<p>
Yes, anything that isn’t “NOTRE DAME #1 SCHOOL FTW@!$!##$%!#$!#!” is meaningless drivel. But I’ll abstain from arguing with you again considering you can’t even formulate a logical argument.</p>
<p>shanka, stop your nonsense, the only thing that Notre Dame is known for is its Football teams</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Cocktail Party Talk</p>
<p>Party number one
Harold: Hi, I’am Harold where did you get your degree from?</p>
<p>Yale Alumnus: Yale</p>
<p>Harold: Wow, I am impressed - that is such a great academic school, you must be brilliant. So many Yale alumni have been among the most successful people in the U.S.</p>
<p>Party number two
Harold: Hi, I am Harold where did you get your degree from?</p>
<p>Shanka: Notre Dame.</p>
<p>Harold: Wow, I am impressed. Incredible football school. What position did you play on the football team?..Is Charlie Weiss that tough during practices as they say he is?</p>
<p>UVa is NOT very good in sciences overall and not at all in biochem.</p>
<p>I was waiting for you to respond barrons. :-)</p>
<p>
More ad hominem attacks disguised as pathetic attempts at an argument yet still devoid of any intelligence whatsoever.</p>
<p>Looks like no one cares about Duke after all! ;)</p>
<p>barrons (any relation to the company?), care to elaborate? Presenting a conclusion on a questionable issue before/without presenting the evidence and *reasoning<a href=“most%20important”>/i</a> is useless.</p>
<p>I wan’t too surprised at this list. Michigan has long been an international powerhouse, especially in popular science (which this study, seemingly, was concentrated on. So are MIT and Harvard, the former in the hard sciences and the latter in humanities.</p>
<p>
USNWR ranks UVa’s graduate science programs in the 40’s:
Biological Science #46
Chemistry #45
Physics #40
Biochemistry unranked</p>
<p>NRC ranks UVa’s science programs in the 40’s:
Chemistry #43
Physics #44
Cell Biology #39
Biochem & Molecular Bio #57</p>
<p>Why has no one jumped to the gun to say how bad W&M’s science programs are and how incorrect my teacher’s opinion is? for they’re ranked 130 on USNWR’s list.</p>
<p>a couple of things to note:</p>
<p>1) This ranking is good in that it uses a simple methodology, but it still tells you very little other than how many times a name appears and is thus a mediocre but valid estimator for lay name recognition.</p>
<p>2) The ranking is volatile as hell from year to year, and I would withhold any significant judgement such as saying school X is better than school Y, because X is 10 spots higher. MIT (for example) went from #16 to #2 in one year.</p>
<p>^^^ @confidentialcoll, another thing should be noticed is that this ranking is based on quantity not quality. </p>
<p>For example, the appearance of UMich on newspapers of a small town is totally negligible, compared with that in Avatar (Stanford T-shirt), in The Shawshank Redemption(Harvard & Yale), or in Iron Man (MIT).</p>
<p>rjk, congratulations on the Michigan placing</p>
<p>OMGOMGOMG Notre Dame isnt #1…flawed ranking system obviously…stupid elitists!!!</p>
<p>Don’t hate on UVA just because it’s better than UMich. This list is ridiculous… UMich over Stanford? What a joke. This source is totally unreliable.</p>
<p>“Don’t hate on UVA just because it’s better than UMich.”</p>
<p>Not in the sciences and engineering. Or the arts, humanities, etc. etc. etc. etc.</p>
<p>I don’t think this list is meant to be interpreted as a statement of quality of a given school. Rather, it should be considered in terms of what it is: the news profile given to a school, and it is absolutely true that a school like Michigan generates a lot of news. MIT and Harvard will naturally be near the top. A school like Chicago, with a strong focus on the social sciences and humanities will also rise, given the fact that their findings likely are interesting to news sources.</p>
<p>Also schools with graduate programs are going to have a huge advantage here.</p>
<p>^Right. As will schools with notable and powerful alumni. I wonder how Princeton, for example, would have placed if this survey were conducted during the Sotomayor nomination process.</p>