techno-ag said:

---

It's like they tried to figure out if a school's degree was worth it or something.

---

From the write-up regarding their methodology:

"Our new ranking rebalances this. To calculate the value added by colleges, we estimate how well their students would do regardless of which college they attended, taking into account the factors that best predict student outcomes. The colleges are rewarded for their students' success over and above that estimate. These scores are combined with raw graduation rates and graduate salaries. In other words, success in absolute terms is still taken into account, but with the value added given greater emphasis than previously."

I don't think that is really all that easy to do. How can you really "estimate how well their students would do regardless of which college they attended"? You can't do a controlled, scientific experiment and put the same student through two different schools. Similarly, doesn't going to school with students who are more academically prepared count for a lot when comparing schools? These surveys are soft science at best, as evidenced by 30% of the school's grade being given to student experience and diversity.

I applaud the study and what they are trying to do. It's interesting. Again, I love my school and it got me where I wanted to be. I'm just not sure it is necessarily "Better than" Pomona, UC Berkeley, Rice, Brown, Carnegie Mellon, UNC, UVA, and Johns Hopkins, among others.

If you REALLY want to "figure out if a school's degree was worth it or something", you see what the students earn upon receipt of their sheepskin. The WSJ indeed DID do that as well. It's just not the headline ranking being discussed here. In those rankings, Texas A&M was 62nd in the nation (and first in Texas).

NoahAg said:

---

fc2112 said:

---

Urban Ag said:

---

As much as it pains me to say it, I have really tried to get my boys to look hard at other schools than A&M. But both are hell bent on being Aggies. So be it.

---

Two of my sons wanted to major in computer science so I directed them away from A&M to UTD. Both are making bank now.

---

Interested if you could elaborate. Campus life isn't all that important to my son, and A&M is a little overwhelming to him. UTD is one place I'm having him consider.

While lists like these are always fun (especially poking holes in), they're worthless unless you're actually comparing specific degrees.

---

I would advise against it. Go to the best name-brand school you can get into. It's just 4 years anyway and your degree will last a lifetime. You will quickly make the money back but never get the time back.
And please don't get caught in this liberal/conservative school nonsense. Does not matter, one goes to school to study, learn and get a degree and get a job.


A&M >>>> UTD.

If he can get into better schools like Stanford, MIT, UC Berkeley, CMU, UIUC, GaTech then go for it. My son is doing CS at UIUC and the research and internship opportunities are amazing. I wish I could sit in class with him!

Of course, in the end it all depends on how well you make use of the opportunities. Good schools give you good and many of them. Not so good schools are very frugal with them and you have to work much harder to get a break.

All this sort of ranking is utter nonsense.

one safe place said:

---

All this sort of ranking is utter nonsense.

---

Wrong.

Rankings have value as long as you know the limitations and what it is ranking. You have to make use of the opportunities as well. Just because you go to Harvard doesn't mean you can coast all your life.

one safe place said:

---

All this sort of ranking is utter nonsense.

---

Agree. Guy with biggest house and most toys on my street graduated from ETBU.

Using starting salary as a ranking factor is flawed because salaries and cost of living are dramatically different from one area to the next. This methodology still favors northeastern and California schools over schools in most of the rest of the country. They would have to apply some sort of cost of living index to those salaries to attempt to make them apples-to-apples. Also, schools that are heavy on STEM majors will always outperform schools that are not because of the big difference in starting salaries for STEM vs. non-STEM graduates. This is apparent when you look at #17 Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology. This is a tiny all-STEM college that focuses mostly on Bachelor & Masters degrees (no PhDs). Those graduates are pretty much ALL going into the private sector with good starting salaries. Compare them to nearby Purdue, University of Illinois, Ohio State and MIchigan which all have good engineering programs but have their university average starting salaries watered down by the stats for their non-STEM graduates.

Ouch. UT Arlington ahead of Texas tech. Lol

infinity ag said:

---

NoahAg said:

---

fc2112 said:

---

Urban Ag said:

---

As much as it pains me to say it, I have really tried to get my boys to look hard at other schools than A&M. But both are hell bent on being Aggies. So be it.

---

Two of my sons wanted to major in computer science so I directed them away from A&M to UTD. Both are making bank now.

---

Interested if you could elaborate. Campus life isn't all that important to my son, and A&M is a little overwhelming to him. UTD is one place I'm having him consider.

