<p>
[quote]
Please explain why I should give a hoot about the publishing rate for Georgetown students and grads. For people operating in the real world, that is about as relevant as the price of eggs in China.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Same reason we're supposed to give a hoot about the quality and size of the tailgating scene at any given college, Hawkette :-)</p>
<p>Georgetown is a very good school with a strong undergraduate focus, but it's hurt in the U.S. News rankings by the following factors:</p>
<p>1) Apart from international relations, it's perceived as having few exceptionally distinguished departments or programs. It's often mentioned on CC for poli sci, but its poli sci department is not especially highly regarded by other academics and rarely makes any list of top poli sci departments. Consequently Georgetown registers a 4.0 PA rating, not bad---same as Emory, Vanderbilt, and Rice, slightly above Notre Dame's 3.9, slightly under WUSTL's 4.1---but all these schools come out ahead of Georgetown in the overall US News ranking, so PA can be only part of the explanation.</p>
<p>2) It ranks a mediocre 38th in "faculty resources," the lowest ranking in that category for a top 25 private school, with an 11/1 student faculty ratio, the second-highest for a private university in the US News top 25 after Notre Dame's 13/1. Also a fairly low percentage of classes w/ under 20 students--58%, again second-lowest among privates in the top 25 after Notre Dame's 55%. Also, among the top 25, the lowest percentage of classes taught by full-time faculty, 85%. </p>
<p>3) It ranks a mediocre 35th in "financial resources", the lowest ranking in that category for a private school in the top 25.</p>
<p>Now you can question whether these factors have anything to do with the quality of education Georgetown undergrads receive. IMHO, some of them are utterly irrelevant. But I think its fair to conclude that Georgetown "gets the shaft" in the US News rankings only if you think US News is measuring the wrong things pretty much from top to bottom, because by just about every measure that counts in the U.S. News ranking Georgetown does not compare favorably to other top private universities.</p>
<p>There are certain schools that DO get the shaft in UsNews, ahem Berkeley anyone? But Georgetown doesn't get the shaft in UsNews to me. If it deserves to be ranked higher, it probably isn't by much. I've never considered it a peer of Ivy league schools, I've always thought it was good but a level lower. Though, for kids who want to go into international relations, it obviously is a really good choice. It's just my speculation though, that Georgetown isn't reaching out to enough kids and thus gets its ranking as 23.</p>
<p>I would just like to clear something up, when we talk about its exceptional international relations program are we referring to that as a major in CAS or as the focus in its school of foreign service? So, judging from everyone posts would it be fair to say it is a great university that really excels in a particular part of study (politics) and in other aspects it is not quite as strong. So it is not technically peers (in the sense of prestige or academics) with Wash U, Hopkins, or Northwestern.....but maybe more in the line with schools like Emory or Notre Dame?</p>
<p>Cervantes,
You may have an argument about the relevance of the metrics and weightings that USNWR uses in its rankings (and there have been several threads on this), but UC Berkeley is certainly not relatively harmed by this. Based on the parameters that USNWR uses, there are a lot of excellent colleges that score more highly than UCB. This is not meant as a negative to UCB, but I think that folks just don't appreciate and accept the breadth of quality colleges that are to be found around the country. </p>
<p>bescraze,
The folly of your post is that you think that there are real differences in quality and/or prestige between Wash U/Hopkins/Northwestern and Emory/Notre Dame. Silly. Each is a terrific school which is as strong or stronger than the others (including non-HYP Ivies) in their home regions. Good luck trying to tease out consequential differences between a college like Georgetown and these other top colleges. These colleges all have distinct personalities and any choice between based on things other than obvious and large academic specialty differences or personal fit is likely a poorly made decision.</p>
<p>So hawkette you think there is absolutely no difference in future opportunities in lets say wall street or med school in attending Penn/Columbia as compared to Emory or Notre Dame. I do not make the rules, but it definitely seems that certain schools do better than others....I personally believe that the education could very well be identical, since you are learning the exact same material. Yet, the major difference is how the prestige of your school impacts your job opportunities in whichever field you choose to pursue. For that reason I seek to attend the best school that I will be happy in. Best may be a loose term, but it still exists.</p>
<p>As for reputation and places like Georgetown, leftist academia has a long history of antipathy to institutions with a religious connection (and it's not just to Catholics and Jesuits). This hostility is reflected in the PA scores of all of the colleges that have a religious angle, eg,</p>
<p>3.9 Notre Dame
4.0 Georgetown
3.6 Brandeis
3.6 Boston College
2.8 Yeshiva
3.1 Pepperdine
3.0 Fordham
3.1 SMU
2.9 BYU
2.9 St. Louis
2.9 Marquette</p>
<p>And on and on. Take away the prejudice of PA scoring and ALL of these colleges would see a boost to their USWNR ranking. --- Hawkette.</p>
<p>In fact, most political scientists I have spoken to rate both GWU's and U Maryland's political science departments as stronger in the Washington DC area. ---- Bonanza.</p>
<p>"Please explain why I should give a hoot about the publishing rate for Georgetown students and grads."</p>
<p>umm....let me think....maybe...because...its important? Does the term "quality of education" ring a bell? publishing papers means research, a sector where Georgetown is not the strongest institution....
