<p>I will venture a guess that the “+” in Ivy+ are in fact MIT, Cal Tech and Stanford, and then people can argue endlessly, as they will, about whether Duke and/or Chicago belong there also. I have no opinion on that.</p>
<p>curmudgeon - we don’t disagree, because your key phrase is “if they are understood and used properly”. Step out of the rarified air of CC, and you will find they are often not understood well at all. Heck, forget stepping out of CC, there are plenty here that don’t have a clue about PA and many of the other factors. USNWR knows their game is anything but scientific, yet presents it as quite scientific. It is easy to blame the user for not understanding these things, but it is a bit like blaming your average Joe for not understanding a complicated bank document and taking the banks word for it that it is all OK. Sure, it is great to say he should make sure he understands it, but that is not always practical and in any case it isn’t the real world. USNWR counts on most people just taking their word for it that what they say is best is really best.</p>
<p>I think in curm’s case, that USNews was used in a fine way. It is not a negative thing to be aware of schools that have a good reputation (as a whole and not so much as their exact rank) and then search for schools that meet your specific needs and such. I think that is different than starting with “I have to have a top 10 school in USNews” or “I have to only pick from Ivies.” </p>
<p>When my older D was looking for graduate schools of architecture, it was helpful to see a list OVERALL of schools known for architecture to know where to being to look but there was NO care as to their exact rankings. Number one or number 12…does it matter? No. Offering a strong program? Yes. I think if you do view a ranking, it would be fine to look at lists as a whole…like if you are a very strong high school student and want to find a very challenging learning environment, it is fine to look at schools that accept less than 30% or are in a list of top 50 schools or some such. It is when you will only view an exact ranking (where you care if the school is ranked 5 or 25) or care if the school is an Ivy or not, that I can’t really relate to it.</p>
<p>fallenchemist…thanks for the definitiont (roughly) of “Ivy+” CC has been an eye opener because until I came here I never heard of HYPSM acronym, “upper and lower Ivies” or “Ivy+”…certainly not in the vocabulary of my local community or my own kids. I think their vocab (and mine) was more “selective colleges” and that includes quite a bunch!</p>
Yup. You and I are still in total agreement on that. (And I don’t know if “5 or 25” is the number where it could start to need further checking, or “5 or 15” or “5 or 50”. I think that’s a personal call. But for someone to pick between #5 and #9 and choose #5 because of USNWR …well, that’s pretty dang goofy IMO. Edit: And Ivy ain’t nothing but an athletic conference to me. )</p>
<p>Yeah, curm. I pulled “5 or 25” out of thin air as an example but my basic point was “exact” ranking and I’m not into using that. If someone wants a starting point of schools that are well known or well regarded and doesn’t know where to begin, I am not against pulling out a list from USNews and starting somewhere…may be top 100 or all schools with selective admission rates or something. But picking a school because it is an Ivy or a school because it is ranked higher than another school, I’m not personally into. If someone is looking for a very selective school or “good reputation”…start with many and then refine by personal selection criteria, as opposed to some published ranking system. I just looked up D2’s school, NYU, in USNews as I wasn’t sure its ranking. OK, it’s 32. But this school met all her selection criteria. Further, the ranking is not too relevant even when it comes to reputation as for her field, it is considered one of the top programs. Thus, a ranking on USNews just is not relevant for us at all…when it comes to either reputation OR personal “wants” in a college.</p>
<p>I didn’t say anything about guns, you did. Guns are not complicated to practically anyone, but to many people legal agreements and the USNWR methodology are.</p>
<p>Really, if you really believe that these ranking systems are simply to bring out schools that are potentially interesting for someone to look into, then why go to so much trouble to gather all the info and decide what to include, what not to include, how much to weight different things, and present it all as a numerical list that doesn’t just imply, but essentially states that School X is better than School Y, whether it be by 1 place or 30? Why defend a presentation that you yourself say you largely ignore? Surely there are better ways to present the information synthesized from different sources so that you still get to the same result you desire and so that millions of others less aware of the particulars are not misled.</p>
