Is it actually worth it, in terms of quality classroom learning, to land a place at an elite college or university? This is a question that many families with highly-talented students ask themselves. If their answer is yes, the result is likely to be a concerted, frenzied effort to mold the students in a way that gives them at least a modest chance of admission to such schools. (Of course, for better or worse, the question is often framed as “Is it worth it, in terms of career success, to land a place…”).
Regarding the differences in the quality of classes among all levels of institutions, new research provides some insights. The researchers lean toward minimizing the relationship between academic prestige and quality of instruction–but it appears that some of their own research suggests just the opposite.
In an article titled Are Elite College Courses Better?, Doug Lederman, editor and co-founder of Inside Higher Ed, provides an excellent, mostly neutral summary of the recent research that suggests course quality in a relatively broad range of institutions does not vary as much as the prestige of a given school might suggest.
“Researchers at Teachers College of Columbia University and at Yeshiva University… believe they are developing a legitimate way to compare the educational quality of courses across institutions,” Lederman writes, “and their initial analysis, they say, ‘raises questions about the value of higher-prestige institutions in terms of their teaching quality.'”
The researchers suggest that the drive to enhance prestige based on rankings and selectivity have led to “signaling”–branding, perceptions–that are increasingly divorced from the actual quality of classroom instruction. The laudable aim of the researchers is to turn the conversation away from college rankings and the metrics that drive them, and toward measurements of effective, challenging instruction.
Trained faculty observers visited nine colleges and 600 classes. Three of the nine had high prestige; two had minimum prestige; and four had low prestige. The schools were both public and private, with differing research and teaching emphases. We should note that there was no list of which schools were in each category, so we do not know exactly how the researchers defined “elite.” It appears likely, however, that many leading public research universities would be considered elite.
“Teaching quality was defined as instruction that displayed the instructor’s subject matter knowledge, drew out students’ prior knowledge and prodded students to wrestle with new ideas, while academic rigor was judged on the ‘cognitive complexity’ and the ‘level of standards and expectations’ of the course work,” Lederman writes.
“But they found that on only one of the five measures, cognitive complexity of the course work, did the elite colleges in the study outperform the non-elite institutions.”
First, we note that highly-qualified honors students at almost all colleges, including many less prestigious public universities, are far more likely to encounter more “cognitive complexity” in their honors courses. Whether this results from having more depth or breadth in actual assignments, from taking harder courses early on, or from engaging in more challenging interactions with similarly smart students and the best faculty, the learning experience in honors embraces complexity.
We also have to agree with one of the longest and most thoughtful comments posted on Lederman’s article, by one “catorenasci”:
“Well, is [more cognitive complexity] a surprise to anyone? After all…on average the students at elite colleges and universities (private or public) have demonstrated higher cognitive ability than the students at less prestigious colleges and universities. Which means that the faculty can teach at a level of greater cognitive complexity without losing (many) students.”
The full comment from “catorenasci” also seems to be on the mark when it comes to improved instruction in all other measured areas on the part of colleges with less prestige, regardless of honors affiliation.
“As for the level of ‘teaching quality’ based on faculty knowledge, given the job market today, it should hardly be surprising that it has equaled out since there are many top quality candidates for even less prestigious positions and overall, I would suspect that the ‘quality’ of the PhD’s of faculty at less elite schools is much closer to that of elite schools than it was during the ’50s and ’60s when higher education was expanding rapidly and jobs were plentiful.
“The transformational aspect should not be surprising either: assuming faculty are competent and dedicated, with less able students they will work harder to draw out what they know and build on it. And, it will be more likely that students will experience significant growth as the faculty do this.”
Editor’s Note: This article comes from Jason Rose, an Illinois attorney with two extremely bright children, one now a freshman and the other a high school senior. What Jason has to say is especially relevant to families with highly-qualified students and with incomes that leave them in the infamous “donut hole” when it comes to financial aid. What to do when that elite college waitlist notice arrives, or even a rejection or two, despite a 34 ACT and 4.7 HSGPA?
As many parents know, this is the range when anything can happen: your child could do well at any university in the English-speaking world, but the capricious nature of elite admissions today makes acceptance unlikely for all but a fortunate few. Jason’s family’s story also provides an insightful look into the ways the winnowing process works–what students think they want is likely to change, especially with the all-important college visits. And the money–it’s hard to know what you’re willing to pay until that coveted acceptance doesn’t come with much, or any, aid. Now for Jason’s story…
My family in a nutshell: I am a 49 year old husband and parent of two teenagers: an 18-year-old daughter, Tori, (currently a freshman at a college to be named at the end of this article) and a 17-year-old son, Jake, (currently a high school senior).
Our goals: Helping guide Tori and Jake through the college admissions process without driving them, my wife, or myself crazy. Figuring out a way to make college relatively affordable. Figuring out what’s important and what’s NOT. In other words, what to sweat and what to let slide.
Tori (in a nutshell): While excelling in debate and orchestra in high school, Tori is a natural writer, researcher, and future politician. Voted most opinionated by her classmates, Tori is not interested in partying, at least not yet anyway. Although at times anxious, Tori is warm and friendly with those whom she is comfortable with. An eager learner who is well liked by her teachers, perhaps a future lawyer, professor or political wonk. For now, a likely English or Political Science major.
Issues: Attending a powerhouse public high school in an affluent suburb in northern Illinois, observers can almost believe that every student is a superstar (either academically, athletically, or in extra-curriculars) and that every family has a money tree in their backyard. While ideal in some respects, this sort of enriched environment often makes parents and their children a bit neurotic and ultra-competitive.
The Plan: Panic. No, just kidding. Read and research every admissions book and blog, every well known website, and every major college ranking service. My favorite websites were Niche, College Confidential, and Public University Honors. My favorite book about the various colleges was the venerable Fiske Guide to Colleges, which does an excellent job of going beyond the numbers and provides the reader with a feel for over 350 colleges. Later, during Tori’s senior year, I discovered the recently published book, A Review of Fifty Public University Honors Programs, which is the definitive book in the industry regarding the strengths of the various honors programs.
