<p>tom,
As you know, I collect and present lots of data. Usually in threads such as this, my objective is to put the data out there in a logical fashion and then let folks read it and interpret as they see fit. I may often have a view on what the data suggests, but I am continually surprised at the sometimes unconventional ways that other folks will see it. This thread and your reaction is a good example of this as I didn’t expect such a strongly negative viewpoint. I think we have agreed on many, many topics across CC-land. </p>
<p>Anyway, I’m trying not to bring my own prejudice too greatly into the original presentation of the data and such was the case with 4-year. I happen to think it is very important and deserves inclusion in the USNWR rankings methodology, but many have posted reasonable objections to the usefulness of this. </p>
<p>This is a discussion forum and my hope with this and other threads is to spur discussion and get some new thinking applied to the college search process. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn’t and frequently it leaves me as the target of posters who feel that their school’s standing is maligned by the data. </p>
<p>I know I’ll never be able to satisfy all of the people all of the time and that is not a realistic goal. You may not like this thread, but I suspect you’ll like it when I create on the Tuition & Fees as U Florida looks great then (and then the U Michigan folks will rain down on me with more false charges). </p>
<p>Anyway, I appreciate your perspective and contributions, even I don’t always agree with it. But if you don’t like my data, I respectfully ask that you try to improve on it rather than attack the messenger. Thanks.</p>
<p>Well, before you get on your high horse again about how smart engineering students are relative to everyone else, take another look at the data you yourself cite. Math/physics, philosophy, and economics (in that order) consistently outrank engineering in average LSAT scores, as well as MCAT and GRE scores. Other majors consistently ranking near, at, or above engineering are international relations, government service, anthropology/geography, history, and English. Lots of humanities and social sciences in that group. Don’t get me wrong: I think engineers as a group are pretty smart. But so are a lot of other people in other disciplines, many in the social sciences and humanities.</p>
<p>I have quite enjoyed reading this thread. Thanks to all who participated, and let’s keep the debate going!</p>
<p>My own conclusion is that this data is yet another example of how one must do one’s homework about any college or university. A low four-year graduation rate is not very troubling at a school such as the University of Waterloo, which has an enormously popular five-year coop program (with up to two years of paid work experience). However, it could be a sign of real trouble at some other institutions.</p>
<p>Hah, this is so true. If we want a web page built, we can hire an undergrad from the CS department and all we need to do is put up a flyer. Those kids are vastly more capable than the “professional” web designers we’ve tried to bring in over the last couple of years.</p>
<p>Uh, at the end of the day, you complained that hawkette presented data in a manner not to your liking. But, as I said, that’s not her job. You’re not her boss. You would prefer that she not present the data at all? She is perfectly free to present the data in any manner she deems fit. Some data is always better than none at all.</p>
<p>I actually don’t agree with this at all. Data can sometimes be cherry-picked to create a misleading impression—and thereby to disinform, not to inform. Deliberately misleading people with biased data is akin to lying—and that’s worse, IMO, than just keeping your trap shut. I’m not accusing anyone of that here. Just sayin’ . . .</p>
<p>However, reasonably smart people can many times look for bias/misleadings in the data. It’s called analysis. So some data is always better - that way, it can be deconstructed to achieve certain ends. It would be very naive for us to all accept all data compiled by person x, who probably doesn’t care about your specific interests, to be objectively accurate.</p>
<p>Yeah, but who’s going to decide whether the impression is ‘misleading’? Information that is ‘misleading’ may simply mean information that happens to lead people to conclusions that you personally don’t like. Totalitarian governments suppress information precisely to prevent citizens from being ‘misled’ to unwanted conclusions, such as the need for government reform. </p>
<p>The bottom line is this. If you don’t like how somebody is presenting information, then it is your job to present the information in a different manner. Just because you don’t like what somebody says doesn’t mean that he shouldn’t be allowed to say it.</p>
<p>They have very wealthy student bodies so the kids don’t have to work. Indeed, many other privates are similar.</p>
<p>I would submit that is one of the biggest reasons that many publics have lower four-year grad rates: kids take a minimum course load so they can work half-full time.</p>
<p>OK-I’m jumping in re: bluebayou’s post and why Notre Dame in particular has a very high graduation rate. I believe it ranks 1-3 on this, depending on the study. Part of it may be that there is a wealthy student body and all that it entails. However, my kid isn’t in that contingent and he’s going to graduate on time and I know why. He works plenty of hours too.</p>
<p>ND works VERY hard to ensure that their kids graduate at an astoundingly high rate in 4 years. From day 1, students meet with advisors to make sure their hours are on track, they are getting the classes they need to fulfill major and gen ed requirements, their grades are high enough, see if they need help in anything, etc. One-on-one tutoring, as well as writing centers and group study, is available to all who seek it. Professors are available and happy to help. He hasn’t found an exception to this. Kids who are on academic probation meet once a week with their advisor and attend a class throughout the semester that helps them get “back on track.” They are watched. There is incredible support at every level to enable the student to graduate on time.</p>
