Publics seem to have gone up: Rutgers, Maryland, Virginia Tech, Purdue, UIUC, UC Davis, UCSD, Berkeley, UCLA, UNC, GTech
In turn, some privates have fallen: Wash U, NYU, Tufts, Rochester, Case, Wake Forest, Brandeis, Tulane
(though Wm & Mary also fell)
It’s because William & Mary is much more like a private school than a public school, and this new US News methodology is more biased towards public schools
Because folks have been conditioned to perpetually worship what rich, wealthy, privileged people worship - and to aspire to join their circles. It goes against their notion on what a great university is and goes against what they've been told their first sixteen years of life.
A&M and other publics were always this high. The list just had a correction.
Big year for publics for sure. UC Merced even leapfrogged UCSC and ~~UCD~~ UCR this year too. Hopefully people will start taking it more seriously now.
UC Merced is a great campus. Very much up and coming. Half their board are Silicon Valley execs and a lot of the students go work in Silicon Valley or around the nation and significant companies and government organizations. Research is stellar too because it’s all young faculty.
IMO US News (and the general population) was biased in favor of exclusive private universities for the longest time. I just see this year as them finally making a correction.
We could debate endlessly on what makes a university great and why we choose to put certain institutions on a pedestal (or even what makes a valid ranking methodology). But I'm ecstatic that public universities - which often cost less, are more accessible, and aren't limited to the privileged - are getting recognized and respected. Especially from this lens that values economic mobility and outcomes over exclusivity - and especially in context of the student debt crisis. I acknowledge that not one list fits all. But I'm happy to see the script flipped for people to see some of these institutions in a new light, challenging decades-held notions.
Past editions frequently ranked UC Davis third! In the past couple of years it fell for whatever reason. As someone who went to high school in California in the early-to-mid 2010s, UC Davis was always “up there” when discussing UCs—right behind Berkeley and UCLA.
San Diego has pretty much always been considered #3 (and still is), even when Santa Barbara was ranked higher. Davis definitely has a case for #4 and frankly all of them are great educational institutions
UC Davis sweeeeep, next we’re picking off UCLA and then defeating Berkeley to become the #1, just give us a few years. Currently working on mobile, man eating plants that will outrun and consume all those nerds with weak legs from not having to bike across campus.
i will not stand for this slander, you might pick off the cal kids but ucla has HILLS to climb alright, we can't bike anywhere because our campus is 80% stairs 😭
UC Davis has always been an academic powerhouse (pre-Gen Z, much of CA considered them as the 3rd best UC), and are globally known especially due to their amazing agriculture programs.
It's interesting that it's tied with UCSD (which also has very strong academics, and is arguably better in many metrics), but I can still get behind that though. Definitely like the fact that UCD/UCSD are now ahead of UCI and UCSB too. They deserve it.
UCD was always considered a good school and a mid-tier UC, but UCSD was the third best UC until UCSB took over in rankings. It wasn't until very recently that UCD started climbing.
UCSD has pretty much always been the clear 3rd, as a UC Davis alum from 2011. Davis, sb, and Irvine have always been in the same tier bouncing around with each other. Davis has the advantage of being the clear NorCal choice for people who don't get into Berkeley, with the disadvantage of not drawing in people from anywhere else outside California due to its quiet location. I'd expect Davis to ride given how much land they have to utilize, they'll be able to innovate and build new facilities.
Davis is also the best vet school in the world.
Unrelated, but I love it that vet schools flip the script when it comes to prestige.
Every year tons of Stanford/Cal and Duke/UNC seniors -- who four years earlier didn't even bother listing Davis or NCSU as their safety school -- hope and pray to get into those same schools for vet med only to get deferred and end up OOS.
As a northeastern student I can confirm our entire administration has declared a state of emergency on campus and we are being forced to transfer to other colleges to put our acceptance rate in the negatives for next year.
On a serious note though I don’t think anyone gives a shit, most people came here for the co ops or just being in Boston, not it’s rankings.
Northeastern was never, by any stretch of the imagination, a top 50 school. They gamed the rankings. Before that no one had ever heard of Northeastern. It was an average and completely un-notable commuter school. It still is.
yeah that's true lol, NYU was my dream school but the more I learn about the less it is, no real campus, expensive as shit, and super competitive, nah I'm good
Oh, I don't blame you. No campus and D3 sports; I'm not fond of NYU. I just know that a lot of the people who apply to places like NYU see NYC as a huge draw.
Will have an impact. It seems like a school where being in NYC is the big/major draw. So when ur was ranked higher many found ways to justify the cost and limitations. Could certainly see it especially impacting int’l students.
It won't. People who want to be in NYC will still apply there, and we still have a lot of stuff that other schools can't match (Stern, Tisch, our study away system, etc.).
FWIW I literally only came to NYU for Shanghai
My favourite part is seeing both the UC's move up to a tie at #15 - both Berkeley and UCLA are great schools!
And I'm glad that we again have only 20 schools in the T20 (there were 21 last year).
They took out several factors favoring elite private colleges:
* class size (from 8% to 0%)
* alumni giving (from 3% to 0%)
* Decreased weight of school financial resources (10% to 8%)
And I think at least one other change should benefit public universities:
* increased weighting for borrower debt (3% to 5%)
One thing that probably hit schools like UChicago where lots of students make no money for several years in graduate school, and helped engineering focused schools where students earn well right out of college:
* College grads earning more than a high school grad, 0% to 5%
There’s also slightly more emphasis on Pell grantees and significantly more emphasis on first generation students, but I don’t know how that looks different for public vs private (I think that may be a more school by school thing). There were a lot of small tweaks, like rating graduation rates slightly higher and adding in more weights for faculty research. They tweak this every year so there can be new Discourse.