Junior Year: We visited many schools during Tori’s junior year so that we could get a feel for them all. During the visits, we quickly realized that each school has its own distinctive personality. During her junior year, Tori took the ACT multiple times, since we knew that an additional point could make the difference between getting in and getting rejected by a top school (or of getting scholarship money or not). By the end of her junior year, Tori had scored a 34 on her ACT and was sitting with a 4.7 weighted Grade Point Average, making her a very attractive candidate for most schools.
But without a hook (meaning that Tori was neither an athlete nor a legacy nor an underrepresented minority), we knew that entrance into the elite private schools was no sure thing. And even if Tori were to be accepted into a top private school, we were still not sure whether that was the best way to go.
As a quirky, intellectual type, Tori initially thought she would prefer a liberal arts school where she would benefit from close interaction with dedicated professors, small class sizes and a nurturing administration. We started by touring several fabulous liberal arts colleges on the east coast and in the Midwest, including Wellesley, Brandeis, Wesleyan, Carleton and Macalester; a few popular midsized schools (Boston University, Tulane University); and a few elite academic powerhouses (Yale, Brown, Northwestern University, University of Chicago).
What we learned during each visit is that each school had a distinct personality. Sometimes it came from the way the students interacted with each other or from the way the admissions officers would go through their spiels. Wherever it came from, it was palpable, something you could just feel.
But a funny thing happened during our search….after 5 or 10 visits, Tori realized that she was attracted to colleges in major cities. This was a major monkey in the wrench, since most of schools in major cities were typically larger, research powerhouses, while many of the best liberal arts colleges were in idyllic small towns, often far from any major city.
Senior Year (First Semester): By the beginning of Tori’s senior year, we thought that we were well prepared for the year ahead and the upcoming admissions process. At this point, Tori’s college list was in serious transition. Several colleges in major cities were added (welcome University of Minnesota, University of Pittsburgh, University of Texas at Austin, Rice University, Washington University at St.Louis and Emory University, among others) while the original target liberal arts colleges, which had at first appeared to be a wonderful fit, dropped out of the picture one by one. With the inclusion of several larger public schools, I began to look into the honors programs at Texas-Austin, Minnesota and Boston University.
Fortunately, two of the public schools on Tori’s list (Minnesota and Pittsburgh) had rolling admissions, which meant that Tori would receive acceptances from these schools in a matter of weeks. Knowing that Tori had acceptances from two very good schools early in the process (with scholarships from both schools) reduced the collective stress somewhat.
Meanwhile, I created color-coded charts listing the various application and scholarship deadlines and Tori got to work on her common application essay and the various mini-essays which the various colleges would require. By the end of the 2014, Tori had applied to twelve colleges, more than most students but not an extreme number, at least from our perspective. In our case, the number was appropriate since Tori was applying to several elite colleges with shrinking accepting rates and because Tori was not yet willing to limit herself to just one area of the country.
The net was also relatively wide since we had still not talked much as a family about exactly how much money had been saved and how much money might have to be borrowed in the future. Admittedly, the matter of how to fund college for two students was something that probably should have been discussed much earlier in the process.
Senior Year (Second Semester): Tori applied to one school early action, Yale. Deferred…which meant that we would not know until the end of March whether she would be admitted to Yale and the other elite schools that she applied to. While some students already had acceptances in hand to their dream schools, we could tell that Tori’s second semester would be stressful as we awaited decisions from most of the schools that she applied to.
The various reactions to Tori’s deferral from Yale were particularly interesting. In some cases, people would ask us “Is Tori o.k?”, sensing that Tori might be disappointed by the deferral and knowing that the odds for Tori to get in were not great. Others, however, would get excited and say “that’s amazing,” knowing that the Ivy league was just a pipe dream for most students and that most students would not have the grades and test scores to even contemplate attending an Ivy league school.
By February and March, the results started to roll in. Tori would eventually be accepted by 9 of the 12 schools that she applied to, with one school offering her a spot on the waitlist and two Ivy league schools (Yale and Brown) rejecting her. The schools that accepted Tori ran the geographic gamut, in the Midwest, South and along the eastern seaboard. Several of the schools were excellent public research universities (Texas, Minnesota, Pittsburgh), but Tori also was accepted into several smaller elite private schools, including Rice, Emory, Tulane, Washington University (“WUSTL”) and Boston University.
Decision Time: During our visit last fall to St. Louis, Tori had fallen in love with WUSTL, and when she was accepted, Tori was starting to see herself as spending her next four years there. But when the various financial aid packages came rolling in, we were quickly seeing that our family fell into the so-called donut (where families are relatively well off but not so wealthy that they could afford to pay $50,000-65,000 per year to have their child attend college). Some of these schools in fact were willing to work with us, but reductions of $5,000-10,000/year (while certainly substantial) only made a dent on the four year cost of an education.
Meanwhile, a weekend trip to Texas (to see Texas-Austin and Rice) was changing the list of favorites. In particular, Tori became enamored during her Texas trip not only with the city of Austin but also with UT’s Plan II Honors Program, which was widely regarded as being one of the very best honors programs in the country. The venerable but outstanding Fiske Guide to Colleges had touted Plan II as being one of the nation’s most renowned programs and also one of the best values in the country…at least for students in Texas who would pay in-state tuition. Additionally, A Review of Fifty Public University Honors Programs had also listed Plan II as being one of the very best honors programs in the country. But would out-of-state tuition push UT-Austin into the group with some of the other excellent, but ultimately unaffordable options.
At this point, the focus went towards some of the schools that had offered Tori sizable scholarships, most notably Tulane and Pittsburgh. Another trip to New Orleans impressed but did not lead to a commitment. This would be a decision that would go down to the wire.
