Is Duke going to be a casualty of Brown/Penn/Chicago's rise?

[jak321]

<p>@edwitten

To put things in context, Chicago was ranked lower by US News (whose ranking focuses solely on undergraduate education) until its administrators apparently decided to meet with the editors of the publication and implement the ‘suggestions’ they received. Fair enough?

Did Chicago also meet up with Forbes, ARWU, QS, Thomson Reuters et al? Only you can make implementing suggestions seem like a nefarious deed. As I mentioned, a lot of the changes Chicago made were just correcting some of their self-inflicted wounds, such as unnecessarily bunching together certain classes and increasing their average class size. They were leveling the playing field, something which you obviously approve of.</p>

<p>

Also, I find your assertion that Princeton had a 58% yield before it implemented an SCEA program quite irrelevant to the issue at hand. What is Chicago’s yield without its EA program? What’s Penn’s yield without ED? How can you compare Chicago’s overall yield (inclusive of EA) to Princeton’s RD yield? Shouldn’t there be a level playing field?

Fair enough. I think it seemed pretty relevant. Curvyteen used Chicago’s RD yield from 2 years back, so I used the data from when Princeton didn’t have SCEA (2 years ago)… I don’t see how comparing Chicago’s 2 year old (EA+RD) yield to Princeton’s current (SCEA+RD) yield constitutes a level playing field, but w/e… Oh, and maybe you failed to read my second point.</p>