<p>Newmassdad - thanks for the results. I was more interesting in noting, however, (like in the nytimes “scoreboard” picture), how the schools did in direct competition with one another. For example, for students choosing between Swat and Williams, what are the results? (Just like how, in the link nicoleywong posted, in cross admit battles between UPenn and Duke, UPenn gets “wins” 66-34.) While UPenn and Duke are not separated by much in the final ranking, for whatever reason, UPenn gets a sizable majority of the cross-admits between the two schools. </p>
<p>I’m interest in seeing whether Swat takes less than its share of cross-admits when in direct competition with its two closest LAC rivals. </p>
<p>Also, you ask, why do people get “so lathered up” over rankings? The answer is pretty simple - most people remain concerned about status, and rankings provide a numerical appraisal of status. In reading books published on the topic, as a reflection of this, most schools remain VERY CONCERNED about status. Professor Jerome Karabel goes as far as to say that, for most of its history, Harvard was status-obsessed, and carefully scrutinized the decisions made at peer schools such as Yale and Columbia. </p>
<p>Most schools work VERY hard to maintain their status, and in reading these books, I have a newfound appreciation for how hard most schools work to maintain their status and brand. These schools compete vigorously with one another, and Professor Kirp (I think you read this too) terms the competition “positional warfare.” </p>
<p>For most of its history, Chicago simply was not concerned about this battle. Indeed, for long stretches of its history, Chicago was just trying to maintain financial viability. Now, the tables have turned a bit, and the U of C is becoming more brand-conscious and more willing to play the admissions game. While I would be loathe to admit it, I think my peers and I were always a bit resentful about being ranked “too low” in the rankings, and I think current students are at least mindful of the school’s current position. </p>
<p>In this way, schools operate like firms in a market, where money, prestige, and status are the main forms of currency in the realm (to borrow from Kirp’s assertions). Moreover, they just reflect the majority of people’s concern over status.</p>