The Decision: With May Day soon approaching, Tori decided that she wanted to go to Austin and that she wanted to take advantage of Plan II’s interdisciplinary curriculum. This, frankly, was a bit of a shocker because Tori is more of an intellectual than a sports fan. Most people who knew her expected Tori to select a smaller school, not a major research university with 50,000 students known at least somewhat for its prowess in the various major sports. At this point, we reached out to Texas to see if there was any possibility of receiving a Non-Resident Tuition Exemption (“NRTE”). NRTEs are in short supply at Texas-Austin, but most of the various departments at UT (Engineering, Business, Plan II) have a limited number of NRTE each year. In this case, we explained that while Tori would love to attend Texas-Austin, an NRTE would be needed to turn this dream into a reality.
Just days before May Day, we received the word from UT-Austin: Tori would be extended a small scholarship, which would be linked to an NRTE. Tori would be heading to Austin, Texas.
The Aftermath: So how’s it going so far? Two months into the school year, Tori is making new friends, enjoying her new environment, the honors dormitories at UT, and the improved climate–and excelling in the classroom. There will certainly be stressful days ahead and obstacles to overcome but at this point it looks like Tori absolutely made the right decision for herself. But I can’t spend too much time mulling over the past year: our second child, Jake, is now a high school senior and so we are going over a new set of options with a new set of decisions to be made.
The New York Times, in its “Upshot” feature, has analyzed for the second consecutive year data for some 179 colleges and universities to determine the “economic diversity” of the institutions. What this boils down to is a scoring mechanism that ranks the schools according to the percentage of freshmen who receive Pell Grants and graduate. The grants typically go to students with a family income of $70,000 or less.
Note: Two tables are listed below, the first for public universities and the second for private schools.
The review of access data is also useful for families whose income is greater than 70k. To be included in the analysis and ranking, each school had to have a 2014 five-year grad rate of 75% or more. This information in itself is a handy way to group these schools by grad rate.
Other data elements stand out: only 32 public institutions made the list because of the grad rate threshold, while 147 private schools are on the list. This, too, is useful, but the story is more involved that these figures suggest. The 32 public schools actually have more Pell Grant recipient/graduates (26,690) than the 147 private schools (20,192). The average percentage of freshmen with Pell Grants in the public universities is 17%; for the private schools, 14% of freshmen are recipients.
Publics have lower average net cost for Pell Grant recipients, $16,250 versus $19,986.
One more interesting element is that the amount of endowment per student is far less for public universities. UC Irvine, ranked number 1 in the analysis, has an endowment per student of $11,000; for Princeton, ranked number 18 in economic access, the endowment per student is $2,320,000. It is common for the per student endowment for publics to be only 5-15 percent of that for wealthy private colleges. Nevertheless, the publics do somewhat better relative to private schools in providing economic access. The link to the New York Times report lists the endowment figures for each school.
The latest PayScale report contains a lot of extremely useful information about salaries of college grads. But the list below, with more than 250 rows, shows the early career pay, by graduate degree and institution because so many current and prospective honors students will end up pursuing graduate and professional degrees.
The salaries listed are for JD’s, MBA’s, Masters, and Ph.D.’s, with the last two degree types showing pay for degree holders working mostly in government and private industry. Many of these have earned Masters and Ph.D.’s in STEM disciplines.
Please note that several universities, public and private, have entries for all four categories above .
<
Degree Type
University and Professional School
Early Pay
MBA
Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) - Sloan School of Management
131000
MBA
University of California, Berkeley - Haas School of Business
123000
MBA
Yale University - School of Management
123000
MBA
Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania
122000
MBA
University of Chicago - Booth School of Business
122000
JD
Harvard Law School
118000
MBA
Stanford University Graduate School of Business
118000
MBA
Northwestern University - Kellogg Business School
117000
MBA
Harvard Business School
114000
MBA
Dartmouth College - Tuck School of Business
111000
MBA
University of Virginia (UVA) - Darden School of Business
111000
PhD
Stanford University
111000
PhD
Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT)
105000
PhD
Carnegie Mellon University (CMU)
105000
MBA
Columbia Business School
104000
MBA
Cornell University - Johnson Graduate School of Management (JGSM)
104000
MBA
University of California at Los Angeles (UCLA) - Anderson School of Management
103000
PhD
Harvard University
103000
MBA
Duke University - Fuqua School of Business
102000
PhD
University of California - Santa Barbara (UCSB)
102000
MBA
University of Notre Dame - Mendoza College of Business
101000
PhD
University of California - Berkeley
101000
MBA
University of Michigan - Stephen M. Ross School of Business
100000
MBA
Carnegie Mellon University (CMU) - Tepper School
100000
MBA
Babson College - F.W. Olin Graduate School of Business
96900
PhD
California Institute of Technology (Caltech)
95600
MBA
Vanderbilt University - Business School
94800
MBA
New York University (NYU) Leonard N. Stern School of Business
94700
MBA
University of Texas (UT) - Austin McCombs School of Business
94600
PhD
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute (RPI)
94000
MBA
Georgetown University McDonough - School of Business
93300
PhD
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign (UIUC)
93100
PhD
Princeton University
92700
PhD
Georgia Institute of Technology
92300
PhD
Cornell University - Ithaca, NY
92000
JD
University of California - Hastings College of Law
91700
MBA
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (UNC) - Kenan-Flagler Business School
91600
PhD
Columbia University
90300
PhD
University of California - Los Angeles (UCLA)
90200
Master's
United States Naval Postgraduate School
