US News and World Report 2017 Economics Rankings

[bison]

https://www.usnews.com/best-graduate-schools/top-humanities-schools/economics-rankings

 

Looks like USNWR has updated their rankings for the first time since 2013. While no ranking system is perfect, and USNWR certainly has its flaws, they do seem to form the jumping-off point from which most people base their internal rankings. As such, this update may warrant a discussion here, particularly considering the infrequency with which these are released.

 

What do you all think? Personally I'm surprised to see a six-way tie at #1, to start.

[ledmonds049]

Did a little digging...

 

[TABLE=width: 458]

[TR]

[TD]School[/TD]

[TD]2009 rank[/TD]

[TD]2013 rank[/TD]

[TD]09 to 13 change[/TD]

[TD]2017 rank[/TD]

[TD]13 to 17 change[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD]Chicago[/TD]

[TD=align: right]1[/TD]

[TD=align: right]1[/TD]

[TD=align: right]0[/TD]

[TD=align: right]7[/TD]

[TD=align: right]-6[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD]Harvard[/TD]

[TD=align: right]1[/TD]

[TD=align: right]1[/TD]

[TD=align: right]0[/TD]

[TD=align: right]1[/TD]

[TD=align: right]0[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD]MIT[/TD]

[TD=align: right]1[/TD]

[TD=align: right]1[/TD]

[TD=align: right]0[/TD]

[TD=align: right]1[/TD]

[TD=align: right]0[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD]Princeton[/TD]

[TD=align: right]1[/TD]

[TD=align: right]1[/TD]

[TD=align: right]0[/TD]

[TD=align: right]1[/TD]

[TD=align: right]0[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD]Stanford[/TD]

[TD=align: right]5[/TD]

[TD=align: right]5[/TD]

[TD=align: right]0[/TD]

[TD=align: right]1[/TD]

[TD=align: right]4[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD]UC-Berkeley[/TD]

[TD=align: right]6[/TD]

[TD=align: right]5[/TD]

[TD=align: right]1[/TD]

[TD=align: right]1[/TD]

[TD=align: right]4[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD]Northwestern[/TD]

[TD=align: right]8[/TD]

[TD=align: right]7[/TD]

[TD=align: right]1[/TD]

[TD=align: right]7[/TD]

[TD=align: right]0[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD]Yale[/TD]

[TD=align: right]6[/TD]

[TD=align: right]7[/TD]

[TD=align: right]-1[/TD]

[TD=align: right]1[/TD]

[TD=align: right]6[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD]Penn[/TD]

[TD=align: right]9[/TD]

[TD=align: right]9[/TD]

[TD=align: right]0[/TD]

[TD=align: right]10[/TD]

[TD=align: right]-1[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD]Columbia[/TD]

[TD=align: right]10[/TD]

[TD=align: right]10[/TD]

[TD=align: right]0[/TD]

[TD=align: right]9[/TD]

[TD=align: right]1[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD]Minnesota[/TD]

[TD=align: right]10[/TD]

[TD=align: right]11[/TD]

[TD=align: right]-1[/TD]

[TD=align: right]16[/TD]

[TD=align: right]-5[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD]NYU[/TD]

[TD=align: right]12[/TD]

[TD=align: right]11[/TD]

[TD=align: right]1[/TD]

[TD=align: right]11[/TD]

[TD=align: right]0[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD]Michigan[/TD]

[TD=align: right]12[/TD]

[TD=align: right]13[/TD]

[TD=align: right]-1[/TD]

[TD=align: right]12[/TD]

[TD=align: right]1[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD]Wisconsin[/TD]

[TD=align: right]14[/TD]

[TD=align: right]13[/TD]

[TD=align: right]1[/TD]

[TD=align: right]12[/TD]

[TD=align: right]1[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD]UCLA[/TD]

[TD=align: right]14[/TD]

[TD=align: right]15[/TD]

[TD=align: right]-1[/TD]

[TD=align: right]12[/TD]

[TD=align: right]3[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD]UCSD[/TD]

[TD=align: right]14[/TD]

[TD=align: right]15[/TD]

[TD=align: right]-1[/TD]

[TD=align: right]12[/TD]

[TD=align: right]3[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD]Caltech[/TD]

[TD=align: right]14[/TD]

[TD=align: right]15[/TD]

[TD=align: right]-1[/TD]

[TD][/TD]

[TD][/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD]Cornell[/TD]

[TD=align: right]18[/TD]

[TD=align: right]18[/TD]

[TD=align: right]0[/TD]

[TD=align: right]16[/TD]

[TD=align: right]2[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD]CMU[/TD]

