<p>uc riverside > uc davis</p>
<p>hahahaha</p>
<p>WHAT?????? SMU 13???? CRAZY, No way... SMU's credentials are not even as good as underrated UTD. UTD has more of its students in the top 10% in high school and a higher SAT score expectation...
I'm still disappointed with UTs ranking, it seems so much better then what all these rankings say.
Some of the UCs are more rightfully ranked in my opinion, they are good schools(I actually do want to go to them) but not uber top tier like they are in USNWR...
I've seen lists with Texas A&M ranked one... so this is not so off...
But even then some, they use different things to rank. So they may have excluded the strong spot of MIT and the weak spot of SMU</p>
<p>
[quote]
Whatever, hopefully these rankings will ring true for some people, casting doubt on USNews.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I agree. People put far too much stock in the USNWR rankings. I think it's important for people to see that those rankings are not hard and fast, and that different criteria yield different results. Yes, SMU seems like an anomaly in the midst of the others, but the rest on this list are merely reshuffled from the more famous list. UPenn, for example, drops much lower on this list. Does it mean that one ranking is wrong? Absolutely not. Both can be "right" because they value different aspects. The important thing to note is that UPenn remains in the top 20 of all universities nationwide, no matter which criteria are used. For this reason (and others), many on CC have expressed a wish for ranking tiers instead of individual numerical rankings. A university that slips a few spots in USNWR hasn't suddenly deteriorated; it's the same university that it was the year before.</p>
<p>I have been thinking about the use of RMP and Who's Who as quantifiable measures. RMP bothers me the most because some universities have internal professor rating sites that outsiders cannot access and others simply don't have a student body that uses it. While perhaps using this is on the right track to evaluating the quality of education, it certainly shouldn't be used as a reliable source. Who's Who is a different matter. While an invitation to supply an entry comes with a sales pitch to buy the expensive volumes, not everyone receives one. In fact, most people do NOT get one; first, Who's Who has to learn about the person. So, while being included in Who's Who is not an honor, it is a measure of public visibility.</p>
<p>I understand why rankings exist and how some colleges, particularly the LACs, have benefited from exposure. Still, high school students and their parents should take rankings with a grain of salt.</p>
<p>
[quote]
1. Student evaluations posted on Ratemyprofessors.com (a nine-year-old site with 6.8 million student-generated evaluations)
[/quote]
LOL</p>
<p>
[quote]
4. Vocational success using Who's Who in America ("Though imperfect, it is the only comprehensive listing of professional achievement that includes undergraduate affiliations")
[/quote]
LMFAO</p>
<p>
[quote]
LMFAO
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Why? Because Duke is 15th? Right.</p>
<p>There's no need to feel inferior beefs. I'm sure you are looking forward to those fun Cranium and Scrabble gaming sessions on the weekends at Chicago.</p>
<p>^^^^
As someone who has committed to Duke this year, even I feel nauseated reading his post</p>
<p>FYI, the CCAP rankings of national universities as published by Forbes.com is inaccurate as to CCAP's actual ranking of SMU. Forbes.com lists SMU as 13 when, in fact, it's ranked by CCAP as 43. Take a look at CCAP's own list at the bottom of its own home page:The</a> Center for College Affordability and Productivity. As you will see, the top 20 schools now begin with Harvard and end with Brandeis. BTW, I confirmed the accuracy of the CCAP-published list by email with CCAP.</p>
<p>Interesting that the Forbes article doesn't even correctly represent the latest word from the Center for College Affordability & Productivity. Thanks for the direct link to that organization's ranking.</p>
<p>Methodology: </p>
<p>America's</a> Best Colleges 2008 - Forbes.com </p>
<p>Rankings: </p>
<p>Americas</a> Best Colleges - Forbes.com </p>
<p>I'm sure this link will be posted multiple times. I'll move all recurrences to this thread.</p>
<p>stanford = fail ;)</p>
<p>Hahaha, using ratemyprofessors.com as a source of info. Speaks to the credibility of that ranking...</p>
<p>
[quote]
stanford = fail
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Clearly, Wabash College, Centre College, USMA, NU, etc. are superior.</p>
<p>Wabash over Stanford?!</p>
<p>
[quote]
Interesting that the Forbes article doesn't even correctly represent the latest word from the Center for College Affordability & Productivity. Thanks for the direct link to that organization's ranking.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I assume that such mistake has been corrected. Now, we have an updated link to the CRAP ranking from that "organization."</p>
<p>What a complete joke!</p>
<p>Generally speaking, big state schools performed poorly: the University of Wisconsin, Madison, ranked 335th; the University of Texas, Austin, 215th; and the University of Minnesota 524th. California public schools scored relatively well, with the flagship Berkley campus coming in 73rd place.</p>
<p>Small liberal arts schools shine in our rankings, probably due to both the quality of their faculty and the personal attention they can provide. Williams and Swarthmore both rank in the top five, while Pomona, Smith, Middlebury and Amherst all come in the top 20, ahead of such schools as Stanford (23rd) and Brown (27th).</p>
<p>
[quote]
To answer these questions, the staff at CCAP (mostly college students themselves) gathered data from a variety of sources. They based 25% of the rankings on 7 million student evaluations of courses and instructors, as recorded on the Web site RateMyProfessors.com. Another 25%depends on how many of the school's alumni, adjusted for enrollment, are listed among the notable people in Who's Who in America.