89800
PhD
Purdue University - Main Campus
89500
PhD
University of California - Irvine (UCI)
89500
PhD
University of Houston (UH)
89400
PhD
Arizona State University (ASU)
89200
MBA
Georgia Tech - College of Management
88800
PhD
University of Massachusetts (UMass) - Amherst Campus
88500
MBA
University of Southern California - Marshall School of Business
88300
PhD
University of Michigan - Ann Arbor
88100
PhD
University of California - Davis (UC Davis)
87900
JD
University of Houston Law Center
87400
MBA
University of Minnesota - Carlson School of Management
86900
PhD
University of Texas (UT) - Austin
86900
MBA
Texas Christian University (TCU) - Neeley School of Business
86700
MBA
Santa Clara University - Leavey School of Business
86600
PhD
University of Wisconsin (UW) - Madison
86600
PhD
University of Minnesota - Twin Cities
86100
MBA
Boston University - School of Management
85900
PhD
University of Florida (UF)
85900
MBA
Villanova University - Villanova School of Business
85800
MBA
Boston College - Wallace E. Carroll School of Management
85500
PhD
University of California - San Diego (UCSD)
85300
PhD
Johns Hopkins University
85200
MBA
Emory University - Goizueta Business School
85100
MBA
University of California Davis (UC Davis) - Graduate School of Management
85000
PhD
Rice University
84900
PhD
University of Rochester
84700
MBA
University of Washington (UW) - Foster School of Business
84200
MBA
Brigham Young University (BYU) - Marriott School of Business
84100
PhD
Yale University
84100
Master's
University of Nebraska Medical Center
83800
MBA
Wake Forest School of Business
83800
Master's
Stanford University
83400
PhD
Pennsylvania State University (Penn State) - Main Campus
83300
PhD
University of Southern California (USC)
83200
PhD
North Carolina State University (NCSU)
82900
PhD
Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University (Virginia Tech)
82500
MBA
University of California Irvine (UCI) - Paul Merage School of Business
82400
PhD
Texas A&M University - Main Campus
82400
PhD
University of Utah
82300
PhD
University of Maryland - College Park
82100
PhD
Duke University
82100
MBA
Southern Methodist University (SMU) - Cox School of Business
81900
PhD
University of Colorado - Boulder (CU)
81900
PhD
Michigan State University (MSU)
81900
MBA
University of California San Diego (UCSD) - Rady School of Management
81700
PhD
Ohio State University (OSU) - Main Campus
81600
JD
Georgetown University Law Center
81500
JD
Santa Clara University School of Law
81300
MBA
Ohio State University (OSU) - Fisher College of Business
81100
Master's
Carnegie Mellon University (CMU)
81000
JD
University of Texas at Austin School of Law
80900
Master's
Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT)
80900
PhD
University of Virginia (UVA) - Main Campus
80900
PhD
University of Notre Dame
80700
MBA
University of Connecticut (Uconn) - School of Business
80600
PhD
University of Central Florida (UCF)
80600
MBA
Thunderbird, The American Graduate School of International Management
80500
PhD
University of Pennsylvania
80400
JD
University of California at Los Angeles (UCLA) - College of Law
80300
PhD
University of Pittsburgh - Main Campus
80200
JD
Brooklyn Law School
80100
MBA
Kelley School of Business, Indiana University
80000
MBA
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign (UIUC) College of Business
80000
Master's
Santa Clara University
79700
MBA
University of Maryland - Robert H. Smith School of Business
79700
PhD
Auburn University
79500
PhD
Boston University
79400
MBA
George Washington University (GWU) - School of Business
79200
MBA
The University of Iowa - Henry B. Tippie College of Business
79200
PhD
University of Washington (UW) - Main Campus
79000
MBA
Tulane University - A.B. Freeman School of Business
78700
Master's
San Jose State University (SJSU)
78500
PhD
University of Arizona
78300
PhD
University of Illinois at Chicago
78300
PhD
Indiana University (IU) - Bloomington
78200
MBA
Pepperdine University - Graziadio School of Business and Management
77900
JD
Pepperdine University School of Law
77700
MBA
Bentley University - McCallum Graduate School of Business
77600
JD
George Washington University Law School
77100
PhD
University of Tennessee
77100
JD
Boston University School of Law
76800
MBA
University of Wisconsin (UW) - Madison School of Business
76800
PhD
Iowa State University
76800
MBA
University of Pittsburgh - Katz Graduate School of Business
76600
PhD
Washington State University (WSU)
76600
JD
McGeorge School of Law
76300
PhD
Clarkson University - Potsdam, NY
76300
JD
University of Southern California Law Center and Law Library
76200
JD
Fordham University School of Law
76200
Master's
Kettering University
76200
MBA
Virginia Commonwealth School of Business
76000
PhD
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (UNC)
75800
MBA
Washington University - Olin Business School
75600
JD
Southern Methodist University School of Law
75500
MBA
University of Rochester - Simon School of Business
75100
Master's
University of South Alabama
75000
JD
University of California at Berkeley School of Law
74900
PhD
Rutgers University - New Brunswick Campus
74800
MBA
Fordham University - Gabelli School of Business
74700
MBA
The College of William and Mary - Mason School of Business
74700
JD
University of Miami School of Law
74600
Master's
Cornell University - Ithaca, NY
74500
PhD
University of Connecticut (UConn) - Main Campus
74500
JD
University of Washington (UW) School of Law
74000
MBA
Rutgers Business School
74000
MBA
Purdue University - Krannert School of Management
73900
Master's
Georgia Institute of Technology
73800
MBA
University of Delaware - Alfred Lerner College of Business and Economics
73800
JD
St. John's University School of Law, New York
73700
MBA
Northeastern University - D'Amore-McKim School of Business
73400
JD
Seton Hall University School of Law
73300
MBA
Michigan State University - Broad College of Business
73300
MBA
CUNY Bernard M Baruch College - Zicklin School of Business
73200
JD
University of San Diego (USD) School of Law
73100
Master's
Stevens Institute of Technology
73000
MBA
Lehigh University College of Business and Economics
72900
JD
Emory University School of Law
72700
MBA
University of Arizona - Eller College of Management
72400
MBA
Pennsylvania State University (PSU) - Smeal College of Business
72300
MBA
Suffolk University - Sawyer School of Management
72100
Master's
Rochester Institute of Technology (RIT)
71900
MBA
Arizona State University (ASU) - W. P. Carey School of Business
71900
MBA
University of Massachusetts (UMass) - Boston Campus
71900
MBA
Loyola Marymount College of Business Administration