[TD=align: right]19[/TD]

[TD=align: right]19[/TD]

[TD=align: right]0[/TD]

[TD=align: right]20[/TD]

[TD=align: right]-1[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD]Brown[/TD]

[TD=align: right]19[/TD]

[TD=align: right]19[/TD]

[TD=align: right]0[/TD]

[TD=align: right]19[/TD]

[TD=align: right]0[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD]Duke[/TD]

[TD=align: right]19[/TD]

[TD=align: right]19[/TD]

[TD=align: right]0[/TD]

[TD=align: right]16[/TD]

[TD=align: right]3[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD]Maryland[/TD]

[TD=align: right]22[/TD]

[TD=align: right]22[/TD]

[TD=align: right]0[/TD]

[TD=align: right]21[/TD]

[TD=align: right]1[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD]Rochester[/TD]

[TD=align: right]22[/TD]

[TD=align: right]22[/TD]

[TD=align: right]0[/TD]

[TD=align: right]21[/TD]

[TD=align: right]1[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD]BU[/TD]

[TD=align: right]24[/TD]

[TD=align: right]24[/TD]

[TD=align: right]0[/TD]

[TD=align: right]23[/TD]

[TD=align: right]1[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD]JHU[/TD]

[TD=align: right]25[/TD]

[TD=align: right]24[/TD]

[TD=align: right]1[/TD]

[TD=align: right]23[/TD]

[TD=align: right]1[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD]Texas[/TD]

[TD=align: right]25[/TD]

[TD=align: right]26[/TD]

[TD=align: right]-1[/TD]

[TD=align: right]27[/TD]

[TD=align: right]-1[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD]OSU[/TD]

[TD=align: right]28[/TD]

[TD=align: right]27[/TD]

[TD=align: right]1[/TD]

[TD=align: right]29[/TD]

[TD=align: right]-2[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD]Wash U[/TD]

[TD=align: right]28[/TD]

[TD=align: right]27[/TD]

[TD=align: right]1[/TD]

[TD=align: right]27[/TD]

[TD=align: right]0[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD]Penn State[/TD]

[TD=align: right]27[/TD]

[TD=align: right]27[/TD]

[TD=align: right]0[/TD]

[TD=align: right]25[/TD]

[TD=align: right]2[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD]Virginia[/TD]

[TD=align: right]28[/TD]

[TD=align: right]30[/TD]

[TD=align: right]-2[/TD]

[TD=align: right]29[/TD]

[TD=align: right]1[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD]Michigan State[/TD]

[TD=align: right]31[/TD]

[TD=align: right]30[/TD]

[TD=align: right]1[/TD]

[TD=align: right]29[/TD]

[TD=align: right]1[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD]UIUC[/TD]

[TD=align: right]31[/TD]

[TD=align: right]32[/TD]

[TD=align: right]-1[/TD]

[TD=align: right]29[/TD]

[TD=align: right]3[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD]UC-Davis[/TD]

[TD=align: right]34[/TD]

[TD=align: right]32[/TD]

[TD=align: right]2[/TD]

[TD=align: right]29[/TD]

[TD=align: right]3[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD]UNC Chapel Hill[/TD]

[TD=align: right]34[/TD]

[TD=align: right]32[/TD]

[TD=align: right]2[/TD]

[TD=align: right]29[/TD]

[TD=align: right]3[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD]BC[/TD]

[TD=align: right]31[/TD]

[TD=align: right]32[/TD]

[TD=align: right]-1[/TD]

[TD=align: right]25[/TD]

[TD=align: right]7[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD]ASU[/TD]

[TD=align: right]39[/TD]

[TD=align: right]36[/TD]

[TD=align: right]3[/TD]

[TD=align: right]42[/TD]

[TD=align: right]-6[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD]Arizona[/TD]

[TD=align: right]39[/TD]

[TD=align: right]36[/TD]

[TD=align: right]3[/TD]

[TD=align: right]42[/TD]

[TD=align: right]-6[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD]Pitt[/TD]

[TD=align: right]39[/TD]

[TD=align: right]36[/TD]

[TD=align: right]3[/TD]

[TD=align: right]39[/TD]

[TD=align: right]-3[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD]Vanderbilt[/TD]

[TD=align: right]34[/TD]

[TD=align: right]36[/TD]

[TD=align: right]-2[/TD]

[TD=align: right]35[/TD]

[TD=align: right]1[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD]Iowa[/TD]

[TD=align: right]34[/TD]

[TD=align: right]40[/TD]

[TD=align: right]-6[/TD]

[TD=align: right]42[/TD]

[TD=align: right]-2[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD]Washington[/TD]