While lists like these are always fun (especially poking holes in), they're worthless unless you're actually comparing specific degrees.

---

I would advise against it. Go to the best name-brand school you can get into. It's just 4 years anyway and your degree will last a lifetime. You will quickly make the money back but never get the time back.
And please don't get caught in this liberal/conservative school nonsense. Does not matter, one goes to school to study, learn and get a degree and get a job.


A&M >>>> UTD.

If he can get into better schools like Stanford, MIT, UC Berkeley, CMU, UIUC, GaTech then go for it. My son is doing CS at UIUC and the research and internship opportunities are amazing. I wish I could sit in class with him!

Of course, in the end it all depends on how well you make use of the opportunities. Good schools give you good and many of them. Not so good schools are very frugal with them and you have to work much harder to get a break.

---

Disagree to an extent. UTD is a really good school for CS and a few other specialties. Now if you can go to A&M it's higher ranked but it really depends on what you want to do. A&M is really heavy on the Engineering side vs the "Science" side. Meaning if you want a more EE style track that is focused towards Semiconductors, Embedded SW Engineering, Hardware, etc then A&M is definitely better. If you just want to do programming though that isn't really a big specialty at A&M. You can certainly do it but remember A&M also has all Engineers as Interdisciplinary Freshman Year and then you have to get probably a 3.5 if not higher to do Comp Sci/Engineering and likely pushing 3.8.

A&M is a far less forgiving culture as well, monster school with a billion distractions. You need to really focus and be ready or else you can get chewed up and spit out.

I would only recommend UTD for a few specialties but CS is definitely where the UT System has poured serious money into that program. They have 4000 Undergrads in CS, it's massive and they are rising up the rankings fast. As I said I went there and was very impressed, it's going to continue to rise in the coming years.

I definitely wouldn't say you should just go wherever the best school you get accepted to is out of hand. For instance you could easily have one school that is a few points higher than another and be 3 or 4x the cost. Cultural fit matters. Some kids do great in a small environment and some in a big one. Some like an Engineering heavy environment (like a School of Mines) and some like a school with a much broader scope.

I have a friend that was a student at Carnegie Mellon but hated it and transferred to Cal State San Diego of all places and loved it. Why? He was one of hundreds trying to get research time in an ultra competitive environment at CM but was a Rock Star at CSSD. Ended up getting to do far more there and has had a very successful career.

I know 2 girls that were borderline Ivy level that went to UTD on full rides and actually got an additional stipend. One got her MD in 6 years for free, she matched at UPenn for Residency. The other used it to go to UC Berkeley for her Masters where she had a fellowship and also ended up netting out at zero. If they had gone Ivy they would have racked up a few hundred grand in debt.

I think WSJ has a great methodology that weights 70% of each school's score on student outcomes, 20% on learning environment, and 10% on diversity. Because Texas A&M produces a lot graduates, who go on to earn high incomes, it is the highest-ranking Texas school by a landslide.

Few public universities in the top 20.

Florida is the high rates public university in this list, but honestly I think Florida is overrated.

The first year the state of Florida did performance based funding which was 1/3 based on graduate salaries, UF and FSU weren't the leaders. The Florida legislature, who is a bunch of FSU and UF grads, changed the scoring metrics the next year to make sure FSU and UF scored highest.

Also, the Florida Gators are to Florida what the Texas Longhorns are to Texas. Arrogant jerks with inflated egos and overrated academics and athletics.

infinity ag said:

---

one safe place said:

---

All this sort of ranking is utter nonsense.

---

Wrong.

Rankings have value as long as you know the limitations and what it is ranking. You have to make use of the opportunities as well. Just because you go to Harvard doesn't mean you can coast all your life.

---

Sorry, but its nonsense. The limitations you speak of encompass almost everything in them. Almost every college in the US has good students attending and quality profs in ALMOST every program that's worth a darn. Notice the bolded part.

With that said, there are probably 4 dozen schools nationwide (maybe as many as twice that) that are not worth attending for many reasons. But some may rank near schools mentioned here as quality. For example, putting UT Arlington in the mid- or even high- 200s is idiotic. It may not be the best school in Texas but its pretty good and has been for a long time. Good engineering, good business, and certainly average to above average liberal arts in the quality programs like Economics. What was once considered a "commuter" school has worked very hard the last 2 decades to bring students on campus and while UT-Dallas* has gotten a lot of press, UTA has done, in my opinion, as good a job. For some programs, like music, UTA is the better option. (I know many on here laugh at music, but it is a solid major/minor IF you know what you're getting into).