[/quote]
ROFL.
[quote]
Small liberal arts schools shine in our rankings, probably due to both the quality of their faculty and the personal attention they can provide.
[/quote]
Apparently, the quality of faculty and personal attention given at #50 Hampden-Sydney College (ACT range 20-26) justifies it being placed 71 spots above #121 Cornell University :rolleyes:</p>
<p>
[quote]
The list also suggests that some schools--the University of Pennsylvania (61st), Georgetown (76th), Cornell (121st) and Dartmouth (127th)--may be living a bit off of their reputations. Graduates of these schools typically ran up large debts; at most of them, notably Dartmouth, students are not particularly happy with the quality of instruction.
[/quote]
Funny, you never seem to hear Dartmouth (or Penn, Georgetown, or Cornell) students complaining about the general quality of instruction. Not much credibility here.</p>
<p>Some of those dismissing these rankings might want to take a closer look as Wash U, the most hated college on CC, is ranked 146th by Forbes. Hey, you Wash U bashers finally got what you wanted. You should be celebrating this ranking. :)</p>
<p>I agree with those who point out the many limitations of these rankings, but I like that they are trying to give voice to groups/data points that have too long been shut out of the college rankings business, namely students and the matter of student outcomes. It's hard to do, but this is what A LOT of students and families care about and it's a heckuva lot more relevant to their lives than the archaic PA ratings of USNWR.</p>
<p>In particular, I liked Forbes's public college rankings because this is one of the few rankings that I've seen that gives some appreciation to the quality of individual coming out of our country's military academies. Here are how some of those colleges fared in the rankings of public institutions:</p>
<ol>
<li><p>Army (US Military Academy)</p></li>
<li><p>Air Force (US Air Force Academy)</p></li>
<li><p>Navy (US Naval Academy)</p></li>
<li><p>Virginia Military Institute</p></li>
<li><p>Coast Guard (US Coast Guard Academy)</p></li>
<li><p>The Citadel</p></li>
</ol>
<p>Ex-military academies, here are the Top 10 Publics. Those in academia have their favorites (and some are on here), but for students interested in public universities that are most interested in the undergraduate classroom experience and student outcomes, I think that this might be pretty accurate.</p>
<ol>
<li> New College</li>
<li> U Virginia</li>
<li> William & Mary</li>
<li> U North Carolina</li>
<li> UC Berkeley</li>
<li> UCLA</li>
<li> SUNY-Binghampton</li>
<li> St. Mary's</li>
<li> Mary Washington College</li>
<li>U Illinois</li>
</ol>
<p>Has anyone every used rate my professor. com site before?</p>
<p>It doesn't have all my professors....but in general, it is pretty accurate and in line about everyone says about the quality of instruction, clarity, difficulty, and teaching style of each professor.</p>
<p>Like this is pretty interesting information, it doesn't amount to much, buts its interesting because I believe ratemyprofessor is an incredible resource, and I've picked classes and avoided professors because of it.</p>
<p>To create a ''ranking'' out of rate my professor is kinda just plain dumb. It was never meant to be a source for rankings and if so, there has to be a more consistent way of conducting is as not all students from all schools use ratemyprofessors are prolifically as others.</p>
<p>Using rate my professor is, with all due respect, bull.<br>
On the other hand, I find the other 75% of the ranking to be legit.
I would be curious to see how exactly rate my professor was used.
Were ratings weighted or not?</p>