[TD=align: right]34[/TD]

[TD=align: right]40[/TD]

[TD=align: right]-6[/TD]

[TD=align: right]35[/TD]

[TD=align: right]5[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD]Purdue[/TD]

[TD=align: right]42[/TD]

[TD=align: right]42[/TD]

[TD=align: right]0[/TD]

[TD=align: right]42[/TD]

[TD=align: right]0[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD]Texas A&M[/TD]

[TD=align: right]42[/TD]

[TD=align: right]42[/TD]

[TD=align: right]0[/TD]

[TD=align: right]39[/TD]

[TD=align: right]3[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD]Indiana U[/TD]

[TD=align: right]46[/TD]

[TD=align: right]42[/TD]

[TD=align: right]4[/TD]

[TD=align: right]39[/TD]

[TD=align: right]3[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD]UC-Santa Barbara[/TD]

[TD=align: right]42[/TD]

[TD=align: right]42[/TD]

[TD=align: right]0[/TD]

[TD=align: right]37[/TD]

[TD=align: right]5[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD]Georgetown[/TD]

[TD=align: right]46[/TD]

[TD=align: right]46[/TD]

[TD=align: right]0[/TD]

[TD=align: right]50[/TD]

[TD=align: right]-4[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD]UC-Irvine[/TD]

[TD=align: right]42[/TD]

[TD=align: right]46[/TD]

[TD=align: right]-4[/TD]

[TD=align: right]47[/TD]

[TD=align: right]-1[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD]Florida[/TD]

[TD=align: right]48[/TD]

[TD=align: right]48[/TD]

[TD=align: right]0[/TD]

[TD=align: right]55[/TD]

[TD=align: right]-7[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD]NC State[/TD]

[TD=align: right]50[/TD]

[TD=align: right]48[/TD]

[TD=align: right]2[/TD]

[TD=align: right]55[/TD]

[TD=align: right]-7[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD]Rutgers[/TD]

[TD=align: right]50[/TD]

[TD=align: right]48[/TD]

[TD=align: right]2[/TD]

[TD=align: right]47[/TD]

[TD=align: right]1[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD]Rice[/TD]

[TD=align: right]48[/TD]

[TD=align: right]48[/TD]

[TD=align: right]0[/TD]

[TD=align: right]42[/TD]

[TD=align: right]6[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD]USC[/TD]

[TD=align: right]50[/TD]

[TD=align: right]48[/TD]

[TD=align: right]2[/TD]

[TD=align: right]37[/TD]

[TD=align: right]11[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD]Colorado-Boulder[/TD]

[TD=align: right]50[/TD]

[TD=align: right]53[/TD]

[TD=align: right]-3[/TD]

[TD=align: right]50[/TD]

[TD=align: right]3[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD]Syracuse[/TD]

[TD=align: right]54[/TD]

[TD=align: right]53[/TD]

[TD=align: right]1[/TD]

[TD=align: right]50[/TD]

[TD=align: right]3[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD]Iowa State[/TD]

[TD=align: right]54[/TD]

[TD=align: right]55[/TD]

[TD=align: right]-1[/TD]

[TD=align: right]53[/TD]

[TD=align: right]2[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD]Oregon[/TD]

[TD=align: right]59[/TD]

[TD=align: right]56[/TD]

[TD=align: right]3[/TD]

[TD=align: right]59[/TD]

[TD=align: right]-3[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD]Notre Dame[/TD]

[TD=align: right]65[/TD]

[TD=align: right]56[/TD]

[TD=align: right]9[/TD]

[TD=align: right]47[/TD]

[TD=align: right]9[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD]Claremont[/TD]

[TD=align: right]65[/TD]

[TD=align: right]58[/TD]

[TD=align: right]7[/TD]

[TD=align: right]90[/TD]

[TD=align: right]-32[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD]Kentucky[/TD]

[TD=align: right]56[/TD]

[TD=align: right]58[/TD]

[TD=align: right]-2[/TD]

[TD=align: right]68[/TD]

[TD=align: right]-10[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD]GWU[/TD]

[TD=align: right]59[/TD]

[TD=align: right]58[/TD]

[TD=align: right]1[/TD]

[TD=align: right]63[/TD]

[TD=align: right]-5[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD]Stony Brook[/TD]

[TD=align: right]59[/TD]

[TD=align: right]58[/TD]

[TD=align: right]1[/TD]

[TD=align: right]63[/TD]

[TD=align: right]-5[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD]Virginia Tech[/TD]

[TD=align: right]56[/TD]

[TD=align: right]58[/TD]

[TD=align: right]-2[/TD]