So yeah, the rankings are nonsense. But you can think what you want. I wouldn't give you a dime for a Harvard grad and one of the best guys I ever worked with graduated from tech. (He might make more than you do; I'm pretty sure he makes more than I do, at least consistently!)

*Most people don't know that until the late '80s or early '90s, UT-Dallas was an upper level only college that mostly took in Dallas County and other JuCo transfers. They transitioned (no jokes please) from that to a top notch business and engineering school almost overnight in the mid-90s through the 2000s. Now, they often rank with Rice, us, and t.u. I was considering transferring to UTD prior to coming to A&M.

deddog said:

---

Urban Ag said:

---

As much as it pains me to say it, I have really tried to get my boys to look hard at other schools than A&M. But both are hell bent on being Aggies. So be it.

In particular, Florida. Have also come to really like Arkansas.

But I tell you what and I never thought I'd say this. I would be perfectly happy for either of them to attend Texas Tech. As long as they wrap it up

---

What major?

While i realize A&M is nowhere as conservative as it used to be, it's not some woke hell hole.
The student body is still overwhelmingly conservative, and it pains me to see folks choose a different school.

The answer isn't encouraging conservative students to attend elsewhere.
The answer is to get more conservative students to attend A&M

I'm sure there are other reasons to look at Arkansas, Florida, and even Tech. (I have one kid who considered tu, and then attended a school in Florida), but i have 2 others who attend A&M and are thrilled by their choice.

---

My son is a junior, top 10%. OU and Arkansas are really aggressive in communicating with him. I'm in his ear about A&M, no idea which direction things will go but those two are working hard to attract students in Texas.

Definitely better measurables than they've used in the past, but other than a sprinkling of some different schools, the ones at the top are largely the same as they've always been.

ts5641 said:

---

Definitely better measurables than they've used in the past, but other than a sprinkling of some different schools, the ones at the top are largely the same as they've always been.

---

BYU #20.

shiftyandquick said:

---

ts5641 said:

---

Definitely better measurables than they've used in the past, but other than a sprinkling of some different schools, the ones at the top are largely the same as they've always been.

---

BYU #20.

---

BYU is fairly difficult to get into. All of the highest academic achieving Mormons, by and large, want to go there. And when they finish, they likely go out and get pretty good jobs that pay well, which will boost the school's rankings significantly based on the methodology of this study. It does seem a bit high at 20, but I'm not completely surprised by this. The only thing is that I am sure they got a 0 for that all-important Diversity metric, the true test of a school's value. But that only counted for 10% in this study.

The rankings are not nonsense simply because a single school is ranked lower than you believe it should be.

WSJ has completely changed the way they rank schools. It's a good thing imo. Are there flaws in it? Sure, just like every ranking. But if you go in with your eyes open, that's ok. I also think you should look at groups. In other words, looking at one school ranked 10 places above another is meaningless if they are both in the top 20% for example. It's really a wash. It comes down to other factors then.

Do you also believe A&M is ranked incorrectly? If not, then you can't dismiss the ranking out of hand like you have.

You are free to wait for the USA Today or US News rankings, which are based on how much the school spends per student, endowments, reputation polls by professors and academics, etc.

Owlagdad said:

---

one safe place said:

---

All this sort of ranking is utter nonsense.

---

Agree. Guy with biggest house and most toys on my street graduated from ETBU.

---

Good. So let's all send our kids to ETBU so they can become as rich as the guy on your street.
Darn it. I wasted my years at TAMU. If I had gone to ETBU I would have become a billionaire.

infinity ag said:

---

Owlagdad said:

---

one safe place said:

---

All this sort of ranking is utter nonsense.

---

Agree. Guy with biggest house and most toys on my street graduated from ETBU.

---

Good. So let's all send our kids to ETBU so they can become as rich as the guy on your street.
Darn it. I wasted my years at TAMU. If I had gone to ETBU I would have become a billionaire.

---

Sure enough! You might have become the next Billy Graham!

45-70Ag said:

---

deddog said:

---

Urban Ag said:

---

As much as it pains me to say it, I have really tried to get my boys to look hard at other schools than A&M. But both are hell bent on being Aggies. So be it.

