<p>Another silly ranking, but interesting results nonetheless...</p>
<p>In an exclusive TrendTopper Media BuzzTM analysis of the nations colleges and universities, the Global Language Monitor (<a href="http://www.LangaugeMonitor.com%5B/url%5D">www.LangaugeMonitor.com</a>) has ranked the nations colleges and universities according their appearance in the global print and electronic media, as well as on the Internet and throughout the Blogosphere.</p>
<p>In the University category, Harvard nipped Columbia for top spot with Michigan, the University of California, Berkeley and Stanford following. Rounding out the top ten were: the University of Chicago, University of Wisconsin, Madison, Yale, Princeton and Cornell. Taken as a whole, the University of California system would have outdistanced Harvard for the Top Spot by a wide margin. </p>
<p>In the Liberal Arts College category, Colorado College upset Williams for the Top Spot, while Richmond, Middlebury and Wellesley followed. This is the first time, in any national ranking that a Liberal Arts College from the West ranked in the Top Spot. Rounding out the Top Ten were: Bucknell, Amherst, Oberlin, Vassar, and Pomona College.</p>
<p>I don't think this is a bad way to analyze institutional influence.<br>
[quote]
“There are only three types of intellectual property in the US, and one of them is the trademark (or brand) which are intended to represent all the perceived attributes of a service - and institutions of higher education are no different,” said Paul JJ Payack, President and Chief Word Analyst at GLM.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Whether influence has any relevance to undergraduate education is another question. Note too that the article/link does not advocate using these rankings for choosing undergraduate institutions.</p>
<p>I do wonder, though, if some colleges, like Michigan and Wisconsin, made the ranking because of sports? Probably not, because their sports cousins like OSU (or Texas) did not. </p>
<p>At any rate, I think rankings like this are useful precisely because they are methodologically sound AND shed a different light on how we can look at colleges. This study looked at media influence.</p>
<p>seeing how UCLA is absent, while UC Santa Barbara and UC Irvine are present in the link, tells me the search engine looked for "University of California Los Angeles", and not UCLA. Something as silly as that can kick a school out.</p>
<p>Newmasdad, are you even serious? UW and UM are two of the top 5 research universities in the US which makes them among the top few in the world.</p>
<p>It is curious how difficult it is to have an intelligent discussion with some posters here, who seem to spend their time attacking the credibility of other posters, rather than engage in an intelligent discussion. </p>
<p>Maybe the markets have you down? Don't take your frustrations out on others. Stick to intelligent comments and add to the discussion, not detract.</p>
<p>Name recognition generates news stories which generate name recognition which... Thanks newmassdad for your comments on Barrons- irritating poster but useful in ferreting out news items for the UW-Madison CC threads. </p>
<p>Do remember that Michigan and Wisconsin are excellent academic/research institutions regardless of the sports scene. People on the East Coast tend to forget that in the Midwest and California public U's dominate the intellectual scene. We are fortunate to not have private schools dominating and taxpayers who therefore put more into public education than on the east coast as seems evident from CC postings (it seems as though too many people with money/influence choose private education and neglect their public schools).</p>
<p>"I do wonder, though, if some colleges, like Michigan and Wisconsin, made the ranking because of sports?"</p>
<p>"JHU and U Washington are both bigger in terms of research $ (in fact, 1 and 2). So there is more to the story."</p>
<p>When people make unfounded statements and back them up with more uninformed data it serves gives the less informed a false impression of the truth. Some would call that misleading. Others just being uniformed. You may chose which. How does one have an intelligent conversation with that? Better have the facts straight first if you take a shot at Wisconsin or Michigan. </p>
<p>If you have seen any of my posts on the market this week I am just the opposite.</p>
<p>Wow I think for once Barrons and I share the same side of an issue!</p>
<p>I think its most interesting is how upset people get on CC when another ranking method doesn't correspond to their view of the university world (typically aligned USNWR rankings). Of course I don't know any one person's view of the university world on this thread, but most often on CC, no one has a problem with USNWR rankings yet balks at more objective methods.</p>
<p>Those rankings seem completely nutty to me. U of Florida ahead of Northwestern and Brown? Colorado College #1? I think the article must be intended as satire or something.</p>