[TD=align: right]59[/TD]

[TD=align: right]-1[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD]UC-Santa Cruz[/TD]

[TD=align: right]65[/TD]

[TD=align: right]58[/TD]

[TD=align: right]7[/TD]

[TD=align: right]53[/TD]

[TD=align: right]5[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD]GMU[/TD]

[TD=align: right]59[/TD]

[TD=align: right]64[/TD]

[TD=align: right]-5[/TD]

[TD=align: right]78[/TD]

[TD=align: right]-14[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD]CUNY[/TD]

[TD=align: right]59[/TD]

[TD=align: right]64[/TD]

[TD=align: right]-5[/TD]

[TD=align: right]68[/TD]

[TD=align: right]-4[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD]Illinois-Chicago[/TD]

[TD=align: right]65[/TD]

[TD=align: right]64[/TD]

[TD=align: right]1[/TD]

[TD=align: right]68[/TD]

[TD=align: right]-4[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD]Emory[/TD]

[TD=align: right]56[/TD]

[TD=align: right]64[/TD]

[TD=align: right]-8[/TD]

[TD=align: right]63[/TD]

[TD=align: right]1[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD]UC-Riverside[/TD]

[TD=align: right]72[/TD]

[TD=align: right]64[/TD]

[TD=align: right]8[/TD]

[TD=align: right]63[/TD]

[TD=align: right]1[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD]FSU[/TD]

[TD=align: right]59[/TD]

[TD=align: right]64[/TD]

[TD=align: right]-5[/TD]

[TD=align: right]59[/TD]

[TD=align: right]5[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD]Georgia[/TD]

[TD=align: right]65[/TD]

[TD=align: right]64[/TD]

[TD=align: right]1[/TD]

[TD=align: right]55[/TD]

[TD=align: right]9[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD]SMU[/TD]

[TD=align: right]72[/TD]

[TD=align: right]64[/TD]

[TD=align: right]8[/TD]

[TD=align: right]55[/TD]

[TD=align: right]9[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD]Houston[/TD]

[TD=align: right]72[/TD]

[TD=align: right]72[/TD]

[TD=align: right]0[/TD]

[TD=align: right]78[/TD]

[TD=align: right]-6[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD]Brandeis[/TD]

[TD=align: right]65[/TD]

[TD=align: right]72[/TD]

[TD=align: right]-7[/TD]

[TD=align: right]72[/TD]

[TD=align: right]0[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD]Missouri[/TD]

[TD=align: right]72[/TD]

[TD=align: right]72[/TD]

[TD=align: right]0[/TD]

[TD=align: right]63[/TD]

[TD=align: right]9[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD]Georgia State[/TD]

[TD=align: right]65[/TD]

[TD=align: right]72[/TD]

[TD=align: right]-7[/TD]

[TD=align: right]59[/TD]

[TD=align: right]13[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD]Albany-SUNY[/TD]

[TD=align: right]72[/TD]

[TD=align: right]76[/TD]

[TD=align: right]-4[/TD]

[TD=align: right]90[/TD]

[TD=align: right]-14[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD]Connecticut[/TD]

[TD=align: right]79[/TD]

[TD=align: right]76[/TD]

[TD=align: right]3[/TD]

[TD=align: right]78[/TD]

[TD=align: right]-2[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD]Kansas[/TD]

[TD=align: right]72[/TD]

[TD=align: right]76[/TD]

[TD=align: right]-4[/TD]

[TD=align: right]72[/TD]

[TD=align: right]4[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD]Clemson[/TD]

[TD=align: right]79[/TD]

[TD=align: right]76[/TD]

[TD=align: right]3[/TD]

[TD=align: right]72[/TD]

[TD=align: right]4[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD]Wyoming[/TD]

[TD=align: right]79[/TD]

[TD=align: right]76[/TD]

[TD=align: right]3[/TD]

[TD=align: right]68[/TD]

[TD=align: right]8[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD]Washington State[/TD]

[TD=align: right]72[/TD]

[TD][/TD]

[TD][/TD]

[TD=align: right]78[/TD]

[TD][/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD]Buffalo[/TD]

[TD=align: right]79[/TD]

[TD][/TD]

[TD][/TD]

[TD=align: right]90[/TD]

[TD][/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD]Alabama[/TD]

[TD=align: right]79[/TD]

[TD][/TD]

[TD][/TD]

[TD=align: right]90[/TD]

[TD][/TD]

[/TR]

[/TABLE]

[ledmonds049]

Largest changes

 

[TABLE=width: 158]

[TR]

[TD]School[/TD]

[TD]Move[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD]Georgia State[/TD]