In particular, Florida. Have also come to really like Arkansas.

But I tell you what and I never thought I'd say this. I would be perfectly happy for either of them to attend Texas Tech. As long as they wrap it up

---

What major?

While i realize A&M is nowhere as conservative as it used to be, it's not some woke hell hole.
The student body is still overwhelmingly conservative, and it pains me to see folks choose a different school.

The answer isn't encouraging conservative students to attend elsewhere.
The answer is to get more conservative students to attend A&M

I'm sure there are other reasons to look at Arkansas, Florida, and even Tech. (I have one kid who considered tu, and then attended a school in Florida), but i have 2 others who attend A&M and are thrilled by their choice.

---

My son is a junior, top 10%. OU and Arkansas are really aggressive in communicating with him. I'm in his ear about A&M, no idea which direction things will go but those two are working hard to attract students in Texas.

---

That's because Arkansas and Oklahoma have very few top notch High Schools and certainly nothing like the big 6A Suburban HS's in DFW, Houston, Austin, and San Antonio that produce massive numbers of kids who have 20 or so hours of college credit already and do very well there. They offer lots of aid as well and it is often cheaper to go there than going to A&M or Texas though their main target is really kids who are outside the Top 10%.

For instance you could have a kid who is Top 25% from a great HS with a 12-1300 SAT that is marginal for A&M or Texas and at best is waiting on an admission decision into March. Arkansas and OU will have already accepted them and given them incentives while calling and writing them constantly while A&M and Texas do nothing because they don't have to. That kid is likely going to crush it at any of those schools but A&M and Texas simply have so many of them to choose from.

Texas has 31 million people. Arkansas has 3 million. Oklahoma has 4 million. Neither Arkansas nor Oklahoma have significant tech industries that drive large populations of Asians to live there and other tech bros that tend to have kids that are serious academics. I mean my son is currently a Junior taking AP Calculus at his HS (2 years ahead of On Level) and in his class they have 3 Freshman and 5 Sophomores, all Asian and all making A's. There just isn't much of that in those states.

For additional perspective both A&M and Texas have over 90% of Freshman from Texas. Try finding any other big State schools outside of this state that are like that. Texas just produces a ton of kids that are prepared for college. Part of that is sheer size of the state with only 3 true Tier 1 Colleges (and Rice is small and expensive). Part of that is just quality and culture. That said the difference between those Top 10% of HS's vs the Bottom 50% is significant. My son's HS produces 4 or 5x the amount of National Merit Scholars as the other 5 HS's in the District combined regularly and none of them are bad HS's.

While I applaud the changes I don't think that list is COLA adjusted.

Salary Impact versus Similar Colleges is our biggest differentiator vs. tu.
We are ranked 62nd with a 83.5 score while tu is 193rd with a 68.

Quote:

---

• Salary impact versus similar colleges (33%): This measures the extent to which a college boosts its graduates' salaries beyond what they would be expected to earn regardless of which college they attended. We used statistical modeling to estimate what we would expect the median earnings of a college's graduates to be on the basis of their demographic profile, taking into account the factors that best predict salary performance. We then scored the college on its performance against that estimate. These scores were then combined with scores for raw graduate salaries to factor in absolute performance alongside performance relative to our estimates. Our analysis for this metric used research on this topic by the Brookings Institution policy-research think tank as a guide.

---

It's similar to their football recruits. Are their students overrated or do they just underperform?

infinity ag said:

---

IIT better than Northwestern???

BWAHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHHAA



What is the criteria? Wokeness?

---

Found the Kellogg Grad

DD88 said:

---

Salary Impact versus Similar Colleges is our biggest differentiator vs. tu.
We are ranked 62nd with a 83.5 score while tu is 193rd with a 68.

Quote:

---

• Salary impact versus similar colleges (33%): This measures the extent to which a college boosts its graduates' salaries beyond what they would be expected to earn regardless of which college they attended. We used statistical modeling to estimate what we would expect the median earnings of a college's graduates to be on the basis of their demographic profile, taking into account the factors that best predict salary performance. We then scored the college on its performance against that estimate. These scores were then combined with scores for raw graduate salaries to factor in absolute performance alongside performance relative to our estimates. Our analysis for this metric used research on this topic by the Brookings Institution policy-research think tank as a guide.

---

It's similar to their football recruits. Are their students overrated or do they just underperform?

---

Do they produce more liberal arts grads than us?