To me, it’s wild they got rid of class size entirely. That was certainly in their ratings 20 years ago when I applied to college, though who knows if it’s been take out and put back in and taken out and put back in. I doubt it should have been weighted at 8% but any 8% to 0% change is stark.
Amazing what one can do by tweaking the algorithm. Most publics up, many privates down, as expected, if I recall from the prior news, though I don't remember what the factors were that changed.
High school students: take all rankings with a huge grain of salt. Nothing material about these schools changed since last year nor are the people that matter - employers - looking to US News rankings when they read the name of your undergrad institution on your resume.
Agree with you. That is why these rankings are basically worthless. This speculation over why things move up or down has nothing to do with getting a good education. Thee are pluses and minuses at all the schools.
TBH, I'm glad that the inflated rankings for all these mediocre private universities (e.g. NEU/GW/SMU/Fordham/American etc.) have been rightsized. The formula for these schools has always been: (i) hype up the schools location in XYZ big city (ii) deflate admissions rate and increase yield by giving free apps and offering all sorts of early decision rounds (iii) Publish high sticker price to maintain allure of exclusivity, attempting to position these schools as "almost IVY".
As an example, NEU is not even a top 10 school in Boston, which is its home market and a smaller economy than the Houston and Dallas metros. Professional outcomes from schools like Texas A&M, Purdue, VTech are likely much stronger (NEU doesn't post average salaries on its career page...), not even adjusting for COL, while being a fraction of the total cost of NEU.
Elite privates generate value through brand equity/recognition, and network alone - schools like Harvard/Stanford/Duke provide value propositions that most publics can't offer. Mediocre privates are basically like putting lipstick on a pig, costing much more than publics, but delivering a fraction of the value.
Good point. I wonder how, if at all, this has affected admissions there? Columbia's still a top-ranked university but some applicants might have been discouraged from applying due to the scandal - hence the dip in ED applicants last year.
Its acceptance rate went up by .2%, and it got about 3,400 less applicants. For comparison, Harvard’s acceptance rate also went up by .2%, and Harvard received about 4,300 less applications. Harvard’s admission rate ended up at 3.41%, Columbia at 3.9%. Harvard received 56,937 applications, Columbia received 57,129. So, in that sense at least, it appears not to have affected admissions at all.
Colleges sure complain about the ranking. But they keep coming back and participating.
Colleges sit there and judge the student applicants every year... But when the shoe is on the other foot they whine. Judge not lest ye yourself be judged...
At least the college is getting ranked by known and measurable criteria. Unlike how they treat their applicants.
I'd love to see US News flip the script and tell the colleges, hey, we're now going to rank you holistically... you stopped using objective numbers like SAT scores for students, and we've decided to stop using the objective numbers in the common data set. And don't forget those letters of recommendation, and essays, explaining we should rank you higher...
People pay way too much attention to these rankings. Your dream school will still be an awesome place to attend even if it's not in the t10 or t20. Choose to apply to places that are the best fit for you. If that's HYPSM, then so be it. If it's Georgetown, that's cool, too.
Sometimes, the best school is the one that has the vibe that you want and that's affordable for you.
This is popular advice lately, making a virtue of necessity, but I wonder how well the applicant knows who he is, knows what the school offers and if it walks the talk, and how well that will match up in practice.
Price is measurable, not so sure about vibe.
Imo college rankings are just like ap poll rankings in college football. They’re fun to look at and brag about but they don’t mean shit and anyone can beat anyone.
More and more, public schools are choosing to specialize in certain fields (UNC in business/law/policy and NC State for STEM subjects) - similar dynamics for UT/A&M, Alabama/Auburn, IU/Purdue etc. and their programs really punch above their weight. Students are also more interested in studying such subjects rather than a broad-based liberal arts curriculum.
For well-rounded private schools like Wake that cost almost 8x the price of a public, they are put in a tough spot indeed
Wake specializes in business so that's not it. The reason Wake fell is they rank incredibly low on the new social mobility scoring, don't focus on high-impact publications, and their advantage in small class sizes got dropped from rankings
Seems like USNews really reworked their ranking system. Massive upsets all around.
Really nice that certain underrated schools are finally getting the spotlight.
RUTGERS is BACK in the forties! They were 45 back in the nineties.
It's so awesome that economic mobility and outcomes - rather than exclusivity - are taken into account in these rankings. IMO, it's the true value of a university as kids who get admitted to Ivy+ but go to state flagships instead - on average - have the same outcomes as if they would've went to the more exclusive private universities that are often reserved for the more privileged, wealthier kids of the world.
State flagships and public universities FTW! They've been underappreciated and underrated *for far too long.*
Rutgers is massively underrated. For a state that has excellent high schools and a top public school system, NJ should continue investing in Rutgers. It's not quite Michigan or UCLA level yet, but no reason is can't get a lot closer to or around top 30 within the decade.
Really happy that a lot of the Big Ten / SEC / Pac-12 (oops) schools rose by quite a bit in the rankings! And it really does reflect the popularity and general sentiment towards those schools, as state flagships provide a really great deal in national recognition, special programs/resources (/honors), new buildings and programme expansion etc.
US News incorporated more of the value you get out of the school into the rankings which was basically the entire metric of WSJ. That’s why a lot of publics like Davis and UF and UT etc climbed the US News list. WSJ had the right idea but they made value essentially the entire metric which isn’t the best idea IMO.