[TD=align: right]13[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD]USC[/TD]

[TD=align: right]11[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD]Georgia[/TD]

[TD=align: right]9[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD]Notre Dame[/TD]

[TD=align: right]9[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD]SMU[/TD]

[TD=align: right]9[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD]Missouri[/TD]

[TD=align: right]9[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD]Wyoming[/TD]

[TD=align: right]8[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD]BC[/TD]

[TD=align: right]7[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD]Yale[/TD]

[TD=align: right]6[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD]Rice[/TD]

[TD=align: right]6[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD]Washington[/TD]

[TD=align: right]5[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD]UC-Santa Barbara[/TD]

[TD=align: right]5[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD]FSU[/TD]

[TD=align: right]5[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD]UC-Santa Cruz[/TD]

[TD=align: right]5[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD]Stanford[/TD]

[TD=align: right]4[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD]UC-Berkeley[/TD]

[TD=align: right]4[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD]Kansas[/TD]

[TD=align: right]4[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR]

[TD]Clemson[/TD]

[TD=align: right]4[/TD]

[/TR]

[/TABLE]

 

Claremont -32

George Mason -14

SUNY Albany -14

Kentucky -10

Florida -7

NC State -7

Chicago -6

ASU -6

Arizona -6

Houston -6

Minnesota -5

George Washington -5

Stony Brook -5

Georgetown -5

CUNY -4

Illinois-Chicago -4

[voble]

I think top10 is quite reasonable and close to the ranking in my mind.

[chateauheart]

So Chicago econ was somehow ranked #1 along with H/M/P for nearly ten of their weakest years in history, and now that they actually have a ton of funding and new hires, they're #7?

[Jayd]

Programs with +3 or -3 are not that significant. Programs with +5 are doing very well.

[JoeShmoe]

Programs with +3 or -3 are not that significant. Programs with +5 are doing very well.

I'm 100% sure the rankings are made from trolling on Econ job rumors. The survey hardly every gets >20% response rate which is painfully low. The questionarre is "what do you think of x school on a scale from 1 to 5. So I'd take the rankings with a grain of salt.

[DDQuanta]

They updated them every 4 year: 2009, 2013, and 2017. I think they conducted survey between 2013-2016 and use those data to publish ranking. That's probably the reason why Chicago falls down to 7 because List's new policy on admission was in effect around 2016.

[ksuga]

If that really is the case, mostly likely that's how it has always been, even when say chicago was no. 1. Unless you have any reason to believe survey responses were much higher before. These are still far more reliable than alternatives like ideas which puts places like cornell, duke, maryland below usc, vanderbilt and bc for instance.

I'm 100% sure the rankings are made from trolling on Econ job rumors. The survey hardly every gets >20% response rate which is painfully low. The questionarre is "what do you think of x school on a scale from 1 to 5. So I'd take the rankings with a grain of salt.

[pocketecon]

Apologies for digressing, but can anyone tell me what is the general consensus regarding the most trustworthy ranking methodologies these days ?

[specious]

Small differences across the Top 10 and drop off when you reach the boundary for the Top 12. Basically, don't sweat if you're admitted in this range but obviously it's an accomplishment to get admitted. I think the absolute scores of these programs all rose even if relative ranking changed.

 

This list + NYU is the generally accepted Top 10. And the Top 15 stops at rank 12 (but people generally also include UMN in this group).

 

I think buckets are more informative (i.e. Top 5, Top 10, Top 15, and Top 20).

[tm_member]

Apologies for digressing, but can anyone tell me what is the general consensus regarding the most trustworthy ranking methodologies these days ?

 

There is no easy way to rank PhD programs. It's all subjective. There are 3-7 schools that are at the very top of the profession - Princeton, Harvard, MIT are definitely in there. A case could be made for Yale, Chicago, Stanford, and Berkeley to be right there next to those three. If you get into any of these seven schools, you should not be considering anything outside those and your outcomes can be expected to be similar regardless of where you choose to go. Pick whichever one you like best from this top tier.

 

The next group (Tier 2) covers schools ranging from Northwestern, Maryland, Penn, and NYU, to schools like Michigan and Duke. Which school is best for you in that group depends on your interests. It also includes schools like BU, UCLA, Caltech, and Columbia. Again, if accepted in that group (but not anywhere better) you should just pick whichever one suits you.