71800
PhD
Northwestern University
71700
MBA
Johns Hopkins University - Carey Business School
71400
PhD
Vanderbilt University
71300
JD
Loyola Law School
71200
Master's
Worcester Polytechnic Institute (WPI)
71100
JD
University of North Carolina (UNC) School of Law
71000
MBA
George Mason University - School of Management
71000
MBA
University of Colorado Boulder (UCB) - Leeds School of Business
70900
MBA
University of Arkansas - Sam M. Walton College of Business
70900
JD
University of Illinois College of Law
70700
Master's
Purdue University - Main Campus
70700
MBA
Oklahoma State University (OSU) - Spears School of Business
70700
MBA
Case Western Reserve University - Weatherhead School of Management
70600
MBA
University of Miami School of Business (Florida)
70500
MBA
University of Georgia (UGA) - Terry College of Business
70500
Master's
Manhattan College
70400
Master's
NYU Polytechnic School of Engineering
70200
Master's
University of California - Berkeley
70100
Master's
Missouri University of Science and Technology (S&T)
70000
MBA
American University - Kogod School of Business
70000
Master's
Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University (ERAU) - Daytona Beach, FL
69900
MBA
University of Texas at Dallas - Naveen Jindal School of Management
69900
MBA
Clarkson University - Clarkson School of Business
69700
MBA
University of Houston (UH) - C.T. Bauer College of Business
69600
PhD
Colorado State University (CSU)
69400
Master's
University of Texas at Dallas
69300
MBA
Texas State University - San Marcos Campus
69200
Master's
Medical University of South Carolina
69100
MBA
University of Florida (UF) - Warrington College of Business
69100
JD
Seattle University School of Law
68900
JD
University of Connecticut (UConn) School of Law
68700
MBA
Duquesne University - A.J. Palumbo School of Bus Admin and John F. Donahue Grad School of Bus
68700
JD
Detroit College of Law at Michigan State University
68600
MBA
Drexel University - Bennett S. LeBow College of Business
68600
Master's
Michigan Technological University
68500
MBA
Texas A&M University - Mays Business School
68500
MBA
University of South Carolina - Darla Moore School of Business
68400
JD
American University Washington College of Law
68300
MBA
University of St. Thomas - Opus College of Business
68300
Master's
Colorado School of Mines
68200
Master's
Gannon University
68200
Master's
University of California - Irvine (UCI)
67900
Master's
Vanderbilt University
67900
MBA
San Francisco State University (SFSU) - College of Business
67900
MBA
Clemson University - College of Business and Behavioral Science
67800
Master's
Princeton University
67700
Master's
Lehigh University
67700
Master's
University of Michigan - Dearborn Campus
67700
Master's
Tufts University
67700
Master's
Illinois Institute of Technology (IIT)
67500
MBA
San Jose State University (SJSU) - College of Business, and Lucas Graduate School of Business
67500
JD
University of Florida (UF) Levin College of Law
67400
Master's
University of Southern California (USC)
67400
Master's
Pennsylvania State University (Penn State) - Great Valley Campus
67400
JD
Temple University School of Law
67300
Master's
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute (RPI)
67300
Master's
California Polytechnic State University (CalPoly) - San Luis Obispo
67300
Master's
Clarkson University - Potsdam, NY
67200
Master's
University of Colorado at Colorado Springs
67200
MBA
Wayne State University - Detroit, MI
67100
Master's
University of Alabama - Huntsville Campus
67000
Master's
Texas A&M University - Main Campus
67000
MBA
University of New Haven
67000
MBA
DePaul University - Kellstadt Graduate School of Business
66900
Master's
Northeastern University
66800
MBA
Oakland University - Rochester Hills, MI
66700
MBA
Westminster College - Salt Lake City, UT
66700
JD
University of Minnesota Law School
66600
MBA
University of Kansas - School of Business
66500
JD
University of Denver College of Law
66400
Master's
New Jersey Institute of Technology (NJIT)
66400
PhD
Florida State University (FSU)
66400
Master's
University of California - San Diego (UCSD)
66300
Master's
Idaho State University (ISU)
66200
MBA
San Diego State University (SDSU) - College of Business Administration
66200
MBA
St. Xavier University
66200
JD
New England School of Law
66100
Master's
Duke University
66100
Master's
Bowie State University (BSU)
66100
JD
Tulane Law School
65700
MBA
Temple University - Fox School of Business and Management
65700
MBA
University of Utah - David Eccles School of Business
65600
Master's
Johns Hopkins University
65500
Master's
University of Colorado - Boulder (CU)
65500
Master's
North Carolina State University (NCSU)
65500
MBA
SUNY Albany - School of Business
65500
JD
John Marshall Law School - Chicago, IL
65400
Master's
University of California - Santa Barbara (UCSB)
65400
Master's
University of Houston (UH)
65400
Master's
Philadelphia University
65300
JD
California Western School of Law
65200
Master's
University of Massachusetts (UMass) - Lowell Campus
65200
MBA
Florida State University (FSU) - College of Business
65200
MBA
Georgia State University - J. Mack Robinson College of Business
65100
MBA
Seattle University - Albers School of Business and Economics
65100
Master's
Bentley University
65000
Master's
Purdue University - Calumet Campus
65000
MBA
California State University East Bay (CSUEB) - College of Business and Economics
65000
MBA
Loyola University of Chicago - Quinlan School of Business
Have you ever notice that the Academic Reputation scores in the U.S News Best Colleges ranking can be very high for several public universities although their overall ranking is much lower than other schools with less stellar reputations?
Of course, there can be good reasons for this discrepancy: larger class sizes in public universities, lower graduation rates, etc. But…honors colleges and programs within the larger institutions offset the negatives and offer their students opportunities to take advantage of the factors contributing to the strong academic reputations.
First, these are factors to consider if the state university’s academic reputation is much stronger than its overall ranking:
1. The overall rankings penalize public universities for their typically larger class sizes, but the average class size in the 50 major honors programs we track is only 21.2 students, much smaller than the average class size for the universities as a whole. Most of these honors classes are lower-division, where the preponderance of large classes is the norm. Result: the relatively poor rating the whole university might receive for class size is offset for honors students.