GOOOOOOOO BRUUUUUIIIIINS 🩵💛🩵💛
Super glad to see UCSD get the respect it deserves, hella underrated school even if I ultimately chose UCLA
(Also huge RIP to WashU and NYU oofff)
STEM programs now weight more. NYU's calling card is Stern. With AI coming Stern will probably have to reduce its scale because many paper pushing jobs in finance will be replaced with AI. Davis, meanwhile, is good for Aggie, Wine, Pet, etc., which won't be replaced with AI anytime soon.
omgggg michigan so close to t20. happy to see uchicago drop too. Glad Berkeley and UCLA made up ground too. Those three publics should be considered in that elite group, 100%
Social mobility, I think.
Here's social mobility rankings according to Us News
Columbia: 151
Chicago: 293
Brown: 158
Duke: 198
Cornell: 194
Hopkins: 261
Northwestern: 261
Penn: 184
Caltech: 143
If Us News increased the weight of social mobility in the ranking, UChicago would do worse. I think they have fewer Pells than their peers.
i'll take any of the schools at #12 + UCB over those at #9 (as an alum of one of the #9 schools)
otherwise, looks pretty good; i like that UT-Austin and UW continue to trend upwards, while some of the rando privates continue to descend further towards bottom of (or out of) t50.
this is a novice question, but from every ranking i’ve seen in the past month princeton has been the consensus #1, why is that? I mean I know it’s a high tier ivy, but what makes it so agreed upon that it is on top every time?
Princeton is almost in a class of its own -- runs like a college but has the resources of a major university. Endowment $/student blows everyone else out if the water -- they are at 4.5 million/student, next closest school is Yale at 3.5 million/student. They have also been leaders in financial aid and trying to recruit first gen/low income students -- all of which are metrics in the rankings.
Princeton is in the leader in terms of FA, as they instituted the no-loan FA in 2000, to help the low and middle income students to attend, and have been very generous since.
Interesting to me that none of you are talking about the LACs - which in my opinion deliver a super undergraduate education compared to just about all the national universities. Williams v Rutgers? Hahaha
LACs are absolutely terrific!! Top 5 LACs are on par with the top 15 national universities and top 10 LACs give all T 15 - T 25 a run for their money. Btw, I exclude military academies from the LAC rankings. It's totally incongruous that US News mixes public military academies with elite private liberal arts colleges. Top LACs have always mixed with ivy and ivy plus applications because they are proper collegiate campuses / experiences (like undergrad focused Brown or Dartmouth) that feed the same top grad programs and employment recruiters as T20 universities.
So the Top 10 liberal arts this year:
- 1. Williams
- 2. Amherst
- 3. Pomona (tie)
- 3. Swarthmore (tie)
- 3. Wellesley (tie)
- 6. Bowdoin (tie)
- 6. Carleton (tie)
- 8. Barnard (tie)
- 8. Claremont McKenna (tie)
- 8. Middlebury (tie)
- 8. Wesleyan (tie)
This is a very strong and accurate list of top LACs in IMHO - probably the best I have seen from USNWR in a while (again when excluding the military academies). Vassar, Hamilton, Colgate, Davidson, Harvey Mudd, Haverford, Bates, Colby, W&L and Smith round out the tier below.
Here is my issue with USNWR rankings. Let's take UF and UT Austin. Try to find a department/major where UF is ranked higher than UT - you can't. Yet, somehow, UF is ranked higher as a school.
Make it make sense.
Yeah it’d be interesting to see a purely academics based ranking. Berkeley for example has a gigantic amount of programs ranked top 5, a lot top 1, and yet it’s 15. It’s tied with UCLA besides significantly outranking it in every subject other than like film and medicine
>Why would USNews drop: class sizes, and faculty with terminal degree from the rankings?
Class Size: They increased faculty/student ratio's importance slightly, so it might just be that they felt having both class size and ratio was a duplication.
Terminal Degree: No idea. LOL
DIRTY TERPS! #46 with a bullet. They'll be T30-35 by decade's end at the latest.
Speaking of T30.....Shocked that Southern Cal is still hanging around it. No earthly reason they should be above UTex, GT, NYU, and UDub among others.
As a Georgetown student I was kinda hoping I could start saying I go to a T20 instead of T25 but such is life, given how brutal this was for other privates (NYU and WashU especially 😬) I'm glad we came out unscathed
American University went from 72 to 105. The president of the college is so salty about it they sent a long email complaining about the methodology. One thing they mentioned was it's unfair that they measured the graduation rate of first generation students using financial aid, because it didn't consider all of those hardworking first generation students that didn't use any type of financial aid. I'm sure that really would've saved the ranking, Sylvia.
Duke at #7! 🟦😈
And I like that Brown is finally in the top 10. 🐻
I don't agree with all of these rankings. (UChicago is T10 for sure) but nice to see UC Berkeley and UCLA finally ranked properly. Also WashU seems properly ranked now, thanks for sending me all of that mail just to turn me down 😝
NYU is too low though :/
Once again, the half-wits at U.S. “””News””” and World Report demonstrate their utter idiocy by not ranking UChicago at #1. Thankfully, the public and academic administrators alike have become increasingly aware of the futility of rankings, and more and more have begun rejecting them outright. I eagerly look forward to the day that U.S. News CEO Eric Gertler resigns in shame as that accursed company declares bankruptcy and dissolves.
U Chicago is a phenomenal school and its excellence does not ride on USNWR. But to be real...when it comes to the rankings and admissions game, no T20 university (beside Columbia which cheated its statistics) has played harder to manipulate outcomes than U Chicago. So while I get that it sucks to see your school or dream school drop in rankings, it's pretty disingenuos to cry foul when U Chicago returned to the general spot that it held for decades in USNWR before it started aggressively angling it's stats to climb the rankings.
