Does WashU deserve its ranking?

jazzymom
Sun, 25 Mar 2007 19:29:49 +0000

This is an easy question. Under the ranking methodology devised by USNWR, WashU most definitely deserves the ranking it has. (Unless, someone wants to argue that it should be higher.) Yield is not a determinant in the rankings anymore and the acceptance rate is a minor piece of the puzzle.

Sorry to be repetitious, but the ranking components are these:


Peer Assessment: 25 percent. (College administrators ranking each other)
Retention: 20 percent (Students return after freshman year)
Faculty Resources: 20 percent (this is faculty-student ratio, class sizes)
Student Selectivity: 15 percent.

Within this category, 50 percent of the score comes from the range of SAT/ACT scores of admitted students; the next (40 percent) is the percentage of admitted students who were in the top 10 percent of their class, the smallest, 10 percent, is from the admission rate, or how many were admitted out of the number of applicants.


Financial Resources: 10 percent. (Not just endowment, but per-student spending to benefit the education)
Graduation rate: 5 percent
Alumni giving rate: 5 percent.


I always think it’s unfair when people attack Washu’s ranking based on admission rate and yield when this part of the formula accounts for 10 percent of a component that contributes 15 percent to the overall ranking. Washu has earned its ranking under the methodology devised by USNWR. It couldn’t have “spammed” its way to a higher admission rate, or “played games” with its yield, and had any appreciable impact on rankings if all the other components of excellence were not in place. If someone wants to rant about those rankings, take it up with the people that devised the methodology.

Is it “on par” with Cornell? I suppose that the long answer would depend on what you’re comparing: specific schools or departments, special programs, integrated majors, ease of double majoring, quality of life, friendliness of the campus, etc. IMO, the short answer would be: yes.