OT: US News and World Report 2025 | Page 6 | Syracusefan.com

OT: US News and World Report 2025

We're 73, We're 73. The days of being 44 are long over. Does the Board of Trustees care about this rating or is it irrelevant? To see schools like UMass and Michigan State rated higher is preposterous to me but I guess things are always changing.


Acknowledging all the necessary caveats about how dumb and easily gameable these rankings can be, it is worth noting that private schools outside the ivys and near-ivys have as a group taken a hit in these lists over the years. This is not a Syracuse-specific problem. So many state schools, and I'm not talking about the public ivys that have competed with the very best privates for a very long time, have shot up the rankings over the past twenty or so years because of the huge rise in college expenses attracting more and more high achieving middle class kids to their lower costs vis-a-vis second and third tier privates. Second and third tier U of California campus have moved into the top fifty over the past couple of decades precisely because there are so many good in-state students who can't get into Berkeley or UCLA but also don't want to pay to go to a second tier private out of state. In other states, the flagships have risen up the ranks because in-state students are opting for a public education rather than going to Syracuse or GWU or Boston U. and paying double for what they increasingly see as a comparable education. See the rise of Rutgers, UMD, Penn State, and Delaware.

This is not an easily resolvable problem. The donors need to focus on setting up scholarship funds and less on expensive sports like football (sorry guys). The impending Cold war with China also doesn't help the financial model of a lot of private schools in the Northeast that relied on Chinese students paying full fare. International students made up upwards of a third of Boston U.'s undergrad population until Covid hit.

Some big schools with long histories are going to go under unless major changes to their business models are made. The upshot is that the survivors will get healthier by picking the meat off their bones.
 
BC in many ways did what Northeastern did.

When I graduated from Boston Latin school in Boston, Northeastern was the safety school for most kids there. All you needed was a C average and you got in.

Now, Northeastern is regarded as ON PAR with BC and BU and in some ways is more selective.
I wonder if NU is gaming the acceptance criteria through their deferred admission program. For those not familiar, a large portion of their freshman class is "deferred" admission until the spring semester of freshman year. They attend a program abroad through affiliated schools. After the fall semester, they matriculate to NU and their credits transfer fully. The small print says automatic acceptance isn't guaranteed. But, everyone knows it is and they openly discuss it as such with prospective students.
 
BC in many ways did what Northeastern did.

When I graduated from Boston Latin school in Boston, Northeastern was the safety school for most kids there. All you needed was a C average and you got in.

Now, Northeastern is regarded as ON PAR with BC and BU and in some ways is more selective.
what year did you graduate from Boston Latin?
 
Acknowledging all the necessary caveats about how dumb and easily gameable these rankings can be, it is worth noting that private schools outside the ivys and near-ivys have as a group taken a hit in these lists over the years. This is not a Syracuse-specific problem. So many state schools, and I'm not talking about the public ivys that have competed with the very best privates for a very long time, have shot up the rankings over the past twenty or so years because of the huge rise in college expenses attracting more and more high achieving middle class kids to their lower costs vis-a-vis second and third tier privates.
Um, USC (Southern Cal) has also shot up, and schools like Carnegie Mellon (where I also went) have declined.
Occam's Razor. SU has declined because... it declined.
A combination of academics, prestige, ability to get jobs, and "was it worth it."
Coupled with alumni feedback.
 
BC in many ways did what Northeastern did.

When I graduated from Boston Latin school in Boston, Northeastern was the safety school for most kids there. All you needed was a C average and you got in.

Now, Northeastern is regarded as ON PAR with BC and BU and in some ways is more selective.
This is a great example.
I've seen NU come on - friends of mine (plus my best man and my father-in-law) are some of the most successful people I know.
The "quarters" (trimester?) system plus mandated internship was (is?) brilliant.
 
Acknowledging all the necessary caveats about how dumb and easily gameable these rankings can be, it is worth noting that private schools outside the ivys and near-ivys have as a group taken a hit in these lists over the years. This is not a Syracuse-specific problem. So many state schools, and I'm not talking about the public ivys that have competed with the very best privates for a very long time, have shot up the rankings over the past twenty or so years because of the huge rise in college expenses attracting more and more high achieving middle class kids to their lower costs vis-a-vis second and third tier privates. Second and third tier U of California campus have moved into the top fifty over the past couple of decades precisely because there are so many good in-state students who can't get into Berkeley or UCLA but also don't want to pay to go to a second tier private out of state. In other states, the flagships have risen up the ranks because in-state students are opting for a public education rather than going to Syracuse or GWU or Boston U. and paying double for what they increasingly see as a comparable education. See the rise of Rutgers, UMD, Penn State, and Delaware.

This is not an easily resolvable problem. The donors need to focus on setting up scholarship funds and less on expensive sports like football (sorry guys). The impending Cold war with China also doesn't help the financial model of a lot of private schools in the Northeast that relied on Chinese students paying full fare. International students made up upwards of a third of Boston U.'s undergrad population until Covid hit.

