Ranking prestige seems like comparing apples and oranges because everyone has his or her own perspective. But there is a way I believe to get a “general” sense of how two schools compare----just use Parchment:
http://www.parchment.com/c/college/tools/college-cross-admit-comparison.php
Enter two schools in the boxes and it gives you a percentage based on real students choices in the past.
@gallentjill I can empathize with your question and thoughts. Our oldest was the guinea pig for our college approach. He mainly applied to schools that offered merit aid, some large, some medium and small liberal arts. He was allowed to apply to a couple full pay options (where if he matured quite a bit, we might be willing to take out loans). As time went on, he decided he wanted a liberal arts school (he changes ideas of majors rapidly). He got into the full pay and all the others, but the higher the rank, the less his merit. He’s still not committed, but leaning toward the highest ranked liberal arts schools where he received merit (because of the programs it offers that he’s now interested in). I go back and forth about whether it’s worth it to pay even the discounted rate.
Plenty of lower ranked liberal arts schools churn out future PhDs, per Colleges that Change Lives. So, does where u went to undergrad matter? And, with good stats, you get very good merit at most of these schools.
Idk, these decisions are hard.
One criticism of Krueger & Dale is that they didn’t compare colleges that are different enough in selectivity/prestige. Joni Hersch tried to do that, but had trouble finding a very large data base that included both the labor market information and also the college selectivity/quality information she wanted. She used the NSCG database, which “does not report information on specific institutional quality or selectivity”, but does report both the Carnegie Classification and public/private governance of covered institutions. So she tried to exploit that information in her “tiers”, very creatively IMO, by defining them so as to correlate rather highly (not perfectly) with admission selectivity. Yes, w.r.t. selectivity there may be a few false positives (St. Louis U in Tier 1) or false negatives (Harvey Mudd not in Tier 1). I’m not sure how critical this issue is for the validity of her findings.
Anyway, it seems to be very hard to reach consensus on the OP’s problem based on solid social science research. So we’re all pretty much speculating whether there’s any “prestige boost” from attending the kinds of schools s/he’s considering. Personally, I wouldn’t count on one. Not if there isn’t even consensus on the prestige boost from attending Ivies and such. Focus on net cost, personal fit, and the kind of education you want. Then work hard, wherever you wind up.
@havenoidea Thanks so much for your post. Sometimes, it seems like few other people here understand. The more I read and the more I think about it, the more I really do believe that the best option for us, given our situation, is a school that gives great merit aid. That is probably not going to be a school with any kind of high rank. Its just hard not to second guess everything as a parent. The thing is, no matter what we choose there are advantages and disadvantages. I can’t say that I have no doubts, but I would have doubts no matter what we choose. These decisions really are hard!
@tk21769 I really do think you are right. I also think that when I started this thread, I wasn’t truly aware of exactly what I wanted to ask. Sometimes, it takes a while for your thoughts to clarify. The issue for us is that my daughter likes schools ranked fairly low. Certainly below the top 100, although not below the top 200. The benefit is that these schools are likely to be VERY affordable. I have no problem with that in theory and there are a lot of benefits. But I keep second guessing myself. We have visited some of these places and they seem wonderful. Great opportunities, good facilities, advising, etc. We have met many students and they seem bright and motivated, at least in her field. So, what is the problem? Why the low ranking? What do you lose by choosing a school in that category? Am I missing something that will come back to hurt my daughter in the long run?
I think the prestige boost ends when the name isn’t universally recognized on both coasts and in between. In the schools ranked 20-60, its all about the student and their ambition. I also believe that a school ranked in the 50s with an honor program is equal to one in the 20s academically and “prestige wise”. I do think that once you get to the schools that very few people recognize the name of there is no prestige boost at all and students need to work that much harder to make a name for themselves.
Our family income made merit-chasing a number one priority. Every safety school D applied to had an honors program. There were several on the list that I still wonder if they could have provided her with the academic challenge that you want and pay for. She was lucky in that she was accepted to a low match school with a great package (and an honors program which is not common for LACs in the top 50). Prestigious, no. But challenging enough and recognized well enough that those familiar with LACs in the Northeast are familiar with it. What makes it work? Her ambition, her efforts to get every little bit she can from it in the four years. And honestly, there are many students there who are just sailing through and will most likely find themselves employed in low paying jobs d/t lack of effort.
So, in a nutshell, it all depends on your student unless they are a tippy top kid at a tippy top school.
Prestige and ranking is only one factor. I have always said I want my kids to go to the “best” college I can afford. What I won’t do is take out a huge loan for undergrad.
Basically, those schools lack the qualities that sell magazines (and these days, web subscriptions)
Many years ago US News tweaked its ranking algorithm one year and Cal Tech came out on top.
This was not good.
