Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

U.S. News pulls Columbia University from its 2022 rankings

forbes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

301–310 of 348 posts

Re: U.S. News pulls Columbia University from its 2022 rankings

#301

Post by [deleted] »

rayiner wrote: post #251
lmm wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's nothing inherently white, anglo-saxon or protestant about the oligarchy that these institutions preserve; they will very happily pass on to a new generation of westernised, college-educated liberals of all races and genders but no more variation in thought than the one they replaced. The cultural focus on such ephemera gives them a very useful fig leaf for excluding the demographic that it actually matters to…

In this context, “WASP” refers to social status and cultural norms derived from northeastern British and Dutch colonists, but not limited to them. Working class southerners or Appalachians have never been “WASPs” in that sense despite fitting the definition literally.

[deleted]

Re: U.S. News pulls Columbia University from its 2022 rankings

#302

Post by rconti »

frognumber wrote: post #288
whimsicalism wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think Stanford is viewed as having eclipsed Yale and is competitive with Harvard. Princeton probably also eclipses Yale.

Insider who worked with a lot of schools: Yale is a much, much better school than Stanford. Stanford beats Yale on hype. A lot of the elites are hype-over-substance, and it's often hard for a naive audience to screen out which ones.

It makes more sense to me that east-coast schools would show an artificial advantage on "revealed preference" type rankings, because more Americans live closer to the east coast schools. They're more "locally" well-known, you're closer to home (okay, a disadvantage for some), etc. I'd expect them to benefit more from hype than Stanford would.

Re: U.S. News pulls Columbia University from its 2022 rankings

#303

Post by telotortium »

SneakyTornado29 wrote: post #259
rayiner wrote: post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, there’s some “new gold rush money” thinking going on in this thread. Harvard has had 5 US Presidents. Yale has had 3. Stanford has had just one. Not a single Supreme Court justice went to Stanford. 4 went to Yale and 4 went to Harvard. Stanford tied with Harvard for 6 Senators in the 117th Congress, impressively, but obviously Harvard dominates that metric over a longer time. Harvard still has more than twice a…

You are quite wrong about the Stanford supreme court justices: Sandra Day O'Connor and Stephen Breyer

He's talking about Law School of course - that's where promising students are drafted into the Supreme Court clerk position that's the first step on the cursus honorum to becoming a Supreme Court Justice. Undergrad doesn't matter as much except inasmuch it gets you into the prestigious law schools.

Re: U.S. News pulls Columbia University from its 2022 rankings

#304

Post by gundmc »

draz wrote: post #279
JohnBooty wrote: post #276

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm confused. How would Michigan know that they were your second choice?

They expect students of a certain caliber. If the applicant exceeds their expectations, the university assumes the student is using this application as a “safety school.”

This is sometimes referred to as "Tufts Syndrome" or "Yield Protection": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yield_protection

Re: U.S. News pulls Columbia University from its 2022 rankings

#305

Post by throwawayarnty »

University rankings are mostly bunk because they weigh mostly on perception and lagging indicators. A university can deteriorate for decades while remaining high on ranking.

The only criterion that matters for a student that wants to select a university is the fraction of graduates that go on to do impressive things.

Re: U.S. News pulls Columbia University from its 2022 rankings

#306

Post by telotortium »

pyuser583 wrote: post #148
hardtke wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My kid just went through college selection process and I can assure you that the US News rankings are largely irrelevant in terms of decision making. The revealed preference score[1] or global university rankings[2] are much closer to how students, their counselors, and their parents rank the universities. For instance, any ranking that does not have Stanford first among non specialized US universities (i.e. excludin…

It’s really weird Cambridge is ahead of Oxford in world rankings. Cambridge has a reputation for strongly preferring UK students.

Cambridge has traditionally been ahead in science and mathematics (e.g., it's where Newton was a professor). On the other hand, Oxford until the 1800s was pretty much a seminary and theological college. As a non-Brit, I still get the impression that Oxford is where you would find the best philosophers and other humanities experts, while Cambridge is still slightly ahead in STEM

Re: U.S. News pulls Columbia University from its 2022 rankings

#307

Post by rconti »

ketzo wrote: post #27
bee_rider wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah they should stick all the ivies, MIT, etc... in a top "non-rankable" rank. Like realistically a student will be happy to go to whichever one they get into, and if someone gets into multiple, they probably won't pick based on position in some list.