 

Below that are a third tier of schools including Boston College, Pitt, Vanderbilt, UNC, Virginia, and so on. Job market outcomes from these places is not so great - it's not that the programs are poor quality, it's just hard when the schools above them have 200-300 students graduating each year. You really need to think long and hard about attending these kinds of programs. About half of graduates from these kinds of programs end up in tenure track academic positions and those that get academic positions generally place into lower ranked schools and LACs if they are good teachers. You need to have a low opportunity cost of attending in order for these programs to make sense. Again, conditional on not getting into any schools in Tier 2, pick whichever one you like best - your outcomes from attending Virginia instead of Arizona will not be "better" (but they will be different).

 

Below that level (outside of the top 50), it's tough to recommend attending a PhD unless you have very very specific reasons to do so.

[Kaysa]

These rankings get worse every iteration. I can't take this newest iteration seriously at all

[Isaac in my Madge]

There is no Caltech. :(

[behavingmyself]

There is no easy way to rank PhD programs. It's all subjective. There are 3-7 schools that are at the very top of the profession - Princeton, Harvard, MIT are definitely in there. A case could be made for Yale, Chicago, Stanford, and Berkeley to be right there next to those three. If you get into any of these seven schools, you should not be considering anything outside those and your outcomes can be expected to be similar regardless of where you choose to go. Pick whichever one you like best from this top tier.

 

The next group (Tier 2) covers schools ranging from Northwestern, Maryland, Penn, and NYU, to schools like Michigan and Duke. Which school is best for you in that group depends on your interests. It also includes schools like BU, UCLA, Caltech, and Columbia. Again, if accepted in that group (but not anywhere better) you should just pick whichever one suits you.

 

Below that are a third tier of schools including Boston College, Pitt, Vanderbilt, UNC, Virginia, and so on. Job market outcomes from these places is not so great - it's not that the programs are poor quality, it's just hard when the schools above them have 200-300 students graduating each year. You really need to think long and hard about attending these kinds of programs. About half of graduates from these kinds of programs end up in tenure track academic positions and those that get academic positions generally place into lower ranked schools and LACs if they are good teachers. You need to have a low opportunity cost of attending in order for these programs to make sense. Again, conditional on not getting into any schools in Tier 2, pick whichever one you like best - your outcomes from attending Virginia instead of Arizona will not be "better" (but they will be different).

 

Below that level (outside of the top 50), it's tough to recommend attending a PhD unless you have very very specific reasons to do so.

A couple of points where I disagree:

 

1) The divisions between tiers are not clear, and there are exceptions to picking a school in one tier over a school in another. I would for sure take a funded Northwestern offer over an unfunded Chicago offer, for example. Students with strong field preferences may also not want to follow the tier strategy, e.g. a student who is certain of wanting to do macro should pick BC over Caltech.

 

Perhaps an easier rule of thumb is that you need a strong rationale for picking a school more than 5 ranks below your highest-ranked admit in the US News rankings, and an exceptional rationale for picking a school more than 10 ranks below your highest-ranked admit. (These numbers might expand from 5 and 10 to 10 and 20 once you get to outside the top 50.)

 

2) I don't think it's not worth it to attend a PhD for students outside the top 50. I teach in a department outside the top 50 and I think most of our students are making a perfectly reasonable life choice. The point is just that those students need to be aware of what their likely job market outcomes would be, and not go into a PhD if they would only accept working at a research university.

[hkke]

This is good advice for steady state but one needs to be careful when there is a structural change. The placements are mainly a function of the advisor, not of the program one is graduating from. In steady state, they are correlated but when there is a structural change, one needs to know how the job market works to be able to make counterfactual predictions.

 

As the DGS of Rice, I started getting phone calls from good schools (e.g. University of Chicago, UPenn, Penn State, etc.) inquiring whether I could recommend any of our Rice students to tenure track positions at those schools as soon as I arrived at Rice 3 years ago. Of course I will not risk my reputation and make such recommendations when they are not warranted, but my prediction is that we will be able to make them in about 3-4 years.

 

In general, I recommend looking at the placement records of the faculty in trying to make predictions about future placements.

 

 

There is no easy way to rank PhD programs. It's all subjective. There are 3-7 schools that are at the very top of the profession - Princeton, Harvard, MIT are definitely in there. A case could be made for Yale, Chicago, Stanford, and Berkeley to be right there next to those three. If you get into any of these seven schools, you should not be considering anything outside those and your outcomes can be expected to be similar regardless of where you choose to go. Pick whichever one you like best from this top tier.

 

The next group (Tier 2) covers schools ranging from Northwestern, Maryland, Penn, and NYU, to schools like Michigan and Duke. Which school is best for you in that group depends on your interests. It also includes schools like BU, UCLA, Caltech, and Columbia. Again, if accepted in that group (but not anywhere better) you should just pick whichever one suits you.