The goal of the US News ranking system is that Harvard or Princeton must always come out on top. Maybe Yale, maybe even Columbia. But if the top school isn’t Ivy League… well, they can’t have that.
One way that US News keep its system working is by placing a significant weight on the subjective factor of how college administrators rank other schools by reputation. Currently this is “reputation” score is 22.5% based on peer asessment. So name recognition among educators plays a huge role.
US News used to set up schools in tiers of 50 schools each. When my son was applying to colleges, Reed was 3rd or 4th tier among LAC’s. The problem was that Reed wasn’t playing the game right – it wasn’t returnng the survey. Reed still ranks at #82, tied with Willamette … even though this year US News also ranks Reed as #13 for “Best Undergraduate Teaching.”
I remember Pitzer & Occidental also being way down the list. Now Pitzer is #33, Occidental #44.
Sarah Lawrence was within the top 50, probably around 45 or so. A few years back, Sarah Lawrence decided to stop requiring or reporting SAT/ACT scores-- their admissions system had always been focused on student writing anyway. (For example, they used to require submission of a graded writing sample in addition to essays). US News decided to take them off the list entirely. They were moved to some sort of “other” category rather than LAC. They became invisible and their application numbers plunged. So now they take the common app & report their test scores.
Because US News also ranks by test scores even when colleges don’t use them as a criteria for selection. (You would be amazed at how many kids who score well on ACT/SAT can’t write worth a darn).
Back when my son was applying, the internet was young, and US News had a table on its website that allowed sorting by specific criteria. My son wanted a LAC with small classes, so we did sorts by average class size and faculty:student ratio — with 10:1, faculty/students being our minimum criteria. I never actually did a sort by the overall ranking until after my son was accepted to his first college… and it was then that I discovered for the first time that the LAC which admitted him was ranked #15. (And that was a college that he was never strongly interested in … mostly a financial backup as they promised money for his NM status).
You have to keep in mind that the ranking has no academic validity whatsoever. It really is mostly a popularity contest, which from the start disfavors any colleges or universities that are more geared to niche groups.
Way back when I found “Colleges that Change Lives” to be a much more helpful resource, not so much based on the specific schools listed, but as a guide to what kind of qualities to look for in a LAC. I mean… my son ended up attending two different colleges and graduting from a CSU … but his CSU experience looked a lot like it had a lot of the stuff that CTCL values.
If your daughter likes the lower “ranked” schools… then you are ahead of the game from day one. She’ll end up with a whole bunch of acceptances including early writies, and weighing merit offers next year when the more ambitious of her school friends will be agonizing over rejections.
Really: the best thing you can do is dig deep and explore what each college would offer your daughter in terms of undergraduate experience, tied to her areas of interest … rather than worrying about rankings or prestige. Does your daughter even have long-term goals where prestige would make a difference? Because the vast majority of employers aren’t looking for that sort of thing.
^ THAT! Excellent, calmom.
@calmom great points! I think subconsciously, when we visit a highly ranked school, we simply look for “fit,” because the ranking provides a sense of credibility. On the other hand, when we visit a lower ranked school, I constantly wonder what I’m missing. I keep thinking, if this looks so good to me, why don’t other people see it? Why do I get funny looks and disapproving stares when I talk about D going there? What do they know that I don’t know?
It would be great to start developing a methodology to be able to do the analysis on my own. Then it would be much easier to ignore the rankings, the naysayers here and in person, AND my self doubt. My daughter wants to eventually go to medical school, so that is the lens that we are viewing this through.
If you were doing this kind of search, and wanted to be able to make an informed decision untethered to the rankings and other people’s opinions, how would you go about it?
“The goal of the US News ranking system is that Harvard or Princeton must always come out on top. Maybe Yale, maybe even Columbia. But if the top school isn’t Ivy League… well, they can’t have that.”
That is actually not true, US News’ first three rankings had Stanford #1 to and the fact it wasn’t an ivy was news and sold magazines. Columbia has never been #1.
“One way that US News keep its system working is by placing a significant weight on the subjective factor of how college administrators rank other schools by reputation. Currently this is “reputation” score is 22.5% based on peer asessment. So name recognition among educators plays a huge role.”
The very first rankings was solely based on reputation, it was 100% and then to change the rankings up a bit, they added selectivity, test scores etc… Going from 100 to 22.5 actually hurts the top publics, when it was 100% Berkeley was 7, Michigan 8.
I agree with the general point on US News Rankings and I think it’s garbage but it’s now an accepted part of admissions. This entire thread is based on going to a college that may not be highly ranked.
Can you give an example of one of the colleges your daughter likes?
I disagree with those who said “it depends on the kid.” The OP asked about prestige – not about the actual quality of the school, or what the school is actually going to offer the kid. If you’re asking whether it’s “worth it” to strive for a top-ranked school, then that depends on a lot of factors. But if all you’re asking about is prestige, then it depends entirely on who it is you’re trying to impress.