2. The overall rankings hit some public universities hard for having relatively low retention and graduation percentages, but freshmen retention rates in honors programs are in the 90% range and higher; meanwhile six-year grad rates for honors entrants average 89%–much higher than the average rates for the universities as a whole. Result: the lower rates for the universities as a whole are offset for honors students.
3. All public universities suffer in the overall rankings because U.S. News assigns ranking points for both the wealth of the university as a whole and for the impact that wealth has on professors’ salaries, smaller class sizes, etc. This is a double whammy in its consideration of inputs and outputs separately; only the outputs should be rated. Result: the outputs for class size (see above) are offset for honors students, and the wealth of the university as an input should not be considered in the first place.
4. For highly-qualified students interested in graduate or professional school, academic reputation and the ability to work with outstanding research faculty are big advantages. Honors students have enhanced opportunities to work with outstanding faculty members even in large research universities, many of which are likely to have strong departmental rankings in the student’s subject area. Result: honors students are not penalized for the research focus of public research universities; instead, they benefit from it.
5. Many wealthy private elites are generous in funding all, or most, need-based aid, but increasingly offer little or no merit aid. This means that families might receive all the need-based aid they “deserve” according to a federal or institutional calculation and still face annual college costs of $16,000 to $50,000. On the other hand, national scholars and other highly-qualified students can still receive significant merit aid at most public universities. Result: if a public university has an academic reputation equal to that of a wealthy private elite, an honors student could be better off financially and not suffer academically in a public honors program.
But…what if the academic reputation of the public university is lower than that of a private school under consideration? In this case, the public honors option should offer the following offsets:
1. The net cost advantage of the public university, including merit aid, probably needs to be significant.
2. It is extremely important to evaluate the specific components of the honors program to determine if it provides a major “value-added” advantage–is it, relatively, better than the university as a whole. Typically, the answer will be yes. To determine how much better, look at the academic disciplines covered by the honors program, the actual class sizes, retention and graduation rates, research opportunities, and even honors housing and perks, such as priority registration.
Honors News is a regular (not always daily) update, in brief, of recent news from honors colleges/programs and from the world of higher ed. Occasionally, a bit of opinion enters the discussion. These brief posts are by John Willingham, unless otherwise noted.
Critics claim that public universities spend far too much on merit aid at a time when the focus should be on providing more need-based assistance, but the uses of merit aid are many, as are the reasons that drive the aid decisions at individual institutions.
The main problem for leading institutions, especially, is how to balance quality, access, state interests (including revenue), and public perception. In general, the most vocal critics of merit aid believe that access should trump all the other factors.
First of all, some of the arguments in these and other reports are valid. For one thing, there is no doubt that the U.S. News rankings drive many colleges to spend money on generating better metrics, especially those related to test scores, selectivity, and student/faculty ratios. Some schools have become proficient in gaming the system.
The U.S. News methodology currently gives a combined weight of 9.25% to test scores and selection ratios. The use of the latter should be scrapped, given the increased use of the Common App and marketing geared to ramping up applications just for the sake of lowering acceptance ratios. (As for test scores, there are ways that colleges can game that metric as well.) The methodology also assigns a weight of 22.5% to multiple financial metrics that also pressure colleges to raise and spend more money.
State budget cuts and rising costs for instruction, research, and administration have also led to the need for more revenue. Just how much of the additional revenue is actually necessary for improved instruction is a matter of contention. (See for example Baumol’s Cost Disease and The Bowen Effect.) The combined effects of state disinvestment and the obsession with prestige and rankings have undoubtedly led to the intense focus on increasing revenues.
Yet after granting the critics a fair measure of credit, we come back to the four main factors that affect the allocation of merit aid, discussed below. And here’s a proposed standard for balancing the factors: If merit aid is denied to highly qualified, low-income students who are residents of the state, and goes instead to out-of-state students whose qualifications are about the same or less, then the merit aid is being used excessively for revenue purposes.
Quality–As noted elsewhere on this blog, the elite colleges and universities in this country, almost all of them private, simply do not have enough slots for the top 8-10% of students, based on test scores. Most of the highly talented students who are not accepted by elite private colleges will end up at public universities. Those public universities that allocate funds to support smaller classes and undergraduate research for talented students through honors programs, along with merit aid, are not only spending money to recruit students with higher test scores in order to enhance their prestige; they are also filling a real need by providing more slots for talented students. In addition, many are trying to keep talented students in state rather than seeing them leave, never to return. All too often, critics of public university spending ignore these needs.
Access–The relationship of merit aid to greater access for lower-income students is complex. Rankings and prestige have an impact on merit aid allocations, but that impact is not always what the critics see.
Some elite public universities (UC Berkeley, Michigan) offer higher percentages of merit aid than other public universities that are excellent but not so elite (although the average amounts of merit aid from Berkeley and Michigan are not especially large.) Why? The competition for UC Berkeley and Michigan includes many private elite schools, and sometimes even modest merit aid can be the deciding factor. Private universities such as Chicago, Northwestern, and Rice also offer significant merit aid, and do so to compete with the Ivies, Stanford, etc., who are so much in demand that they don’t have to offer non-need-based aid.
The University of Virginia and the University of North Carolina also compete effectively against private elites, but they have chosen to provide very limited merit aid.
For public universities at the next level, Washington, Illinois, UT Austin, Wisconsin, the competition is often with other publics, and they more than hold their own. Partly as a result of being in high demand regardless of aid, UT Austin has one of the highest enrollments of Pell Grant students and offers little in the way of merit aid.
But when it comes to public universities with lesser reputations than those listed above, the balance between aid for quality or aid for access may tip too far toward quality, sometimes with an eye on improving rankings and revenue. New America singles out the University of Alabama and the University of South Carolina for criticism. How much of this criticism is valid?
State Interests/Revenue–The state of South Carolina now funds only 10 percent of the cost of education at the flagship university. Moreover, the number of college-age students in the state is declining. New America criticizes the University of South Carolina for awarding too much merit aid to out-of-state students, who still end up providing more revenue out of pocket than in-state students, and also help to sustain enrollment levels.