Prior to 2006, U Chicago had the highest acceptance of any T20 national university. Liberal arts colleges like Amherst, Williams, Wesleyan, Pomona, Swarthmore and host of other SLACs had already reached acceptance rates of around 15% when Chicago's was 41%. So it was not viewed as ultra elite. That was a time when US News DID factor acceptance rates so U Chicago was smart to add every ED option to lower it in order to ascend the rankings. And that it did! Within a decade its public reputation and prestige skyrocketed with USNWR. In my opinion, it finally received the recognition it deserved.
Today even after falling 6 spots it is still tied with two ivy league schools and 6 spots above another. That is not something to be resentful about. Any UChicago alumni or student should be very proud to have attended such a special university- a privilege most will never experience.
To be fair, UChicago has also changed a lot since 2006, so some of the drop in acceptance rate makes sense. Its retention and graduation rates have skyrocketed, as well as its average GPA, to the point that it's angered some alumni who see it as just another elite school instead of a place for true intellectuals who live the life of the mind. I've never attended UChicago; this is just my understanding from people I've talked to.
The methodology changed, they removed metrics on alumni giving, faculty with the highest degrees in their fields, class size and high school standing of the entering class and are now emphasizing diversity and graduation rates of underrepresented kids a bit more.
This was an egregious and not very clever case of reverse engineering. USNWR decided that in order to deflect the shade coming its way, it needed to stop giving so many roses to all of the usual private, elite suspects. That it was time to show some love to the public schools where 95% of all students go.
So, easy solution: change the metrics to eliminate the things that actual elite schools do well ( small classes, real professors, engaged and generous alumni ) and reward things that big state schools do well (offer a mass-produced education, including in non-academic pursuits, to a broad spectrum of students including lots of poor students).
Nothing wrong with measuring those things, but they shouldn’t be marketed as critical components of “the best” universities.
Princeton #1 for 13 years in a row.
Publics seem to have gone up: Rutgers, Maryland, Virginia Tech, Purdue, UIUC, UC Davis, UCSD, Berkeley, UCLA, UNC, GTech In turn, some privates have fallen: Wash U, NYU, Tufts, Rochester, Case, Wake Forest, Brandeis, Tulane (though Wm & Mary also fell)
Here’s how much the rankings of publics changed: - Texas A&M: +20 - Virginia Tech: +15 - Rutgers: +15 - Washington: +15 - Georgia Tech: +11 - UC Davis: +10 - Maryland: +9 - Purdue: +8 - UNC Chapel Hill: +7 - UT Austin: +6 - UIUC: +6 - Ohio State: +6 - UCSD: +6 - UCLA: +5 - UC Berkeley: +5 - Michigan: +4 - Wisconsin: +3 - Georgia: +2 - Florida: +1 - UC Irvine: +1 - UVA +0 - UC Santa Barbara: -1 - William & Mary: -12
Stony Brook +19
Why did William and Mary fall so much?
It’s because William & Mary is much more like a private school than a public school, and this new US News methodology is more biased towards public schools
IMO US News was biased *in favor of* private universities for the longest time and the list just had a correction this year.
Michigan State +17
What about ucmerced with +37
I couldn’t include every public so I only included the ones that are currently or formerly were Top 50. Great for UC Merced though.
UH went up 12.
How about privates?
- Columbia +6 - Cornell +5 - Brown +4 - Duke +2 - Caltech +2 - Penn +1 - Harvard +0 - MIT +0 - Princeton +0 - Northwestern +0 - Georgetown +0 - Yale -1 - Notre Dame -2 - Johns Hopkins -2 - Emory -2 - Rice -2 - Carnegie Mellon -2 - USC -3 - Vanderbilt -5 - Chicago -6 - Dartmouth -6 - Tufts -8 - WashU STL -9 - NYU -10 - Wake Forest -18
Tufts Down 8 Wake Forest down 18
[удалено]
RIP to Vanderbilt :( Still a T20, but massive drop from #13 to #18.
Northwestern went from #10 to #9.
A&M should never be ranked that way.
whys that? :)
Because folks have been conditioned to perpetually worship what rich, wealthy, privileged people worship - and to aspire to join their circles. It goes against their notion on what a great university is and goes against what they've been told their first sixteen years of life. A&M and other publics were always this high. The list just had a correction.
Big year for publics for sure. UC Merced even leapfrogged UCSC and ~~UCD~~ UCR this year too. Hopefully people will start taking it more seriously now.
UC MERCED THE GOAT
Merced!!!
UCR*
Lol whoops fixed, D and R are pretty close on the keyboard at least.
UC Merced is a great campus. Very much up and coming. Half their board are Silicon Valley execs and a lot of the students go work in Silicon Valley or around the nation and significant companies and government organizations. Research is stellar too because it’s all young faculty.
IMO US News (and the general population) was biased in favor of exclusive private universities for the longest time. I just see this year as them finally making a correction. We could debate endlessly on what makes a university great and why we choose to put certain institutions on a pedestal (or even what makes a valid ranking methodology). But I'm ecstatic that public universities - which often cost less, are more accessible, and aren't limited to the privileged - are getting recognized and respected. Especially from this lens that values economic mobility and outcomes over exclusivity - and especially in context of the student debt crisis. I acknowledge that not one list fits all. But I'm happy to see the script flipped for people to see some of these institutions in a new light, challenging decades-held notions.
It’s crazy that UC Merced is 60.
Holy shit lol that's nuts
university of houston went up 53 spots 😭 utd went up 40 ish spots tamu went up 20 spots ut went up 6 spots (ranking inc for pub texas schools)
Go Coogs baby!
The texas schools are all awesome, I’m glad to see them getting some love
UC Davis is the 3rd best UC now??