 

Below that are a third tier of schools including Boston College, Pitt, Vanderbilt, UNC, Virginia, and so on. Job market outcomes from these places is not so great - it's not that the programs are poor quality, it's just hard when the schools above them have 200-300 students graduating each year. You really need to think long and hard about attending these kinds of programs. About half of graduates from these kinds of programs end up in tenure track academic positions and those that get academic positions generally place into lower ranked schools and LACs if they are good teachers. You need to have a low opportunity cost of attending in order for these programs to make sense. Again, conditional on not getting into any schools in Tier 2, pick whichever one you like best - your outcomes from attending Virginia instead of Arizona will not be "better" (but they will be different).

 

Below that level (outside of the top 50), it's tough to recommend attending a PhD unless you have very very specific reasons to do so.

Edited March 16, 2017 by hkke
typos

[upwardly mobile]

Below that level (outside of the top 50), it's tough to recommend attending a PhD unless you have very very specific reasons to do so.

An utterly ridiculous statement; the hubris is astounding.

[Jayd]

Although I would agree with you, it's not politically right. Actually, one of my professors told me this as well. He said "Any Phd program below 50 is not worth attending."

There is no easy way to rank PhD programs. It's all subjective. There are 3-7 schools that are at the very top of the profession - Princeton, Harvard, MIT are definitely in there. A case could be made for Yale, Chicago, Stanford, and Berkeley to be right there next to those three. If you get into any of these seven schools, you should not be considering anything outside those and your outcomes can be expected to be similar regardless of where you choose to go. Pick whichever one you like best from this top tier.

 

The next group (Tier 2) covers schools ranging from Northwestern, Maryland, Penn, and NYU, to schools like Michigan and Duke. Which school is best for you in that group depends on your interests. It also includes schools like BU, UCLA, Caltech, and Columbia. Again, if accepted in that group (but not anywhere better) you should just pick whichever one suits you.

 

Below that are a third tier of schools including Boston College, Pitt, Vanderbilt, UNC, Virginia, and so on. Job market outcomes from these places is not so great - it's not that the programs are poor quality, it's just hard when the schools above them have 200-300 students graduating each year. You really need to think long and hard about attending these kinds of programs. About half of graduates from these kinds of programs end up in tenure track academic positions and those that get academic positions generally place into lower ranked schools and LACs if they are good teachers. You need to have a low opportunity cost of attending in order for these programs to make sense. Again, conditional on not getting into any schools in Tier 2, pick whichever one you like best - your outcomes from attending Virginia instead of Arizona will not be "better" (but they will be different).

 

Below that level (outside of the top 50), it's tough to recommend attending a PhD unless you have very very specific reasons to do so.

[Kaysa]

An utterly ridiculous statement; the hubris is astounding.

tm_member is correct. It is very tough to justify going to a program outside the top 50. I have read over 5,000 jmps from students spanning every institution in the top 100. It is very obvious that there is a sharp drop in the mean-and I emphasize, mean-level of quality in jmps from candidates outside the top 50. When you read their jmps it is obvious that their training was not up to par. They submit jmps studying outdated questions using outdated methods.It is clear that they were never taught how to communicate their paper, answer questions properly, or pick out what was originally important about their topic. As a result the job market is terribly unkind to these candidates. Every time I see this I want to smack their adviser's for their incompetence.

[Erin]

An utterly ridiculous statement; the hubris is astounding.

Tough crowd. =|

[tm_member]

Tough crowd. =|

 

Indeed. Imagine what the reaction would have been if I had said something that was not carefully qualified! :-/

[tm_member]

An utterly ridiculous statement; the hubris is astounding.

 

My hubris is based on experience. It's not clear to me that I made the right call attending a program in that third tier even though I have a TT position at an R1 school now. I got pretty lucky given the outcomes of typical students from Tier 3 schools.

 

Moreover, the statement was pretty mild - students who attend a school below the top 50 should only do so if they have a very good reason to. That isn't really that strong of a claim against attending.

[tm_member]

This is good advice for steady state but one needs to be careful when there is a structural change. The placements are mainly a function of the advisor, not of the program one is graduating from. In steady state, they are correlated but when there is a structural change, one needs to know how the job market works to be able to make counterfactual predictions.

 

As the DGS of Rice, I started getting phone calls from good schools (e.g. University of Chicago, UPenn, Penn State, etc.) inquiring whether I could recommend any of our Rice students to tenure track positions at those schools as soon as I arrived at Rice 3 years ago. Of course I will not risk my reputation and make such recommendations when they are not warranted, but my prediction is that we will be able to make them in about 3-4 years.

