Phillies or Yankees maybe?
haha... That was my initial thought but I imagined people saying "what about the mets?" so I just went with sixers and knicks in an attempt to keep it simple... Though I forgot about the nets. Phillies vs yankees is probably best comparison the more I think about it... No one likes the mets anyway
will disagree on any slam dunk and also there were many Philly schools in the rankings not highlghted and Princeton never factored but a topic for another thread because acccording to the Bay, it is the only place that is allowed to bend the rules for its benefit
no offense but this list is bull. I have a feeling what ever the criteria is Penn is better than atleast 6 of the schools above it.
Oh good, the classic NE "My feelings are fact while your statistics are crap" defense. This never gets old.
How unexpected that this would be your response. Is it any fun being biased 100% of the time?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Urban Luxury
I should ofwent to Stanford instead of Penn
where in the hell do you fond these lists! Haha i can't believe Penn beats Stanford in only 3 things. It has to be more for penn
The media hates Philly so I'm. Surelightheads like yourself would believe anything they put up -.-
Sorry, Stanford doesn't accept illiterates. In fact it has the second lowest acceptance rate of any university in the world, following Oxford. I guess the same can't be said for Penn, you know, since you went there and all.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Urban Luxury
you probably believe that Minneapolis is more worldly than Philly along with Portland because the gwac says it
Ahh, another ranking you don't care for b/c it doesn't favor Philthy. But wait...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Urban Luxury
I like the us news one -.- atleast they know the true qualities of Penn. Montclair I like your lists to but they look a little ehh how do I put this, biased
....this one is okay in your eyes! Wow, good thing you're not BIASED like the poster you're accusing of being so.
Oh good, the classic NE "My feelings are fact while your statistics are crap" defense. This never gets old.
How unexpected that this would be your response. Is it any fun being biased 100% of the time?
Sorry, Stanford doesn't accept illiterates. In fact it has the second lowest acceptance rate of any university in the world, following Oxford. I guess the same can't be said for Penn, you know, since you went there and all.
Ahh, another ranking you don't care for b/c it doesn't favor Philthy. But wait...
....this one is okay in your eyes! Wow, good thing you're not BIASED like the poster you're accusing of being so.
I generally favor schools in the eastern part of the US over CA schools. The UC system is very biased in favor of asians. I find this appalling and grossly unfair to others who might be far more versatile, well-rounded, and gifted. An exceptional black student for instance who lives in Palo Alto has a better chance of getting into a good Philly school than he/she does getting into Stanford or Berkeley. This is quite a shame, and a reflection on the short-sightedness of the admission offices of both schools.
Philly would be a far more enriching experience IMO.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Philadelphia