> if someone gets into multiple, they probably won't pick based on position in some list Not trying to be contrarian, but I had two friends literally pick between Ivies based on this very list (in 2015). It’s generally accepted as “The List” by a lot of people. If you’re a parent with no other frame of reference, The List has a serious impact.

I know someone who switched law schools after the rankings came out, because #1 changed.

Re: U.S. News pulls Columbia University from its 2022 rankings

#308

Post by gnicholas »

telotortium wrote: post #303
SneakyTornado29 wrote: post #259

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are quite wrong about the Stanford supreme court justices: Sandra Day O'Connor and Stephen Breyer

He's talking about Law School of course - that's where promising students are drafted into the Supreme Court clerk position that's the first step on the cursus honorum to becoming a Supreme Court Justice. Undergrad doesn't matter as much except inasmuch it gets you into the prestigious law schools.

Um, Sandra Day O'Connor went to Stanford for undergrad and law school.

Also, this is a thread that's largely about undergrad, so I'm not sure Rayiner was talking about law school.

There are different rankings for law schools, and Yale has been considered the most prestigious for many years. I think SLS nabbed the top spot various times in the last decade, but Harvard is definitely not the uncontested leader in law schools.

Re: U.S. News pulls Columbia University from its 2022 rankings

#309

Post by seoaeu »

poulsbohemian wrote: post #96
verst wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly this. I went to a liberal arts college and had small class sizes (most around 9-15 in size, with the largest being 30) - I could see my professors 1:1 pretty much anytime I wanted, but there was also a preceptor (TA) for each class who didn't teach, but was available to answer questions related to assignments, projects etc. I went to the house of many of my professors for food or drinks too. Generally also wa…

>The downside is that liberal arts colleges aren't research institutions and they are generally undergraduate only. What's ironic about this though is how many universities won't accept their own undergrads into their grad programs... IE: they know that their undergrad programs are sub-standard but they don't seem to take action to improve them because the money and the focus is on the grad programs.

It has nothing to do with the quality of the undergrad degrees. Even most top tier programs suggest going somewhere else for grad school because each department has its own research culture and it is good to pick up on more than one

Re: U.S. News pulls Columbia University from its 2022 rankings

#310

Post by kragen »

brewdad wrote: post #285
kragen wrote: post #267

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is that a problem with the quote? It sounds like a problem with the system, a problem the essay correctly identified.

Ok. Now fix the system in a timeframe that is compatible with your expected working life. That's the problem with the quote. Grades may not be the most important thing but they can, and often are, the most important thing for any given individual. For every Bill Gates that dropped out, there are a million John Doe's drowning in student loan debt with no degree and limited future prospects to show for it.

Who are you asking to fix the system, and why? Me, maybe? Paul Graham? gofreddygo?

How is the thing you say a problem with the quote? These can both simultaneously be the case, and often are:

1. The most damaging thing John Doe learned in school was learning to get good grades.

2. Richard Roe didn't get good grades and is drowning in student loan debt with no degree and limited future prospects to show for it.

You have offered no reason to believe that if (2) is more true, or true in more cases, (1) is less true, or true in less cases, or less important. In fact, this tighter conjunction can also often be true:

1'. The most damaging thing John Doe learned in school was learning to get good grades.

2'. John Doe didn't get good grades (despite being damaged by learning how, he didn't learn how enough, or other things interfered) and is drowning in student loan debt with no degree and limited future prospects to show for it.

You've also offered no reason to believe that if (2') is more true, (1') is less true or less important.

I have an idea! Maybe you're misinterpreting the quote as meaning that, if you're in school, it would be a good strategy to stay there but not learn to get good grades. In that case there would be a sort of conflict: by diminishing the damage from (1') you may be increasing the risk of (2').

But that isn't what the essay advises at all, and I'm puzzled as to how you could have read it as suggesting that. It explicitly advises students to do exactly the opposite; it advises them to get good grades by hacking bad tests in the usual ways (cramming before exams, etc.) because everyone will judge them by their grades.

But that's not really the point of the essay, and it would be a pretty boring essay if it was. The point of the essay is its advice to people who aren't enrolled as students: unlearn how to get good grades, and instead of focusing on how to make your product look good, actually make a good product. Also, and maybe more importantly, try to work in fields of endeavor where the way to win is to do good work, rather than hacking bad tests like you do in school. (This might suggest not going into school at all, which would at least avoid the student loan debt problem.)

Post reply on HN