<p>Re: 267…that’s why I like that my kids used big fat college directories which do not numerically rank the schools but are a collection of a few hundred well known schools and then they can use their personal search criteria and go from there. </p>
<p>USNews does have lots of helpful DATA on each college, and to me is a resource in that way but I don’t consult the rankings themselves.</p>
<p>soozie - obviously I have no problem with the gathering of true data and simply presenting it, in general. Even then there should be explanatory notes for outliers or when there is knowledge that a data point is not representative for some reason (an example would be Tulane the year after Katrina).</p>
<p>Fallenchemist…yes, I realize you are not against a collection of data. I’m with you on this. I was saying the college directories provide the data just fine and don’t rank the schools numerically. That’s all I think kids need. I’m not into rankings of “best colleges.” I was saying that the data section for each individual college on USNews is a helpful collection similar to the directories (may have a bit more data though) and could be used in that manner (as a college counselor, I look up basic facts there), while ignoring the actual rankings. I wish they published all that stuff without the rankings. Alas, it might not sell the magazine, LOL. Then again, college directories are sold without adding numerical rankings.</p>
<p>As I wrote near the start of this thread, i, nor my kids, were aware of these national rankings when they applied to college and had never seen them. I’m glad for that. I really only became aware of how much this is talked about and viewed when I read CC where it seems to be a very big aspect of many people’s college process and rankings are referred to a LOT here. Just was not part of our college process and now that i am aware of how rankings are a big deal in certain circles or communities, I am thankful my kids were not aware of all this. Again, we live in rural VT and I have never heard anyone discuss college rankings here. Just on CC!</p>
<p>Y’all should have seen what a cc poster did with a med school admissions data spreadsheet. It was unbelievably good. Till the lawyers shut him down. ;)</p>
<p>It wasn’t a ranking but it was an awesome compendium of copyrighted data. ;)</p>
<p>Well, sure you could, POIH. Those aren’t the right schools for everybody. I wouldn’t see either of my kids there. Those schools just aren’t their type, excellent as they are. </p>
<p>I think there are two different starting points. One is start with the kid and find a college that fits her. The other is start with the college and graft on the kid. I’d rather make the college fit the kid than force the kid to fit the college. What if your D simply hadn’t liked HYPSM? Or was that not an option in your house not to like at least one?</p>
<p>fc, A poster took all the AAMC data, all the US News data, and data from the 130 or so allopathic med schools websites (many , many variables) and had it to where a kid plugged in all their stats and it spit out “potential” admissions results using excel. It must have taken 100’s of hours over several years. He even had dates apps due, LOR’s required, it was truly something to behold. It’s still floating around on a few computers…I believe.</p>
<p>PG, I agree with you. I like to start with the kid and find colleges that meet a bunch of selection criteria. That is different than starting with Ivies or top 10 schools and finding one to attend. Yes, they are awesome schools but may not fit a kid. I think Harvard is awesome (I went to grad school there). The school didn’t fit my D’s selection criteria and so would not have made her list. Same with other D.</p>
<p>And for D2, where USNews rankings are meaningless as she was going for BFA in Musical Theater programs (which are not ranked)…there are a handful of best known or well regarded programs and while she was a contender for such programs (and did end up at a “top program”), she didn’t apply to CCM, one of the top programs in her field, as it did not meet her selection criteria. However, I come across people who automatically want to apply to all the top MT programs regardless of their selection criteria. I have a current client that has CCM on her list even though it doesn’t truly match what she wants in a school but she likes prestige.</p>
<p>This is second guessing. I never said we started with the colleges. We started with DD.
That is why we waited till 9th grade to start. By that time DD has matured to the point where she knew what type of college setting will be more appropriate and she provided the valuable input that she would not be happy at LACs that is why we concentrated on US News top 50 doctoral universities.</p>
<p>DD didn’t like Yale even though it was used to be her Numero UNO in middle school after the visit and she ended up not applying.</p>
(I agree with assessment of Joe and USNews, btw.)</p>