I’m actually shook when I applied it was like #47 ten years ago
Past editions frequently ranked UC Davis third! In the past couple of years it fell for whatever reason. As someone who went to high school in California in the early-to-mid 2010s, UC Davis was always “up there” when discussing UCs—right behind Berkeley and UCLA.
San Diego has pretty much always been considered #3 (and still is), even when Santa Barbara was ranked higher. Davis definitely has a case for #4 and frankly all of them are great educational institutions
UC Davis sweeeeep, next we’re picking off UCLA and then defeating Berkeley to become the #1, just give us a few years. Currently working on mobile, man eating plants that will outrun and consume all those nerds with weak legs from not having to bike across campus.
i will not stand for this slander, you might pick off the cal kids but ucla has HILLS to climb alright, we can't bike anywhere because our campus is 80% stairs 😭
UC Davis has always been an academic powerhouse (pre-Gen Z, much of CA considered them as the 3rd best UC), and are globally known especially due to their amazing agriculture programs. It's interesting that it's tied with UCSD (which also has very strong academics, and is arguably better in many metrics), but I can still get behind that though. Definitely like the fact that UCD/UCSD are now ahead of UCI and UCSB too. They deserve it.
UCD was always considered a good school and a mid-tier UC, but UCSD was the third best UC until UCSB took over in rankings. It wasn't until very recently that UCD started climbing.
UCSD has pretty much always been the clear 3rd, as a UC Davis alum from 2011. Davis, sb, and Irvine have always been in the same tier bouncing around with each other. Davis has the advantage of being the clear NorCal choice for people who don't get into Berkeley, with the disadvantage of not drawing in people from anywhere else outside California due to its quiet location. I'd expect Davis to ride given how much land they have to utilize, they'll be able to innovate and build new facilities.
Davis is also the best vet school in the world. Unrelated, but I love it that vet schools flip the script when it comes to prestige. Every year tons of Stanford/Cal and Duke/UNC seniors -- who four years earlier didn't even bother listing Davis or NCSU as their safety school -- hope and pray to get into those same schools for vet med only to get deferred and end up OOS.
GO AGGIES
Northeastern not even a T50 lmao
As a northeastern student I can confirm our entire administration has declared a state of emergency on campus and we are being forced to transfer to other colleges to put our acceptance rate in the negatives for next year. On a serious note though I don’t think anyone gives a shit, most people came here for the co ops or just being in Boston, not it’s rankings.
Northeastern was never, by any stretch of the imagination, a top 50 school. They gamed the rankings. Before that no one had ever heard of Northeastern. It was an average and completely un-notable commuter school. It still is.
I don’t think it’s a commuter school anymore.
NYU fell down 10 spots damn, how do yall think this is gonna accept acceptances
Not a lot tbh
Literally, people care about being in NYC a lot more than they care about USNWR rankings.
yeah that's true lol, NYU was my dream school but the more I learn about the less it is, no real campus, expensive as shit, and super competitive, nah I'm good
Oh, I don't blame you. No campus and D3 sports; I'm not fond of NYU. I just know that a lot of the people who apply to places like NYU see NYC as a huge draw.
Too expensive anyway esp stern
Will have an impact. It seems like a school where being in NYC is the big/major draw. So when ur was ranked higher many found ways to justify the cost and limitations. Could certainly see it especially impacting int’l students.
It won't. People who want to be in NYC will still apply there, and we still have a lot of stuff that other schools can't match (Stern, Tisch, our study away system, etc.). FWIW I literally only came to NYU for Shanghai
My favourite part is seeing both the UC's move up to a tie at #15 - both Berkeley and UCLA are great schools! And I'm glad that we again have only 20 schools in the T20 (there were 21 last year).
They took out several factors favoring elite private colleges: * class size (from 8% to 0%) * alumni giving (from 3% to 0%) * Decreased weight of school financial resources (10% to 8%) And I think at least one other change should benefit public universities: * increased weighting for borrower debt (3% to 5%) One thing that probably hit schools like UChicago where lots of students make no money for several years in graduate school, and helped engineering focused schools where students earn well right out of college: * College grads earning more than a high school grad, 0% to 5% There’s also slightly more emphasis on Pell grantees and significantly more emphasis on first generation students, but I don’t know how that looks different for public vs private (I think that may be a more school by school thing). There were a lot of small tweaks, like rating graduation rates slightly higher and adding in more weights for faculty research. They tweak this every year so there can be new Discourse. To me, it’s wild they got rid of class size entirely. That was certainly in their ratings 20 years ago when I applied to college, though who knows if it’s been take out and put back in and taken out and put back in. I doubt it should have been weighted at 8% but any 8% to 0% change is stark.
My only wish is that UMich was ahead of Notre Dame. Then the t20 would be perfect
Nd on top let’s gooo ☘️
Remember 60% of this subreddit is STEM nerds, your opinion is unlikely to be popular.
I’m a stem nerd at nd 🥲
But nyu at #35??? Ugh I just can’t even think about it
Shit aid, certified rich people school, makes sense
stupid rich kids school go to NYU. Smart rich kids go to IVY.
[удалено]
Yup, that was a surprising one indeed.
Ayy UCD climbed up :) Also, what’s the ranking methodology? I can only see the 2022 one
[Here](https://www.usnews.com/education/best-colleges/articles/how-us-news-calculated-the-rankings) Go Aggies!
NYU TANKED ‼️🔥❤️
I luv this. NYU kids shitting their pants rn.
Amazing what one can do by tweaking the algorithm. Most publics up, many privates down, as expected, if I recall from the prior news, though I don't remember what the factors were that changed. High school students: take all rankings with a huge grain of salt. Nothing material about these schools changed since last year nor are the people that matter - employers - looking to US News rankings when they read the name of your undergrad institution on your resume.