<p>S2 is at a regional public. Not quite the same story. Not even close. Phone calls are not returned, difficulty meeting with advisors, they have switched his advisor 3 times THIS year, blahblahblah. Can’t get into the classes he needs to graduate. ad naseum.</p>
<p>All of that may translate back into money, but I don’t think a wealthy student body explains it entirely. It’s also very affected by how hard the university works on this as part of their mission.</p>
<p>Suppressing information is only half of what totalitarian governments do. The other half is to pick through information selectively to present a biased, misleading, one-sided version of events and their causes and consequences. It’s called “propaganda.” How do we tell whether it’s propaganda or a good-faith effort to tell the whole truth (which itself will be subject to some unseen biases and filters, to be sure, but that’s not to say all stories are equally valid)? Well, there’s no sure-fire method. But one way is to call the propagandist on it, if you think there’s deliberate bias in the way the data is being presented. That’s not to call for suppression of speech. It is to call into question unfounded assumptions and (possibly deliberate) omissions of germane facts and data.</p>
<p>ya gotta learn to not take things personally on an anonymous board. Your kid is just one of thousands, and it’s the thousands that make up their reported data. </p>
<p>For ND specifically, out of ~8400 undergrads, 186 are Pell Grant recipients, (~2%). Contrast that with any UC campus which has 33% Pell Grantees, or UMich which is ~16%…Boston College is ~65% full pay, meaning that 2/3rds of the students hail from the top 5% of income in the country – top 5%!</p>
<p>Of course this is not meant to single out those specific colleges because they are no different than the vast majority of private colleges, including Harvard, Yale and Stanford: they mostly have full pay students which, by definition, puts their families in the top 5% category. And, IMO, it’s therefore easier to get in and get out. Of course, the financial aid is usually better, too.</p>
<p>The true way to call out the propagandist is to provide another version of the facts. Again, it is through the aggregation and weighing of a wide variety of viewpoints by which we can arrive at a full view of the issue. </p>
<p>Hawkette has provided her presentation of the facts. Those who dislike its implications can present their own. If you think that somebody has omitted certain facts, then by all means, present those omissions. If you think certain assumptions are unfounded, then present different assumptions. If you think that one viewpoint is slanted, then present the other view. But nobody is helped by mere whining about one presentation of the facts without additional information.</p>
<p>I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again: schools should be providing full financial aid so that their students don’t have to work while studying. </p>
<p>Otherwise, don’t admit those students. Nobody benefits when schools admit students who are unable to graduate in a timely fashion, if at all, because they have to work. Better to admit a smaller cohort of students and provide better aid to that smaller cohort.</p>
<p>bluebayou–?? I"m not taking anything personally. I’m simply stating some of the processes which ND uses to ensure that their students graduate on time. I would bet that other schools with similar graduation rates employ similar techniques.</p>
<p>Sakky,
Thanks for your supporting comments. I appreciate it.</p>
<p>For years, I have been catching all kinds of flak from a multitude of U Michigan partisans for sometimes posting data that compares their school to other colleges around the USA. At first, I was surprised by the venom of their attacks and their expressed, absolute certainty of their superiority. I waited for a fact-based, counter-argument that would support their claims. </p>
<p>Well, several years have passed and I’m still waiting. After all of this waiting, the answer is abundantly clear. They don’t have a counter argument. Instead, their entire strategy is based on killing the messenger. I’ve come to expect it and it’s obvious that they want to shut me up for daring to suggest that they have been wearing rose-colored glasses all these years. </p>
<p>I truly think that U Michigan is a nice school and probably a great place for many of their students (I’ve never claimed otherwise), but the U Michigan folks need to get out more and open their eyes and their ears to the reality of the American college scene. Quit targeting me, stop reading your own press clippings, visit some other colleges, do some homework of your own and learn to appreciate the fact that there are many terrific colleges all over the country.</p>
<p>I don’t remember the Michigan folks saying it was the only good school around. Just better than you say Hawkette. And many academics agree with the Michigan folks. </p>
<p>People don’t want to read that their school isn’t as good as that school, or told information about their school that doesn’t jive with their experiences.</p>
<p>The same as you don’t like the south trashed, or southern schools not getting respect.</p>
<p>And you really should read “Outliers”. Chapters 3 and 4 especially.</p>
<p>Did it ever occur to you that people at many, many other schools feel just as strongly about their school and likewise don’t like being told information that doesn’t jibe with their experiences? </p>
<p>Do you really think that this only happens to U Michigan people? Your blindness is inestimable. </p>
<p>As for data, I know that you don’t like it. I mean, who wants to learn things that you don’t want to know.</p>
<p>I agree with the sentiments of your first question. I wrote it, didn’t I? Post#118. I wasn’t just talking about Michigan. </p>
<p>As far as your data, your data doesn’t prove anything. Well, it might to you, but it doesn’t to me and many others.</p>
<p>Have you ever heard of the threshold effect? Once you have a certain IQ, it’s high enough. There are brilliant people with 140 IQs. You don’t have to have a 180 IQ. There are plenty of smart people with 120 IQs. </p>
<p>The same with SAT scores. Above a certain score, it’s high enough.</p>
<p>And if there are enough smart people at a school, the threshold is met. Everybody at a school doesn’t have to be smart. Maybe not even most. Enough so the classes can challenge you to the max and there are fellow students that can challenge you and spur you to great heights.</p>