<p>Jesuit</a> Colleges and Universities Among Americas Best in U.S. News & World Report Rankings</p>
<p>Nice to get the recognition…finally…more evidence of the declining WASP estate? Why, there isn’t even ONE on the US Supreme Court anymore. Would you like to know the religious affiliation of the nine justices? Okay, I’ll tell you. It’s six Catholics and three Jews. Will wonders ever cease?!</p>
<p>Not sure what your intent is with that remark but its not exactly helpful whatever it is. Fwiw, most Jesuit colleges are 60/40 Catholic to Non-Catholic student ratio. Which includes many diverse minorities and many so called “wasps.” Its also true that many formerly exclusive “wasp” schools (such as the Ivy League and Patriot League) have a high percentage of Catholic students. Ditto for formerly Southern Baptist Schools like Wake Forest. </p>
<p>The Jesuits do an excellent job of educating the whole person and instilling in them a sense of justice, regardless of their political leanings or career paths. Jesuit ethos and ethics are highly prized by employers. </p>
<p>But to answer your question (comment) directly I believe the only Jesuit educated Supreme Court Justice is Justice Thomas, who attended Holy Cross. (Correct me if I am wrong.)</p>
<p>:-)</p>
<p>sovereign,</p>
<p>My only point was that for a long time the slant on Catholic education has been that it’s not quite up to ‘standard’. This was, ostensibly, due to the “weakness” of science offerings in Catholic colleges, since Catholics supposedly could not ‘see’ beyond their absolute beliefs, thereby rendering them less than fully capable students of science. In reality this was not true, of course, but it sounded plausible. The real reason for the shunning of Catholic education was (this is, by the way, not fully in the past) due to the enmity which existed between Catholics and Protestants over several centuries and was the prerogative of Protestants to promulgate such a view since their ‘ways’ had been established in this country long before Catholics got a foothold here.</p>
<p>Were it the other way around, perhaps we’d be hearing how ‘second-rate’ Protestant education is.</p>
<p>At any rate, I agree with your assessment of the Jesuits.</p>
<p>Okay. Thanks for that explanation. I was confused by your comment. And yes its very true. The other truth is that Jesuit colleges were established in inner cities to educate Irish, German and Italian immigrants who were denied entry to the Ivy Leagues and other private schools. And became themselves Catholic Ivies. </p>
<p>While discrimination still exists, its also true that Catholics now routinely gain admission to the best schools in the country.</p>
<p>"…Catholics now routinely gain admission to the best schools in the country. "</p>
<p>Yes, and some of those ‘best schools’ are Catholic!</p>
<p>In my travels the other day, I picked up the Omaha paper. There was an interesting article about Creighton. Apparently, there is a strong connection between Creighton and Hawaii. This year, Creighton enrolled about 80 freshmen from Hawaii, continuing a pattern that began during and after WWII. While many other universities refused to admit Hawaiian students of Japanese ancestry at that time, Creighton did not discriminate. Thus, began a Creighton-Hawaii connection that continues to the present. Though Creighton maintains a strong recruiting effort in Hawaii, many potential applicants know of the school through word of mouth, and many health care professionals in Hawaii were educated at Creighton.</p>
<p>leanid:</p>
<p>thanks for your historical perspective.</p>
<p>While there is undoubtedly some bias against religious schools (which includes BYU), today I’m convinced that the issue is not sciences (Georgetown has a fine med school), but ‘vocational’ majors which hinder rankings. At BC, for example, over half of the undergrads are biz, nursing, educ & comm majors. (BC argues that comm is liberal arts and it maybe in Chestnut Hill, but most other colleges don’t consider it as such.) Thus, less than half of BC’s undergrads are traditional ‘liberal arts’ types. And IMO, it is the liberal arts that add heft to prestige, particularly research in the sciences.</p>
<p>Georgetown also has a large undergrad biz program, as well as Nursing. But those are a much small % of the total undergrad pop than at BC.</p>
<p>Just my $0.02.</p>
<p>I think I’m going to be sick.</p>
<p>“AJCU President Rev. Gregory F. Lucey, SJ said, ‘Many of our institutions rose in the rankings, which reflects the hard work and dedication that presidents, administrators, faculty and staff have put into making their schools such excellent places for learning.’”</p>
<p>He should know better. The USNWR rankings have NOTHING to do with schools being “excellent places for learning.” They are prestige rankings, nothing else.</p>
<p>annasdad…of course not. Its just a bow to the rankings king. Nothing more or less. But he also said ALL of the Jesuit schools did well and I think you are putting too much emphasis on the literal wording there. </p>
<p>Fr. Lucey is a fine man and a very experienced educator and administrator. Its all good.</p>
<p>Holy Cross has 3 affiliations on the current Supreme Court with 1 alum, 1 spouse, and 1 parent. Roll Call also rated Holy Cross 1st among all schools with most alums in Congress per capita.</p>
<p>Don’t know about HC’s alums in Congress, but HC should be embarrassed to claim its SCOTUS alum.</p>
<p>zap, that is your opinion. To others, Justice Clarence Thomas is a fine jurist and welcome addition to the Court these last 20 years or so. This is not a political board.</p>
<p>bluebayou,</p>
