So we didn't really attract the BEST students when we were #29 so what's the difference ?
Peer assessment is 20% of the US News rankings, but I think using only that would be a terrible way to rank schools. History shows (at least on the law school side, I don’t know if this holds true for the peer rankings for the undergraduate institutions) that it is almost impossible to change your peer ranking over time, even when all sorts of other metrics change.This formula approach seems like a terrible way to rank schools anyway. Seems like a better way would be to ask people in academia to rank schools based on their perception of them and then aggregate those rankings. They do something similar for big law firms and it seems to produce a ranking that is pretty accurate
i understand that deepmhasiszing legacy adsmissions is an admiralable goal but do first generation college students affect the academic rigor and success rate of graduates?
Peer assessment is 20% of the US News rankings.
I love that someone is seriously making an argument that because we got away from our historical values, which from that poster appears to be not admitting minorities and no dancing, that is the reason we dropped in the rankings.
I love that someone is seriously making an argument that because we got away from our historical values, which from that poster appears to be not admitting minorities and no dancing, that is the reason we dropped in the rankings.
Peer assessment is 20% of the US News rankings, but I think using only that would be a terrible way to rank schools. History shows (at least on the law school side, I don’t know if this holds true for the peer rankings for the undergraduate institutions) that it is almost impossible to change your peer ranking over time, even when all sorts of other metrics change.
Just when you think nobody can top we dropped because we aren’t conservative enough what’s that DonaldRoss clown car music.