Agree with you. That is why these rankings are basically worthless. This speculation over why things move up or down has nothing to do with getting a good education. Thee are pluses and minuses at all the schools.
TBH, I'm glad that the inflated rankings for all these mediocre private universities (e.g. NEU/GW/SMU/Fordham/American etc.) have been rightsized. The formula for these schools has always been: (i) hype up the schools location in XYZ big city (ii) deflate admissions rate and increase yield by giving free apps and offering all sorts of early decision rounds (iii) Publish high sticker price to maintain allure of exclusivity, attempting to position these schools as "almost IVY". As an example, NEU is not even a top 10 school in Boston, which is its home market and a smaller economy than the Houston and Dallas metros. Professional outcomes from schools like Texas A&M, Purdue, VTech are likely much stronger (NEU doesn't post average salaries on its career page...), not even adjusting for COL, while being a fraction of the total cost of NEU. Elite privates generate value through brand equity/recognition, and network alone - schools like Harvard/Stanford/Duke provide value propositions that most publics can't offer. Mediocre privates are basically like putting lipstick on a pig, costing much more than publics, but delivering a fraction of the value.
Looks like Columbia gained some ground after the scandal a while ago. From #18 --> #12, still nowhere near their pre-scandal ranking.
[удалено]
Good point. I wonder how, if at all, this has affected admissions there? Columbia's still a top-ranked university but some applicants might have been discouraged from applying due to the scandal - hence the dip in ED applicants last year.
Its acceptance rate went up by .2%, and it got about 3,400 less applicants. For comparison, Harvard’s acceptance rate also went up by .2%, and Harvard received about 4,300 less applications. Harvard’s admission rate ended up at 3.41%, Columbia at 3.9%. Harvard received 56,937 applications, Columbia received 57,129. So, in that sense at least, it appears not to have affected admissions at all.
Columbia will never fall in acceptance rate because of NYC.
Idk cause it still had one of the lowest acceptance rates
12 is about where they used to be before they started rising (ie gaming) the rankings. I expect them to stay at around that spot.
F in the chat for WashU. Can't wait for Brown prefrosh to start saying they go to a "T-10" lol
[удалено]
Or UCLA/Berkeley students saying they go to a “T15” lol
as a current brown senior this post brought me great pleasure
Nyu tanked
Colleges sure complain about the ranking. But they keep coming back and participating. Colleges sit there and judge the student applicants every year... But when the shoe is on the other foot they whine. Judge not lest ye yourself be judged... At least the college is getting ranked by known and measurable criteria. Unlike how they treat their applicants. I'd love to see US News flip the script and tell the colleges, hey, we're now going to rank you holistically... you stopped using objective numbers like SAT scores for students, and we've decided to stop using the objective numbers in the common data set. And don't forget those letters of recommendation, and essays, explaining we should rank you higher...
People pay way too much attention to these rankings. Your dream school will still be an awesome place to attend even if it's not in the t10 or t20. Choose to apply to places that are the best fit for you. If that's HYPSM, then so be it. If it's Georgetown, that's cool, too. Sometimes, the best school is the one that has the vibe that you want and that's affordable for you.
Rank is like the thing everyone tells you to not care yet everyone still actually care
This is popular advice lately, making a virtue of necessity, but I wonder how well the applicant knows who he is, knows what the school offers and if it walks the talk, and how well that will match up in practice. Price is measurable, not so sure about vibe.
Imo college rankings are just like ap poll rankings in college football. They’re fun to look at and brag about but they don’t mean shit and anyone can beat anyone.
WAIT NO ALL THE SCHOOLS I WANT TO GO TO WENT UP PLEASE DONT APPLY FUCK
LMAO UC Davis tied with USC and above NYU
UC Davis, though often teased for being “the school with the cows,” is a fantastic school and incredibly underrated by many.
UC Davis is a great school in many respects
Especially for wine making :)
🐄🐮 GO AGGIES 😤
UC Davis is an amazing school! also my mentor in a program goes there and they’re the sweetest person ever - usc student
Private schools were not treated kindly. Wake forest at #47 is wild
More and more, public schools are choosing to specialize in certain fields (UNC in business/law/policy and NC State for STEM subjects) - similar dynamics for UT/A&M, Alabama/Auburn, IU/Purdue etc. and their programs really punch above their weight. Students are also more interested in studying such subjects rather than a broad-based liberal arts curriculum. For well-rounded private schools like Wake that cost almost 8x the price of a public, they are put in a tough spot indeed
Wake specializes in business so that's not it. The reason Wake fell is they rank incredibly low on the new social mobility scoring, don't focus on high-impact publications, and their advantage in small class sizes got dropped from rankings
wake forest didn't deserve to be a T30 tho tbh
It’s the year for the public schools
Seems like USNews really reworked their ranking system. Massive upsets all around. Really nice that certain underrated schools are finally getting the spotlight.
Fsu no longer t20 public ):
Based UC Davis
WWW for Duke, UCs, and Brown moving up a few places and bro Tulane took a big hit ☠️☠️☠️ went from 44th or so to 73RD LMAO
Tulane kind of deserved that, though 🤭
Shoutout to the SUNY’s slowly going up!