bclintonk said everything else</p>
<p>^ Except that Georgetown also gets "shafted" by student/faculty ratio, class size, faculty resources, financial resources, you name it. I just listed 5 schools with PA ratings equivalent to Georgetown's that are ranked higher overall by US News due to these "objective" metrics. It's the "objective" metrics, not PA, that are Georgetown's downfall as far as US News is concerned. </p>
<p>There are only two schools you could even plausibly argue edge out Georgetown in the US News rankings because of their higher PA scores---UC Berkeley and UVA, both extremely distinguished academic institutions which IMO deserve stronger PA scores. (UCLA and Michigan rank behind Georgetown in the current US News rankings). But even taking away PA, Berkeley might still outrank Georgetown because the two schools are tied in "faculty resources" at #38, similar in "financial resources" (Georgetown #35, Berkeley #40), and Berkeley come out on top in selectivity (#14, v. #19 for Georgetown). </p>
<p>UVA comes out ahead of Georgetown in faculty resources (#36 v. #38) but trails in selectivity (#26 v. #19) and financial resources (#57 v. #35).</p>
<p>So OK, I'll buy an argument that without PA, Georgetown would advance past exactly one school, UVA. But wait! Georgetown and UVA are currently tied for #23. So in effect, then, the argument is that because of PA, Georgetown is "shafted" by being listed in a 23rd-place tie with UVA, instead of being listed all by itself at #23 with UVA at #24.</p>
<p>But that doesn't really move Georgetown up in the standings, does it?</p>
<p>jipperag.
Important? Important to whom?? The student? The academic? The employer? In answering the question, think about which is the more important in judging "the quality of education?" I don't automatically assign a higher priority to the opinions of academics. Publishing a paper and winning a beauty contest within academia is not the same thing as teaching a student something substantive that he/she can use in post-graduate life. </p>
<p>Think about students and what they may be looking for from a college and its professorial staff. Do they want a college (like Georgetown) that has actually been recognized for its in-class teaching excellence or an institution that is renown for its research work, but not for its dedication to students and to teaching excellence? Ideally, you'd like to have both, but there often is a trade-off and I don't think it is that hard to distinguish these priorities among different institutions. IMO, research strength without teaching strength is not very useful to most students. </p>
<p>Finally, remember that a large part of the real learning at college is driven by the nature of the classroom in which you are learning and the quality of the classmates and the interaction that you experience with them. </p>
<p>As for the ranking debate on Georgetown's place, put me in the group that says Georgetown belongs in that group of 20+ colleges that make a legitimate argument for being ranked in the next 10 after HYPSM. It is for this reason that I choose not to get too hung up on the minute differences among colleges in this group as all provide an excellent education and all can position a student to achieve all of his/her post-graduate dreams.</p>
<p>Well if it helps, I dont know too many public sector or private sector employers (including universities that hire professors) who want their employees running up and down their hallways bragging that their school is higher ranking than the next guy. In fact, I think it might have a rather serious and negative impact on your employment tenure.</p>
<p>
[quote]
bescraze,
The folly of your post is that you think that there are real differences in quality and/or prestige between Wash U/Hopkins/Northwestern and Emory/Notre Dame. Silly. Each is a terrific school which is as strong or stronger than the others (including non-HYP Ivies) in their home regions. Good luck trying to tease out consequential differences between a college like Georgetown and these other top colleges. These colleges all have distinct personalities and any choice between based on things other than obvious and large academic specialty differences or personal fit is likely a poorly made decision.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Very well said, hawkette. Beyond the opinions of overanxious and overeager high school seniors and college freshmen, these "differences" really aren't that large overall. In fact, I'd say for any top 30 school, you couldn't go wrong and totally need to make the decision on personal preferences and not some belief that one is going to take you oh-so-very-much-farther than the next. The people who think it does simply don't seem to understand that the characteristics of the INDIVIDUAL count for a lot more than the name on the diploma.</p>
<p>
[quote]