Some big schools with long histories are going to go under unless major changes to their business models are made. The upshot is that the survivors will get healthier by picking the meat off their bones.
I agree about long term effects of higher tuition but something has changed in the short run that's more specific to the criteria chosen

Rankings aside, I just find it gross how expensive Syracuse is. I want to recommend it, I would love for my kids to go if that's what they wanted. But it is just not worth it
 
I agree about long term effects of higher tuition but something has changed in the short run that's more specific to the criteria chosen

Rankings aside, I just find it gross how expensive Syracuse is. I want to recommend it, I would love for my kids to go if that's what they wanted. But it is just not worth it
Price is right if you live in the city and not one of the weird suburbs of Syracuse. Seriously though I’ve never been anywhere on the planet where the city itself is awesome and the second you step outside city limits it’s just bad vibes etc.
 
We all know that these rankings can be easily gamed, and that they're not good at reflecting the things that college students should actually care about.

That being said, they're also a reality and most schools do take them seriously. Apparently not SU though, since we've let our ranking drop 30 places in the past ~30 years.

SU still has a good academic brand, but this ranking is bothersome. Schools are supposed to improve the perceived value of their degree over time, not see it decline.
SU's best ranking was 35th in 1990's. Cannot believe it drop about 35 places in 30 years. Or let 35 schools passed us.
 
SU's best ranking was 35th in 1990's. Cannot believe it drop about 35 places in 30 years. Or let 35 schools passed us.

These rankings aren’t exactly scientific. I know some have mentioned the ability for schools to game the system but, that aside, they’re scoring some very subjective things.

It’s also worth remembering that employers do not care the least bit about these rankings. This is mostly a tool for high school kids to make a decision about where they want to apply and maybe get bragging rights that they’ll realize within a year or two mean next to nothing.
 
The University brings flash by having "professors-in-practice" at places like Newhouse, but that's not really reflective of academic leadership - that's career training.
POPs are becoming reasonably common. I disagree about it being solely career training.

There are resource challenges for many departments at SU. Some of this is due to the climate of the area, NYS and some is due to other factors. There is also a belief that the Micron and other $$$ will help the university quite a bit in some areas.
 
Last edited:
Um, USC (Southern Cal) has also shot up, and schools like Carnegie Mellon (where I also went) have declined.
Occam's Razor. SU has declined because... it declined.
A combination of academics, prestige, ability to get jobs, and "was it worth it."
Coupled with alumni feedback.

USC kind of proves my point. The real cost to attend is close to UCLA's, according to US News. That means a lot of top students there get a serious discount on their tuition rates. If you want to stay in or go to school in LA, it's a good option. SU is less competitive with the SUNY schools and is in a far less desirable area than USC. Same with Carnegie Mellon in PA.

The good news is that SU can become more competitive if it lowers costs. But there is also a ceiling on how high it can rise. At this point, survival in the long-term requires many private schools to do a serious rethink of their financial model. The top schools with billions in endowment have less to worry about (even so, they are leveraged to the hilt). But the second and third-tier institutions are in a more precarious position. Birth rates never recovered after the 2007-8 recession and there is a reckoning just around the corner as that post-recession generation comes of age. Backlash on immigration and visa policies means that the hopeful plans that schools made about making up for that shortfall in other ways are now increasingly unrealistic.
 
I agree about long term effects of higher tuition but something has changed in the short run that's more specific to the criteria chosen

Rankings aside, I just find it gross how expensive Syracuse is. I want to recommend it, I would love for my kids to go if that's what they wanted. But it is just not worth it

Grad and retention rates always matter a lot to these rankings. Transfers out and dropouts, often for financial reasons, are fast increasing. Rates at state schools have improved, again due to costs. Some students at private schools are trying to game the system by transferring out to cheaper community colleges to do core courses during their middle college years and transferring back in later on to graduate. That helps grad rates but hurts retention rates so it's a wash.
 
USC kind of proves my point. The real cost to attend is close to UCLA's, according to US News. That means a lot of top students there get a serious discount on their tuition rates. If you want to stay in or go to school in LA, it's a good option. SU is less competitive with the SUNY schools and is in a far less desirable area than USC. Same with Carnegie Mellon in PA.

The good news is that SU can become more competitive if it lowers costs. But there is also a ceiling on how high it can rise. At this point, survival in the long-term requires many private schools to do a serious rethink of their financial model. The top schools with billions in endowment have less to worry about (even so, they are leveraged to the hilt). But the second and third-tier institutions are in a more precarious position. Birth rates never recovered after the 2007-8 recession and there is a reckoning just around the corner as that post-recession generation comes of age. Backlash on immigration and visa policies means that the hopeful plans that schools made about making up for that shortfall in other ways are now increasingly unrealistic.
I would have attended USC if not for 1) failed to tell me a got a full ride until 2-3 weeks AFTER I declined (thx USPS), 2) distance, and 3) the riots.
 
I would have attended USC if not for 1) failed to tell me a got a full ride until 2-3 weeks AFTER I declined (thx USPS), 2) distance, and 3) the riots.
Would you have become "Pacificuse" in that scenario?
 

Forum statistics

Threads
169,387
Messages
4,829,833
Members
5,974
Latest member
sturner5150

Online statistics

Members online
327
Guests online
1,877
Total visitors
2,204


...
Top Bottom