<p>A couple points. First, it’s funny that you guys are talking about UChicago as they are the school that has shot up in the USN&WR rankings in the past few years the most of any. They were in the 10-15 range every year but once since 1995, and then has been in the top ten ever since 2007. This is because they changed how they reported statistics to US News after consulting with US News. I can’t find the article, but it was clear that the counting of different things varied and UChicago put forth more effort in distributing favorable numbers. I’m not saying there’s anything wrong with this as all other schools do it too (plus, UChicago was probably habitually underrated); I’m just pointing it out. This story alone should give people pause about the validity of US News’ methodology.</p>
<p>Secondly, RE: faculty pay: “The average faculty pay and benefits are adjusted for regional differences in cost of living.” Now, what are defined as a region (does that mean Northeast vs. South? New York City vs. Durham?), I have no idea. But US News has taken cost of living into consideration at some level.</p>
<p>[Methodology:</a> Undergraduate Ranking Criteria and Weights - US News and World Report](<a href=“http://www.usnews.com/articles/education/best-colleges/2009/08/19/methodology-undergraduate-ranking-criteria-and-weights.html]Methodology:”>http://www.usnews.com/articles/education/best-colleges/2009/08/19/methodology-undergraduate-ranking-criteria-and-weights.html)</p>
<p>Third, Duke doesn’t “game” US News rankings more than any other school really, but there are a few criteria that Duke has paid particular attention to in order to make the school better (obviously, whether that is the only motivating factor is up for debate). One of those is alumni giving rate. Duke always rates high as they have a fervent campaign to call and ask for money. But hey, more money makes the university better and I think having a strong athletics program unlike a lot of other elite universities make alumni feel more connected and more likely to donate, but that’s my personal theory. This only accounts for like 5%, I think. Duke is not like UPenn where 99% fall in the top 10%. Not even close, so we get docked there. Another factor that comes to mind is classes under 20 as Duke caps A LOT of classes at 18, which falls just under the limit. Again, who knows if this is to fulfill US News criteria or some other university goal, and I’d imagine a lot of other schools have a similar cap. But hey, Duke isn’t Wash U who continually waitlists applicants they think are using them as a safety school.</p>
<p>In my opinion, simply based on “prestige” and desirability, Duke falls somewhere in the 8-14 range in the country. Being ranked 4th one year by US News a lot of things had to just fall in place in that one particular year. Doesn’t mean anything. But to say Duke is losing its luster and falling in the rankings is silly; small differences in a couple criteria can make a school fall two spots. You really think that if theoretically a school gives a few thousand dollar raise to all faculty that it’s a better university? Highly unlikely. US News gives a general sense of how schools are seen, but it’s not that precise and year-to-year fluctuations are to be expected. A small fall doesn’t indicate anything. If anything, Duke’s “fall” to #10 is largely a result of UChicago’s changing how they calculate certain numbers and UPenn’s rise. Those two schools make a “big” difference when you’re talking about a fall of two spots…</p>