<p>ILoveUofC - what makes you say that? To understand your stance more comprehensively, I need more information. </p>
<p>You can find the US News methodology here:</p>
<p>[How</a> U.S. News Calculates the College Rankings - US News and World Report](<a href=“http://www.usnews.com/education/articles/2010/08/17/how-us-news-calculates-the-college-rankings?PageNr=4]How”>http://www.usnews.com/education/articles/2010/08/17/how-us-news-calculates-the-college-rankings?PageNr=4)</p>
<p>In all of the core areas (academic rep, graduation and freshman retention, faculty resources) - Chicago does very well. Moreover, in the less important areas where it was traditionally weaker (student selectivity, alumni giving rate), the school has been making strides. Put another way, many of the other top schools (Harvard, Princeton, etc.) are plateauing - each year, their accept rate drops by maybe 0.5%, and the alumni giving rate and graduation rate remains quite steady - and has for years and years. On the other hand, up until recently, Chicago had a poor retention and graduation rate, its admissions and selectivity were poor, and it didn’t care as much about pandering to certain groups (like the HS counselors that now have a say in a school’s ranking). </p>
<p>Put another way, Chicago is already close to many of its peers, and making up ground rather quickly. I’d say it’s more likely that Chicago moves up rather than moves down. </p>
<p>Final, put one more way, when the rankings first came out in 1985 and were based purely on academic rep, Chicago was #4. Since that time, it’s academic reputation has remained quite steady, and its improved on all other fronts. Consequently, at this point, while Chicago preaches skepticism and (at times, cynicism), this is one area where I’m more than cautiously optimistic.</p>