<p>… regarding your quote:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Of course USN wouldnt be subject to sampling biases because USN doesnt generally sample-size numerous data and report its findings, which isnt what Payscale does. Again, to scientifically sample size data, one has to actively gain a snapshot of the sampling item in question, wrt the various demographics, etc, instead of passively waiting for information to roll in as does Payscale. </p>
<p>All USN is doing is gathering already accumulated information the colleges have reported to the public, say, via CDS or their voluntarily submitting it to USN. And many (most?) colleges dont submit information to USN voluntarily.</p>
<p>The problem with the information the USN reports via this ingathering of already-accumulated info, say wrt admissions, eg, incoming students whove graduated top-10% of hs or SAT medians, is that the info is either outdated - which USN would deny; comparing apples to oranges among the colleges, eg, superscoring SATs or not; or just plain incorrect, with the colleges willfully inflating or improving their numbers to make it appear they are more stringent in admissions than they really are. The top-10%-of-graduating-class % is so inflated by all schools that it isnt a viable component.</p>
<p>There are a lot of contradictions in the reporting of admissions by all universities. And these numbers the colleges report are not reviewable, so USN runs with this info and takes it as gospel. So it is a case of garbage in… for the admissions part of USN rankings.</p>
<p>Add, that USN doesnt have a graduate-success component. Most of the USN rankings are admissions related, etc, inputs to the colleges. The alumni giving to a university doesnt denote success because public university graduates arent as likely to give to their alma maters as private college grads would.</p>
<p>I actually think the peer and counselor ratings of USN are the only reliable sources the USN has. It is probably the only controlled element to the rankings that USN reports. USN actively seeks rankings opinions of the deans, presidents, provosts at the colleges and a decently scientifically sampled counselors list, wrt geography, etc, to students who seek admission to the colleges.</p>
<p>The problem with asking counselors their opinions in rankings is, for instance, an advisor to the colleges in Vermont may not know about UCLA especially since it is a public university. He or she may know more about Pomona College than UCLA because he or she has probably had an applicant or more who have applied to PC and probably not to UCLA.</p>
<p>I just find it amusing that so many on this board, who are seemingly, otherwise, really intelligent people would buy into these money-making publications or sites as gospel. As someone said, the USN is a lousy publication that is only in business because of these deeply flawed college rankings.</p>