 

In general, I recommend looking at the placement records of the faculty in trying to make predictions about future placements.

 

With respect, I disagree with your overall message. Things are done quite differently at Rice and I imagine the boost you expect to see to your students outcomes will be due to the careful and exhaustive selection of "diamonds in the rough." That is, without the level of effort you guys are putting into selecting a cohort, outcomes at Rice would be the same as schools of similar rank. Even with the exhaustive process, I would be very impressed if you can send a graduating student to a top 10 program even once within the next 10 years.

 

At most schools, they aren't putting in that effort. Moreover, the best advisors attract the best students within each cohort: it's not clear it's an advisor-driven rather than selection effect. Most likely it's a little of both, but my casual empirical observation is that it is mainly selection. That is, if the best advisor in a given school retired, and all else remained equal, outcomes would change imperceptibly.

Edited March 16, 2017 by tm_member

[tm_member]

A couple of points where I disagree:

 

1) The divisions between tiers are not clear, and there are exceptions to picking a school in one tier over a school in another. I would for sure take a funded Northwestern offer over an unfunded Chicago offer, for example. Students with strong field preferences may also not want to follow the tier strategy, e.g. a student who is certain of wanting to do macro should pick BC over Caltech.

 

Perhaps an easier rule of thumb is that you need a strong rationale for picking a school more than 5 ranks below your highest-ranked admit in the US News rankings, and an exceptional rationale for picking a school more than 10 ranks below your highest-ranked admit. (These numbers might expand from 5 and 10 to 10 and 20 once you get to outside the top 50.)

 

2) I don't think it's not worth it to attend a PhD for students outside the top 50. I teach in a department outside the top 50 and I think most of our students are making a perfectly reasonable life choice. The point is just that those students need to be aware of what their likely job market outcomes would be, and not go into a PhD if they would only accept working at a research university.

 

The divisions are clear enough for the purposes of choosing a program. Is there overlap at the margins? Sure. The point is that the overlap region is small enough and murky enough so that choosing a school at the bottom of tier 2 over a high ranked tier 3 school really doesn't matter much. My overall message (which you have clearly understood) is that 5-10 places in the rankings really won't matter much outside of the very top (as in, moving up the rankings from NYU or UCLA to MIT).

 

It also should go without saying among economists, but my "decision rules" assume all else equal. To make it even clearer, if you don't get funding, you should not attend any PhD program. There are exceptions to that rule for those with other sources of income but for most folks, waiting a year, working a job, improving their profile, and applying to slightly lower ranker schools will be more sensible.

 

Again, I didn't say it's not worth it to go to those programs: I said that it's tough to recommend attending them unless there are good reasons. Students who are in a program outside the top 50 might either have already heeded this advice (they are the ones who have a very good reason to pursue that route and know the consequences). Revealed preference suggests you are right, they are not making unreasonable life choices. However, you are inferring their utility for them.

 

At the same time, looking only at those who are attending programs outside the top 50 is not really a test of my claim. My claim was that students who are admitted to these kinds of programs should only attend if they have a good reason to do so, have no better options, have a fairly low opportunity cost, and know the likely outcomes. Looking only at those who do ultimately choose to attend those programs is not a valid test of my claim.

[hkke]

Agreed, selection matters, but when discussing which school to attend, the decision is conditional on being admitted to schools at various ranks.

 

Conditional on the quality of the student, having a caring and available advisor who is active in research is key to having a high quality dissertation.

 

And conditional on the quality of the student and the quality of the dissertation, having a proactive advisor who is active and respected in research is the key for good placements. Otherwise, it is easy to be overlooked when the recruiting officer in one department calls up the placement officer in another department and asks "who is your best student on the market this year" or "who is your best student in such and such field".

 

I am being a bit vague in saying "active in research" -- I would not attempt it to quantify it precisely but it includes regularly publishing in top journals, being invited to talks, holding editorial positions in reputable journals, etc. etc.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

With respect, I disagree with your overall message. Things are done quite differently at Rice and I imagine the boost you expect to see to your students outcomes will be due to the careful and exhaustive selection of "diamonds in the rough." That is, without the level of effort you guys are putting into selecting a cohort, outcomes at Rice would be the same as schools of similar rank. Even with the exhaustive process, I would be very impressed if you can send a graduating student to a top 10 program even once within the next 10 years.

 

At most schools, they aren't putting in that effort. Moreover, the best advisors attract the best students within each cohort: it's not clear it's an advisor-driven rather than selection effect. Most likely it's a little of both, but my casual empirical observation is that it is mainly selection. That is, if the best advisor in a given school retired, and all else remained equal, outcomes would change imperceptibly.