If the university allocated most or almost all of its aid to need-based students within the state, the revenue would drop dramatically and the expense per student would rise. The university would probably be unable to support its excellent honors college; for that matter, the university would eventually be unable to serve as many students period. So even if the state legislature undervalues higher education, the university and many citizens believe it is in the interest of the state to increase the number of college graduates (and their families) over the long haul, and not diminish the university in the process.
Is the percentage of non-resident freshmen (45%) too high, and the merit aid they receive too much? To answer those questions, one would need to know (1) whether many highly qualified (but low-income) in-state students are not receiving aid because the aid is going to out-of-state students with equal or lesser qualifications; and (2) how many of talented out of state students will remain in South Carolina after graduation. To the extent that highly qualified, low-income, in-state students are losing out, then the out of state aid should be reduced.
Public Perception–Funding honors programs and offering merit aid to talented students can certainly increase the selectivity profile of a university and eventually enhance rankings and public perception. But we would draw a distinction between the aggressive gaming of the rankings and the more justifiable funding that is related to legitimate state interests. New America suggests that the extremely generous merit aid that the University of Alabama offers to talented out-of-state students is mainly to enhance rankings. But, contrary to what New America claims, the Alabama U.S. News ranking has actually fallen 13 places since 2012.
The University of Mississippi is another flagship that offers generous merit aid. What is also true is that the state of Mississippi has the second lowest percentage of college grads in the nation, and Alabama the 7th lowest. Surely these states should find ways to sustain their flagship institutions, and merit aid, for now, is one of those ways. Who knows but that some day they might join UVA, UNC Chapel Hill, UT Austin, Wisconsin and others that can go forward without so much emphasis on merit aid.
Again, we agree with New America that many universities, including some major public institutions, do use merit aid, at least in part, for purposes of moving up in college rankings and sometimes excessively for revenue purposes. But the total picture is much more complicated, resulting in one of the most difficult issues to emerge from state disinvestment in higher education.
Editor’s note: The following article is by Peter Jacobs of Business Insider. We are posting it here because it is a great illustration of the main advantage of many public honors colleges and programs–merit aid for highly talented students that they cannot receive at most private elites.
After some thought and consideration of all the schools’ offers, Nelson decided it wouldn’t be worth the financial strain to use this money on his undergraduate education. He plans on going to medical school after college, and knows he’ll be faced with more tuition costs.
“With people being in debt for years and years, it wasn’t a burden that Ronald wanted to take on and it wasn’t a burden that we wanted to deal with for a number of years after undergraduate,” Ronald Sr. said. “We can put that money away and spend it on his medical school, or any other graduate school.”
University Alabama Quad Denny Chimes Campus
Looking long term, Nelson doesn’t think his decision will impact his chances of getting in to a top medical school or other graduate program. After speaking with his teachers and guidance counselors, Nelson said, he realized that “any undergraduate school can prepare you for a graduate program. It’s just determined on how much work you’re willing to put in.”
At UA, Nelson will be part of the university’s “Fellows Experience” through its honors college. A visit to Tuscaloosa, Alabama, as part of the program’s multiround interview process helped seal the deal for UA. He got to meet other students he would study with over the next four years and was impressed by them.
“It was kind of amazing being around so many like-minded students, which is why I think I’ll be able to have a similar situation [to an Ivy League school], considering the type of students they’re attracting,” Nelson said.
The financial incentive for attending Alabama was high. Due to his high standardized-test scores on the SAT and ACT, UA waived Nelson’s out-of-state fees and covered his tuition costs. Through the fellows program and his National Merit scholarship, Nelson will also have stipends for extra campus costs and potentially studying abroad.
While some people may see his decision to turn down schools such as Harvard, Princeton, Yale, and Stanford as ill considered or shortsighted, Nelson said he’s received a ton of support for choosing UA. One teacher, he told Business Insider, complimented him for “making such an informed decision” about where to work towards his undergraduate degree.
“I’ve had a lot of people questioning me — ‘Why are you doing this?’ — but after I explain my circumstances, they definitely understand where I’m coming from,” Nelson said.
Overall, though, Nelson doesn’t appear to have any regrets about his decision and seems excited to start college in the fall.
“The Ivy League experience would certainly be something amazing, to make these connections, and have these amazing professors,” he said. “But I really do think I’ll be able to make the same experience for myself at the college I chose.”
Editor’s note: The following list comes from a post by college consultant Nancy Griesemer, who writes regular for the Washington Examiner. Read the full post, and consult the always fascinating UCLA Freshman Report for more information.
Griesemer notes in her post that while 73% of applicants are accepted by their first choice college, only 55% end up enrolling at that institution. Clearly, cost is a big factor behind these stats, and points to an issue of concern to us: finding a place for students smart enough to get into elite private colleges but cannot attend the private school of their choice for financial reasons.
In addition, with the current emphasis on selectivity as a major metric in the U.S. News rankings, highly talented students are being ever more widely recruited by elite universities and, at the same time, finding their odds of acceptance significantly reduced. For these students, the relatively high first choice acceptance cited above does not obtain.
So…insufficient merit aid to offset costly private tuition and expenses, plus capricious selectivity designed to make schools look better by rejecting smart applicants, have helped boost public honors programs where students can find quality at a lower cost, along with a better overall mix of students.
The arrows below indicate whether the response percentage has increased or decreased since the previous year’s survey.
