Post by sader1970 on Dec 12, 2019 8:48:58 GMT -5
Of course I kid.
The reality though was “in my day” (think Seth Meyers slipping on his sweater sitting by the fireside with his pipe), there was no USN&WR college rankings and everyone had his/her own opinion of which were the best colleges and universities in the country but a “given” that as a group, the Ivies were the best as well as the “little Ivies” and individual schools like M.I.T. and generally located in the Northeast and more specifically, New England.
The schools that were the charter members of the PL were a notch below but still better than almost any but the ones noted above. Yes, some exceptions like Stanford.
When the first USN&WR rankings came out, HC was categorized as “very highly selective.”
I make no bones about it. When HC accepted women and did not increase acceptances and enrollment in any meaningful way, that cut male acceptances and enrollment by about half. I probably wouldn’t have made the cut if I tried 5-10 years later than 1970.
I had more than one conversation with Fr. McFarland and he had nothing but disdain for college rankings and felt too many schools were “gaming” the rankings and said that HC would NEVER do that and would remain true to its mission.
As I recall, among other issues with the rankings was our having theology courses that somehow inured to hurt the rankings. Not sure if that somehow played into the change to “Religious Studies” years later.
While not having similar specific discussions with Fr. Boroughs, in the times I have heard him talk in general terms and ancillary topics, I believe his thoughts and philosophy towards college rankings are very similar or identical to Fr. McFarland’s.
Abandoning the required SATs (all athletes have to submit SATs or ACTs by NCAA fiat) and making them optional has opened HC up to criticism that HC is “gaming” the rankings. I do believe that TPTB at HC, including and especially Admissions, truly believe that standardized tests are biased and using them as a primary admissions tool runs counter to the College’s mission.
I have met dozens and dozens of current students over the last 20 years and would say, very subjectively, that they are at least as capable and maybe more capable than the students in my day.
Then, again, I probably couldn’t gain admission today, so who am I to judge?
The reality though was “in my day” (think Seth Meyers slipping on his sweater sitting by the fireside with his pipe), there was no USN&WR college rankings and everyone had his/her own opinion of which were the best colleges and universities in the country but a “given” that as a group, the Ivies were the best as well as the “little Ivies” and individual schools like M.I.T. and generally located in the Northeast and more specifically, New England.
The schools that were the charter members of the PL were a notch below but still better than almost any but the ones noted above. Yes, some exceptions like Stanford.
When the first USN&WR rankings came out, HC was categorized as “very highly selective.”
I make no bones about it. When HC accepted women and did not increase acceptances and enrollment in any meaningful way, that cut male acceptances and enrollment by about half. I probably wouldn’t have made the cut if I tried 5-10 years later than 1970.
I had more than one conversation with Fr. McFarland and he had nothing but disdain for college rankings and felt too many schools were “gaming” the rankings and said that HC would NEVER do that and would remain true to its mission.
As I recall, among other issues with the rankings was our having theology courses that somehow inured to hurt the rankings. Not sure if that somehow played into the change to “Religious Studies” years later.
While not having similar specific discussions with Fr. Boroughs, in the times I have heard him talk in general terms and ancillary topics, I believe his thoughts and philosophy towards college rankings are very similar or identical to Fr. McFarland’s.
Abandoning the required SATs (all athletes have to submit SATs or ACTs by NCAA fiat) and making them optional has opened HC up to criticism that HC is “gaming” the rankings. I do believe that TPTB at HC, including and especially Admissions, truly believe that standardized tests are biased and using them as a primary admissions tool runs counter to the College’s mission.
I have met dozens and dozens of current students over the last 20 years and would say, very subjectively, that they are at least as capable and maybe more capable than the students in my day.
Then, again, I probably couldn’t gain admission today, so who am I to judge?