<p>You know as well as I that “vocational” refers to an entirely different realm of training (as in blue-collar jobs) than nursing, which is ‘pre-professional’; education (since when is teaching not a profession?); and management (which includes a good number of courses involving math, formulas, statistics, not to mention economics – all intellectually challenging). Furthermore, you may not know this but there is a core requirement in all of BC’s schools that draws substantially from the liberal arts, because it is part of the Jesuit mission to produce well-rounded (meaning well-educated) graduates, and the lideral arts is the path to that goal. This, by the way, includes the much maligned ‘communications’ major.</p>
<p>Do not think for a moment that BC’s schools of education, nursing and management are turning out one-dimensional graduates.</p>
<p>“research in the sciences”? Check out what the chemistry, physics and biology departments are doing at BC. You may be pleasantly suprised.</p>
<p>Also, where in the US News ranking does it it equate “prestige” with the traditional liberal arts. That may have been the case a couple of generations ago but I feel it is more all-encompassing now.</p>
<p>Do “vocational” programs offered in the School of Nursing, Graduate School of Education, Annenberg School for Communication and the Wharton School hinder Penn’s rankings?</p>
<p>^^^ - touche!</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Sorry leanid, but presume to tell me what I “know”. My speculation, (and it is pure speculation), is based on reading prelaw books that are frequently quoted on cc. Those that supposedly know, tend to break up majors into liberal arts and other (“vocational”). And those that supposedly know say that if you want admission to a top law school, majoring in non-liberal arts is frowned upon. If you want to call nursing pre-professional, it’s ok with me. But it is a pre-professional major leading to a vocation, is it not?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>It doesn’t matter what I think. It does matter what those academics think which complete the USNews rankings. And “academe” looks down upon non-liberal arts majors. They just do. If a college desires to move up in the PA rankings, it needs publications in non-professional journals.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I have, and that only supports my suggestion. Yes, BC’s Chem department is arising But still, it is really small. Just 23 graduates last year. And 13 in the physics, the other physical science. Contrast that with 107 in nursing and ~500 in business at BC. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Then we’ll have to agree to disagree. I still believe that there is a huge arrogance and elitism in academia, even today. 
</p>
<p>Look at it another way: how many top-ranked schools even offer undergrad biz? Of the top 10, only two (MIT & Penn). And only one offers Nursing (Penn). Coincidence? (Not to me.)</p>
<p>According to websters:
"vo·ca·tion [voh-key-shuhn]
noun
- a particular occupation, business, or profession; calling."</p>
<p>This thread got hijacked over semantics. Lets get back on the real subject matter.</p>
<p>Well, then I say it’s time for those in “academe” to appreciate the holistic approach to education that the Jesuits pursue (regardless of what one’s major is).</p>
<p>As far as “vocation” goes, one could call any and all occupations after formal education (which, by the way, is the vehicle for the overwhelming majority of college students to earn a living) one’s ‘vocation’. Just because some students know what careers they want to enter at the outset of their undergraduate years is that reason to dismiss their curriculum as less than rigorous – because it points to (gasp!) a vocation?! I think not. Especially if (as I mentioned) they are in a Jesuit college, where a proportion of the liberal arts is required to attain the bachelor’s degree, irrespective of one’s major. </p>
<p>“Yes, BC’s Chem department is arising But still, it is really small. Just 23 graduates last year. And 13 in the physics, the other physical science. Contrast that with 107 in nursing and ~500 in business at BC.”</p>
<p>Nice try, but you are comparing departments within the College of Arts and Sciences to entire schools within BC, not just departments in them. Also, your numbers on nursing and business are underestimated by quite a lot, I believe.</p>
<p>I notice you didn’t mention ‘education’ this time. Are you conceding, at least there, that teaching is a profession?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I don’t disagree. But what matters to academe is research and publishing, not holistic education. It’s research and pubs that garner high PA scores. It’s unfortunate that Jesuit colleges don’t receive much credit for what else they do, but that is a fact of life in the academic pecking order.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Source was ipeds. </p>
<p>And my comparison was done purposely. Chemistry is a liberal arts field that can earn a lot of respect. But a small Chem department has few faculty and thus, can’t garner many scientific awards. Thus, small (generally) does not result in a high PA. (If over half of the student body are not in traditional liberal arts majors, then half of the faculty are similarly situated, no? And, if as I suggest, traditional liberal arts majors are favored by academe, those colleges that have more non-traditional arts majors – and more such faculty – will take a hit to their PA.)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Never implied otherwise. Yes, education is a profession. And it is a vocation. (And Education undergrad is also frowned upon by the academics that complete the PA.) Incidentally, not only do top law schools frown on ed majors, but so to med schools (according to those knowledgeable on cc). </p>
<p>fwiw: One great thing about BC’s Ed program is the requirement of another major, which is generally liberal arts. I think Penn’s nursing program has a similar requirement (but not sure). Further, unlike at BC Nursing, Penn’s Nursing courses are open to all other Univ students, including those in A&S.</p>