1. College has a very good academic reputation (65.4 percent)↑
2. This college’s graduates get good jobs (53.4 percent)↑
3. I was offered financial assistance (46.9 percent)↓
4. The cost of attending this college (44.9 percent)↓
5. College has a good reputation for social activities (42.8 percent)↓
6. A visit to the campus (42.4 percent)↓
7. Wanted to go to a college about this size (36.6 percent)↓
8. Grads get into good grad/professional schools (32.9 percent)↓
9. Percent of students that graduate from this college (31.1 percent)↑
10. Wanted to live near home (20.7 percent)↑
11. Information from a website (18.8 percent)↑
12. Rankings in national magazines (18 percent)↑
13. Parents wanted me to go to this school (17.2 percent)↓
14. Admitted early decision and/or early action (15.7 percent)↑
15. Could not afford first choice (14.1 percent)↓
16. Not offered aid by first choice (10.6 percent)↓
17. High school counselor advised me (10.4 percent)↑
18. Athletic department recruited me (9.1 percent)↓
19. My relatives wanted me to come here (8 percent)↑
20. Attracted by religious affiliation/orientation of college (7.3 percent)↓
21. My teacher advised me (7.2 percent)↑
22. Private college counselor advised me (4.6 percent)↑
23. Ability to take online courses (4.1 percent)↑
Comparing the departmental rankings of leading public research universities to the overall rankings of the same schools by U.S. News yields striking disparities, emphasizing the impact that selectivity, class size, and financial resources have on the U.S. News listings, to the detriment of other factors.
As we have pointed out elsewhere, honors students have fewer concerns about class size because honors classes in the first two years tend to be much smaller than regular classes; and while selectivity is a driver of graduation rates, honors students have a six-year rate average grad rate approaching 90 percent in major public honors programs, with many significantly higher than 90 percent.
We have also commented before that the strong faculties at leading public research universities are competitive with many private elite national universities. Soon we will update our post that compares the most recent departmental rankings of both public and private research universities. In the meantime, below are the public research universities with the highest overall departmental rankings, listed along with their U.S. News ranking to illustrate the disparities.
The fifteen disciplines surveyed are business (undergrad); engineering (undergrad); biological sciences; chemistry; computer science; earth sciences; economics; education; English; history; math; physics; political science; psychology; and sociology.
Please note that many universities with highly-ranked academic departments (e.g., Indiana, Minnesota) do not have correspondingly high rankings in U.S. News. The converse is also true: some highly ranked universities (e.g., Virginia) don’t have the highest ranked academic departments.
One of the main reasons for this kind of discrepancy is that U.S. News emphasizes selectivity and small class sizes, and some public universities with extremely strong faculties are not highly selective (Wisconsin, Minnesota, Illinois, Washington) or have larger classes than many other universities. But many class sections over the first two years, normally large for non-honors students, are usually much smaller for honors students. The takeaway for prospective honors students: selectivity for the university as a whole and the size of all classes at the university are less important for you than for non-honors students.
We certainly recognize the excellent instruction that occurs at, for example, William & Mary, Wake Forest, Lehigh, Carlton, Swarthmore, Williams, etc., regardless of whether or how highly their academic departments are rated. But for highly qualified students who are looking at large research universities, we do believe the rankings of departments matters quite a bit.
Not included below are universities that do not have ranked departments in at least 13 of the 15 academic disciplines. Notable among these is Georgia Tech, with its nationally renowned engineering programs and a very strong business department.
UC Berkeley has an average national departmental ranking of 3.33 across the 15 disciplines mentioned above. Please bear in mind that the rankings below include all national universities, public and private. All of the top five universities below–UC Berkeley, Michigan, Wisconsin, UCLA, and UT Austin–have no academic departments among the 15 disciplines surveyed that are ranked lower than 30.
Once again, The New Republic is featuring an article that discusses the pros and cons of an Ivy League education. This time, the article comes in the form of a review of New York Times columnist Frank Bruni’s new book, Where You Go Is Not Who You’ll Be.
In the TNR review, called “It Doesn’t Matter if Your Kid Doesn’t Get into Harvard,” author Nick Romeo claims that Bruni is too focused on the ability of college grads from non-Ivy institutions to achieve material success on a par with Ivy grads.
“He’s not asking his readers to examine a cultural obsession with success, so much as assuring them that they can still impress others without attending highly selective undergraduate institutions,” Romeo writes. “Just look at all the people who run huge companies or work at prestigious consulting or law firms, he says. Not all of them went to Ivy League schools! There are ‘myriad routes to a corner office,’ as he puts it. He never seriously considers the possibility that college might shape students into adults who are not interested in a corner office.”
Romeo prefers the earlier challenge to Ivy education published in TNR: William Deresiewicz’s now famous article “Don’t Send Your Kid to the Ivy League,” which appeared on July 21, 2014, and has now been “shared” more than 200,000 times. Deresiewwicz’s article argues that many less elite schools, such as public flagships, allow bright students more latitude to discover themselves in the midst of fellow students who are not all driven or overly-focused on channeling their lives toward one thing: an Ivy admission.
The fact is that college at its best is not an either/or proposition that pits learning for its own sake against training for a career. In almost every college in the nation there are at least three broad types of students–those who are in alive with self-discovery and intellectual excitement, those who want to get out in a hurry and find a high-paying job, and many others who are open to intellectual expansion but are acutely aware that the “real world” awaits.
The subtitle of Bruni’s book is “An Antidote to the College Admissions Mania.” But Nick Romeo argues that what Bruni describes “is not a bracing cure; it’s a soothing balm for upper-middle class parents whose children do not quite manage to scale the highest peaks of prestige.”
We see Bruni’s book as less an antidote than a balancing argument to the one proposed by Deresiewicz. While many smart “kids” do and should value intellectual stimulation, they and their parents need to be practical as well. If Bruni over-emphasizes the “antidote” of achieving career success equivalent to that of Ivy grads without attending an Ivy school, his message is one that parents and prospective students need to hear.
As we have noted many times, there are far more bright students than there are places at Ivy institutions, and these bright students should be able to find, and should know that they can find, both intellectual and career equivalence at colleges outside the Ivy League, including public honors colleges and programs.
It is well known that admission to any highly selective college can be capricious, subjective, and even approach the formulaic. Ivy colleges are wonderful, in most cases, for students who are both brilliant and fortunate. Students who are “merely” brilliant at one brief point of their lives need to know that the rest of their lives can be as fulfilling in all ways as the lives of their more fortunate counterparts.