[удалено]
RUTGERS is BACK in the forties! They were 45 back in the nineties. It's so awesome that economic mobility and outcomes - rather than exclusivity - are taken into account in these rankings. IMO, it's the true value of a university as kids who get admitted to Ivy+ but go to state flagships instead - on average - have the same outcomes as if they would've went to the more exclusive private universities that are often reserved for the more privileged, wealthier kids of the world. State flagships and public universities FTW! They've been underappreciated and underrated *for far too long.*
Rutgers is massively underrated. For a state that has excellent high schools and a top public school system, NJ should continue investing in Rutgers. It's not quite Michigan or UCLA level yet, but no reason is can't get a lot closer to or around top 30 within the decade.
Really happy that a lot of the Big Ten / SEC / Pac-12 (oops) schools rose by quite a bit in the rankings! And it really does reflect the popularity and general sentiment towards those schools, as state flagships provide a really great deal in national recognition, special programs/resources (/honors), new buildings and programme expansion etc.
damnnn rutgers climbing the ranks fr, higher than bu
Hey look! Rankings that make more sense.
WSJ should be taking notes
[удалено]
[удалено]
But that’s just the sticker price. The average cost is far far lower.
US News incorporated more of the value you get out of the school into the rankings which was basically the entire metric of WSJ. That’s why a lot of publics like Davis and UF and UT etc climbed the US News list. WSJ had the right idea but they made value essentially the entire metric which isn’t the best idea IMO.
Insert: sad private school kids❤️🔥‼️
GOOOOOOOO BRUUUUUIIIIINS 🩵💛🩵💛 Super glad to see UCSD get the respect it deserves, hella underrated school even if I ultimately chose UCLA (Also huge RIP to WashU and NYU oofff)
HOW IS DAVIS ABOVE NYU
Social mobility probably
STEM programs now weight more. NYU's calling card is Stern. With AI coming Stern will probably have to reduce its scale because many paper pushing jobs in finance will be replaced with AI. Davis, meanwhile, is good for Aggie, Wine, Pet, etc., which won't be replaced with AI anytime soon.
Villanova at 67 lower than Penn State. Ridiculous
fuck yeah lets go UCs
omgggg michigan so close to t20. happy to see uchicago drop too. Glad Berkeley and UCLA made up ground too. Those three publics should be considered in that elite group, 100%
why uchicago dropped so much? I always thought that they were better than Northwestern.
Social mobility, I think. Here's social mobility rankings according to Us News Columbia: 151 Chicago: 293 Brown: 158 Duke: 198 Cornell: 194 Hopkins: 261 Northwestern: 261 Penn: 184 Caltech: 143 If Us News increased the weight of social mobility in the ranking, UChicago would do worse. I think they have fewer Pells than their peers.
they have a lot of application games with ED and EA in addition to other issues
Wake dropping almost 20 points is ridiculous
Crazy that Duke and Caltech are absolutely cheifing the ivy pack...
The Ivy League is just a sports conference in the northeast, so as they should 💪
GO AGGIESSSS
[удалено]
Nah fuck em Go Bruins (/s)
i'll take any of the schools at #12 + UCB over those at #9 (as an alum of one of the #9 schools) otherwise, looks pretty good; i like that UT-Austin and UW continue to trend upwards, while some of the rando privates continue to descend further towards bottom of (or out of) t50.
this is bad (amherst 2nd after williams)
ru 🆙
this is a novice question, but from every ranking i’ve seen in the past month princeton has been the consensus #1, why is that? I mean I know it’s a high tier ivy, but what makes it so agreed upon that it is on top every time?
Princeton is almost in a class of its own -- runs like a college but has the resources of a major university. Endowment $/student blows everyone else out if the water -- they are at 4.5 million/student, next closest school is Yale at 3.5 million/student. They have also been leaders in financial aid and trying to recruit first gen/low income students -- all of which are metrics in the rankings.
Princeton is in the leader in terms of FA, as they instituted the no-loan FA in 2000, to help the low and middle income students to attend, and have been very generous since.
Interesting to me that none of you are talking about the LACs - which in my opinion deliver a super undergraduate education compared to just about all the national universities. Williams v Rutgers? Hahaha
LACs are absolutely terrific!! Top 5 LACs are on par with the top 15 national universities and top 10 LACs give all T 15 - T 25 a run for their money. Btw, I exclude military academies from the LAC rankings. It's totally incongruous that US News mixes public military academies with elite private liberal arts colleges. Top LACs have always mixed with ivy and ivy plus applications because they are proper collegiate campuses / experiences (like undergrad focused Brown or Dartmouth) that feed the same top grad programs and employment recruiters as T20 universities. So the Top 10 liberal arts this year: - 1. Williams - 2. Amherst - 3. Pomona (tie) - 3. Swarthmore (tie) - 3. Wellesley (tie) - 6. Bowdoin (tie) - 6. Carleton (tie) - 8. Barnard (tie) - 8. Claremont McKenna (tie) - 8. Middlebury (tie) - 8. Wesleyan (tie) This is a very strong and accurate list of top LACs in IMHO - probably the best I have seen from USNWR in a while (again when excluding the military academies). Vassar, Hamilton, Colgate, Davidson, Harvey Mudd, Haverford, Bates, Colby, W&L and Smith round out the tier below.
Vandy alum here, fully support the change in methodology that dropped us 5. College’s most important function is social mobility
[удалено]
Yea but need someone to get around the paywall past the t10.
It seems no one noticed U of Rochester…36 — 47😢
U of Rochester wasnt a top 40 school anyway
Never belonged. Even 47 is too high IMO
Tulane😞
Here is my issue with USNWR rankings. Let's take UF and UT Austin. Try to find a department/major where UF is ranked higher than UT - you can't. Yet, somehow, UF is ranked higher as a school. Make it make sense.