As for reputation and places like Georgetown, leftist academia has a long history of antipathy to institutions with a religious connection (and it's not just to Catholics and Jesuits). This hostility is reflected in the PA scores of all of the colleges that have a religious angle
[/quote]
</p>
<p>That's quite an assertion hawkette.</p>
<p>Maybe a more viable rationale is that those schools aren't research bent universities and hence, lose out w/ regards to rankings in **academia<a href="such%20as%20Ivies%20like%20Brown%20and%20Dartmouth">/b</a>.</p>
<p>
[quote]
So it is not technically peers (in the sense of prestige or academics) with Wash U, Hopkins, or Northwestern.....but maybe more in the line with schools like Emory or Notre Dame?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>In the academic sense - I would place WUSTL closer to schools like Emory, etc. - since it doesn't have the wide breath of highly ranked depts. like JHU, NU, Cornell, etc.</p>
<p>
[quote]
well UC Berkeley is like 50 percent asian.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>It's actually ~40%. Other UCs are more like 50% (some past 50%).</p>
<p>Oddly enough, this is the same for Caltech, yet no one sees any qualms putting it in the top 10, often top 5. People want to demote some universities and will find fault in many areas that are just fine in 'promoted' universities. :rolleyes:</p>
<p>
[quote]
So hawkette you think there is absolutely no difference in future opportunities in lets say wall street or med school in attending Penn/Columbia as compared to Emory or Notre Dame.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Penn is in Philidelphia. Columbia is in New York City. Georgetown is in Washington D.C. Many of Georgetown's alumni are statesmen, politicians, judges, justices, national leaders, and royalty. Why would "Wall Street" or "Med School" be brought up in the discussion of these schools? If you want to work on Wall Street, go to Wharton. Med School? Try JHU. In regard to overall opportunities, and in terms of the number of successful alumni (depending on how one defines success), Georgetown should at least be on par with Penn or Columbia. Since Notre Dame's Mendoza is one of the strongest and most heavily recruited business schools in the country... and the kind of Catholic identity-solidarity that ND fosters is more significant than Ivy League elitism and connections... I'd argue that ND has an alumni network whose strength is on par with that of HYP.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Yet, the major difference is how the prestige of your school impacts your job opportunities in whichever field you choose to pursue.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I certainly agree. Which is why it's so great that Georgetown and Notre Dame are the two most prestigious Catholic universities in the United States. There were 77 million Roman Catholics in the U.S. as of 2003: a quarter of the population. These two schools may not be prestigious in the academic world... but in the rest of the working world, I would imagine that they would be looked upon very, very favorably.</p>
<p>
[quote]
So hawkette you think there is absolutely no difference in future opportunities in lets say wall street or med school in attending Penn/Columbia as compared to Emory or Notre Dame.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Yes, Penn/Columbia would position you better for Wall Street. Georgetown would position you better for government. (Juilliard would position you better for careers in a symphony orchestra, Yale or Northwestern for a career in Hollywood, etc.) Whether one is "better" than the other is dependent on what you want. It's unsophisticated to decree that success on Wall Street is more important than any other kind of success, but that won't stop people from asserting that schools are better overall because they position someone better for ONE KIND of job path.</p>
<p>And for the gazillionth time, medical school is different. The entering classes of ANY med school, from Harvard to State Flagship, are made up of people who went to all different types of colleges. In med school, the guy from JHU and the girl from Harvard sit right next to and do the same things as the guy from State Flagship U and the girl from Third Tier State School. And the same thing happens with residencies -- residencies are filled with people who went to Harvard Med working right alongside the people who went to State Flagship U Med, and it doesn't make a damn bit of difference. It's not like law school, where there is a lot more prestige woven into it.</p>
<p>Georgetown has only a few NAS members and major award winners on the faculty. It just does not stack up with the higher ranked schools. Emory does much better than Gtown in this regard. It has long benefitted from its location and Ivy safety status.</p>