So I’d say that the “prestige boost” ends when the one/s you want to impress are no longer impressed. In Mississippi, that might mean that Ole Miss is the most prestigious school you can attend (particularly if you’re going to need the alumni network). In Silicon Valley, as someone pointed out, San Jose State is pretty prestigious for computer science, but if you major in anything else and then move to another state where nobody has heard of SJS, your prestige boost takes a huge dive.
Some schools are so famous that they carry a “prestige boost” everywhere. But for every other school, it depends on your audience.
Suppose there is a career earnings boost from attending a more selective/prestigious college, and it really isn’t just because they cherry-pick smarter, more ambitious students. That doesn’t necessarily mean the boost comes from a significant difference in academic quality at the undergraduate, classroom instruction level. It may be because an Ivy League college is a better Meet Market than a small, obscure, much less selective LAC. An Old School social climber is more apt to marry up, or make friends with well-connected future business partners, at an Ivy. Hence the earnings/wealth gap.
But if you’re not an ambitious Old School social climber, if you crave knowledge and competence more than social prestige, then I think you can get what you want somewhat regardless of rank and selectivity. Within the top 100 or 200, anyway. At some point, there may be a big enough drop in resources (faculty/facilities quality, etc.) that it becomes much harder. However, if you look at entering class profiles for tip top professional schools (Yale med, Harvard law, etc.) you’ll find a wide variety of undergraduate schools represented (including many from well outside the top ~50). The Colleges That Change Lives members include schools where classes are small, faculty quality is high, courses are rigorous, and the relative lack of resources (/ social prestige) does not seem to compromise instructional quality. Or, may even improve it (by concentrating limited resources on the essentials.)
@dustypig Your’e right about the way I phrased the question. But through the course of this thread, my thinking has evolved and I realized that I was asking the wrong question.
@calmom The lower ranked colleges that we have seen and my daughter has loved so far include Hofstra and Drew. They are quite different from each other, but both seem ideal for her on a “social fit” level as well as offering her what seem to be tremendous opportunities. There are others as well. But I think the general principles can apply. If I can figure out a rubric to analylize these and other schools, I think it would be a tremendous help. It might help others in a similar situation as well. Thanks!!
@gallentjill - Some things for your daughter (and you) to think about when trying to narrow down the list. What are her goals? Grad school or going right into the workforce? What kind of support services to the schools she’s looking at offer to meet her goals? What are their success rates in placing students (either in grad school or in the job market)? What is her intended major (sometimes there is a big disconnect between overall ranking and that for a specific major)? What is the four year graduation rate? How do the schools help students succeed? We also found it helpful to sit in on some classes if the school allowed it. One of the schools my daughter thought seemed too competitive turned out to have an entirely different feel in the classroom with students calling the prof by first name, mutually deciding on exam dates, and just a chill vibe. It spurred her to ask a number of other questions of students and she came away feeling that her initial impression was incorrect.
I wish there was the universal rubric but I think every student, every family, have different goals and priorities.
@calmom Reed is ranked lower then it should be because they don’t provide the data USNWR requests for establishing their rankings. While I have no issue and applaud Reed for doing that, Reed constantly complains on how unfair the rankings are, Reed needs to live with the consequences of its action and not whine about it.
The keyword for very top colleges is not “ambitious.” Not if you mean post grad hopes. Certainly not if you mean dog eat dog. Rather, something like “activated” and how.
Long thread, we’ve already covered a lot of ground.
This isn’t quite right. For “national universities” and “national LACs” the peer assessment reputation survey counts for 15% of the total US News ranking. A separate survey of HS counselors results in a second reputation score which counts for 7.5% of the total ranking. So you’re correct that reputation accounts for 22.5% of the ranking, but peer assessment is only part of that.
One problem with this is that it becomes an echo chamber… Both HS counselors and college administrators read the US News rankings and, whether consciously or unconsciously, their views of schools they don’t know much about are influenced by that filter. So each school’s reputation ranking becomes self-reinforcing. Both PA and GC reputation scores are very slow to change over time, and when they do, the change often lags changes in the school’s overall US News ranking due to other metrics and/or changes in US News’ ranking methodology.
But I think we can agree the nature of any media ranking can affect the population who is aware of them. On CC, eg, we have endless requests for comparisons and those questions about borriwing huge amounts to finance Perceived Better College. Perceived.
@CU123 – what information does US News ask for beyond the common data set? Reed publishes CDS online - https://www.reed.edu/ir/cds/cdsindex.html
Reed says it does not participate in the US News Survey, but I think that would only impact Reed’s participtaion in the reputation ranking for other colleges (the ones it might rank) – because everything else is something US News would pick up from the CDS.