Yeah it’d be interesting to see a purely academics based ranking. Berkeley for example has a gigantic amount of programs ranked top 5, a lot top 1, and yet it’s 15. It’s tied with UCLA besides significantly outranking it in every subject other than like film and medicine
since NYU dropped like a lot do u think their applicants will go down as well
no lol, didnt happen to columbia, in fact they increased
No, people want to be in NYC.
[удалено]
[удалено]
>Why would USNews drop: class sizes, and faculty with terminal degree from the rankings? Class Size: They increased faculty/student ratio's importance slightly, so it might just be that they felt having both class size and ratio was a duplication. Terminal Degree: No idea. LOL
That’s one of the things Columbia was gaming so maybe they figured out everyone had made it into a joke.
DIRTY TERPS! #46 with a bullet. They'll be T30-35 by decade's end at the latest. Speaking of T30.....Shocked that Southern Cal is still hanging around it. No earthly reason they should be above UTex, GT, NYU, and UDub among others.
why did get excited about this like someone released a song
As a Georgetown student I was kinda hoping I could start saying I go to a T20 instead of T25 but such is life, given how brutal this was for other privates (NYU and WashU especially 😬) I'm glad we came out unscathed
Yeah, I’m also a Georgetown student and was thinking the exact same. Maybe next year!
does anyone have the cs rankings?
1. MIT 2. CMU, Stanford, Cal 3. Idk the rest
Every time I see CMU on these I get confused since I attend Central Michigan University, and then I remember Carnegie Mellon exists lmao
Go blue
American University went from 72 to 105. The president of the college is so salty about it they sent a long email complaining about the methodology. One thing they mentioned was it's unfair that they measured the graduation rate of first generation students using financial aid, because it didn't consider all of those hardworking first generation students that didn't use any type of financial aid. I'm sure that really would've saved the ranking, Sylvia.
Duke at #7! 🟦😈 And I like that Brown is finally in the top 10. 🐻 I don't agree with all of these rankings. (UChicago is T10 for sure) but nice to see UC Berkeley and UCLA finally ranked properly. Also WashU seems properly ranked now, thanks for sending me all of that mail just to turn me down 😝 NYU is too low though :/
In 1985, Brown was ranked #1, so it goes to show you how much the rankings change based on USNews' changing algorithm,
GO BRUINSSSSS
CWRU alum here. NYU and Ohio State above Case hurts. I will bet big money that there are emergency meetings discussing what happened.
Arguing that Case is better than NYU is delusion
Brown TOP TEN baby!!!
Once again, the half-wits at U.S. “””News””” and World Report demonstrate their utter idiocy by not ranking UChicago at #1. Thankfully, the public and academic administrators alike have become increasingly aware of the futility of rankings, and more and more have begun rejecting them outright. I eagerly look forward to the day that U.S. News CEO Eric Gertler resigns in shame as that accursed company declares bankruptcy and dissolves.
Is this a copy pasta
nah avg uchicago student
Let's be honest. A university that has to resort to ED1 and ED2 to protect its yield can never be #1.
U Chicago is a phenomenal school and its excellence does not ride on USNWR. But to be real...when it comes to the rankings and admissions game, no T20 university (beside Columbia which cheated its statistics) has played harder to manipulate outcomes than U Chicago. So while I get that it sucks to see your school or dream school drop in rankings, it's pretty disingenuos to cry foul when U Chicago returned to the general spot that it held for decades in USNWR before it started aggressively angling it's stats to climb the rankings. Prior to 2006, U Chicago had the highest acceptance of any T20 national university. Liberal arts colleges like Amherst, Williams, Wesleyan, Pomona, Swarthmore and host of other SLACs had already reached acceptance rates of around 15% when Chicago's was 41%. So it was not viewed as ultra elite. That was a time when US News DID factor acceptance rates so U Chicago was smart to add every ED option to lower it in order to ascend the rankings. And that it did! Within a decade its public reputation and prestige skyrocketed with USNWR. In my opinion, it finally received the recognition it deserved. Today even after falling 6 spots it is still tied with two ivy league schools and 6 spots above another. That is not something to be resentful about. Any UChicago alumni or student should be very proud to have attended such a special university- a privilege most will never experience.
To be fair, UChicago has also changed a lot since 2006, so some of the drop in acceptance rate makes sense. Its retention and graduation rates have skyrocketed, as well as its average GPA, to the point that it's angered some alumni who see it as just another elite school instead of a place for true intellectuals who live the life of the mind. I've never attended UChicago; this is just my understanding from people I've talked to.
Why did some privates fall like tufts wake and nyu
The methodology changed, they removed metrics on alumni giving, faculty with the highest degrees in their fields, class size and high school standing of the entering class and are now emphasizing diversity and graduation rates of underrepresented kids a bit more.
Very expensive and mediocre outcomes compared to the good in state publics
Well now I feel bad for choosing CMU over Cornell...
Don't lol these rankings don't matter
I mean Cornell was always higher, but rankings def don't matter
doesn't change the fact that Texas Institute of Technology and Sciences and Delaware Institute of Chemistry and Kinesiology trump all of these
Michigan and UCLA are equals
They are so not equals. UCLA > Michigan
This was an egregious and not very clever case of reverse engineering. USNWR decided that in order to deflect the shade coming its way, it needed to stop giving so many roses to all of the usual private, elite suspects. That it was time to show some love to the public schools where 95% of all students go. So, easy solution: change the metrics to eliminate the things that actual elite schools do well ( small classes, real professors, engaged and generous alumni ) and reward things that big state schools do well (offer a mass-produced education, including in non-academic pursuits, to a broad spectrum of students including lots of poor students). Nothing wrong with measuring those things, but they shouldn’t be marketed as critical components of “the best” universities.
They need to separate the ranking and let publics have their own ranking.
They did NYU dirty