<p>Nobody cares. Rhodes scholars don’t reflect that much on a college’s quality. Many universities are recruiting exceptional students for things like this. Just like the amount of NMSF students don’t mean that much, neither should Rhodes.</p>
<p>While I would agree this is more sales material than an overall quality boost, it is much more significant than a university buying National Merit freshmen. It’s a good thing overall and will not hurt Florida State.</p>
<p>As to joining the AAU, FSU has some work to do but has embarked upon a plan called "[Pathways</a> to Excellence](<a href="http://pathways.fsu.edu/]Pathways">http://pathways.fsu.edu/)" wherein the university is hiring faculty in academic clusters. Tightening budgets in this economy have slowed the process somewhat, but it goes on. This is great stuff.</p>
<p>I’ll agree with that. It is more significant than buying NMSF students.</p>
<p>And of course, it is a good thing overall and will not hurt FSU. </p>
<p>In the end though, this accomplishment, as wonderful as it may be is more of a marketing thing than indicative of “an overall quality boost”.</p>
<p>Budgets permitting FSU will work its way out of the cellar of the ACC in terms of undergraduate academic rankings, though FSU still has more ranked graduate programs than an ACC school like Miami, so we need to consider the entire worth of this major research university. Globally speaking, it’s not such a bad place to start from.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>No, it’s tier 2. While there is no specific cutoff for where Tier One ends and Tier Two begins, there are 128 schools that comprise the top two tiers, so if you split that in half, Tier One would end at 64 schools. However you look at it, you cannot suggest that FSU is Tier One–it simply isn’t. FSU was 102, a little after the University of Alabama and UC Riverside, just for a bit of relativity.</p>
<p>No, US News says FSU is Tier 1: [Florida</a> State University - Best Colleges - Education - US News and World Report](<a href=“http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-colleges/tallahassee-fl/florida-state-university-1489]Florida”>http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-colleges/tallahassee-fl/florida-state-university-1489)</p>
<p>Since they invented this whole Tier business I suppose they can be presumed to correctly label their own analysis.</p>
<p>I’m a little surprised anyone would question this.</p>
<p>So is there no such thing as a second tier? It goes from first to third? Yeah, that makes a lot of sense.</p>
<p>My apologies, I didn’t even check there, I just looked at the National U’s list and saw 1-128 ranked followed by ‘Third Tier’. You are correct that they label it First Tier.</p>
<p>That being said, I wouldn’t classify a school ranked as the 102nd best university in the country as a top tier school. It is the worst school in the ACC by a long shot, and as I have said earlier, this new development does not change that nor does it change its reputation.</p>
<p>Please…can’t some students be just be admired for their accomplishments? Rhodes Scholars in the US primarily come from undergrad programs, so how does FSU’s grad programs come up in this discussion? Some thoughts:</p>
<ol>
<li><p>Bigp9998, don’t correct yourself. The number 2 comes after 1 and before 3. If USNWR calls the schools after they stop number ranking “Third tier” then don’t think people can’t figure out what the “Second Tier” is. USNWR is like the T-Ball coaches who don’t keep score, trying to save any embarrassment. Readers are like the parents and the kids…THEY keep score. Face it, a university’s goal is to get to the marketing nirvana, the USNWR “centerfold” of the Top 50. Notwithstanding flawed (maybe rigged is a better term ala Clemson/UF) peer scores and other quirks, this is what a lot of parents/students do when they do research…look at the “centerfold” in print, make their list and stop. Do I agree with that? No, but to each his own.</p></li>
<li><p>Has the talking points memo come out of FSU HQ to emulate Ohio State?!? Sorry, that is The Ohio State University (“The” being pronounced “Thee.” Why? I have no clue, this is the place that practices spelling a four letter word, O-H-I-O). I saw the ads for FSU here at CC and verified on their web site, yep, The Florida State University. OSU, whoops, tOSU, gets away with the arrogant and condescending attitude toward their state school brethren because they can. Nobody challenges it in Ohio and poor Ohio University can’t change it in the minds of 90% of Ohioans where it matters the most to them…the football field. Heck, people from Ohio call themselves “Buckeyes” if they went to Joe’s Trucking School or never got past 8th grade. FSU is not as lucky in the Sunshine State. UF’s arrogance can equal tOSU’s and UCF, USF, FIU, and FAU are not BGSU, YSU and Toledo-like lapdogs. How about “Florida State University, Florida’s First Flagship University” as a slogan? It is true and stays more in FSU’s character, not THEE OSU’s bluster. In the same vein P2N, you do this ACC “peer institution” gig like the OSU does with the Big Ten. Yes, the Ivy is an athletic conference, but FSU will look even more “Me Too” if it emulates OSU with this. OSU is not on a consensus par with 5-6 other Big Ten schools. FSU is in worse shape in comparison, being at the consensus low rung of the ACC with NC State. Is sports a part of a school’s reputation? Sure, but trying to raise your schools rep by putting it in with other, consensus higher-rated academic institutions because you share a geographic sports conference is silly. Yes, OSU is ranked higher than FSU, but they are not in the “centerfold” either. FSU needs to stay true to itself.</p></li>
</ol>
<p>Ah, an unbiased perspective. Remember that such ratings only attempt to encapsulate undergraduate rankings and while it appears that you think such metrics establish the entirety of a nearly 150 year old multi-billion dollar state university, I suspect the reality is slightly more optimistic.</p>
<p>Go 'Noles!</p>
<p>Baghdad, it seems to me the ACC has a symbiotic relationship among its members. Each university brings something to the table, which I would offer could be more strength in academics or more strength in sports(money). Schools like FSU and Miami bring supposed strength in sports while others may be more academically focused. </p>
<p>I think from this relationship all ACC members expect to grow stronger - look how much stronger the conference is in football now since FSU joined the ACC in 1991. Both FSU and Miami are benefiting academically.</p>
<p>Florida State was recently ranked around Ohio State, in the 60’s I believe. I don’t know what happened, but it recently “slipped” to ~100. Make no mistake, Florida State is underranked by at least 40 slots. I’m not sure what happened, but for those not living in Florida, it isn’t apparent that all but the most immature Gators, Hurricanes and Bulls, and the general population recognize FSU as a great school. </p>
<p>Now,if we’re talking football…well, FSU will find that they have slpiied to #4 in the state when USF comes to tallahassee this season and whips on the noles!</p>
<p>For those who think a the presige of a school should be related to it’s history and people, FSU should easily be among the top 30 or 40 in the USA: (including 6 nobel prize winning faculty)</p>
<p>[List</a> of Florida State University people - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia](<a href=“http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Florida_State_University_people]List”>List of Florida State University people - Wikipedia)</p>
<p>tomslawsky,</p>
<p>Most folks who know higher ed well, and are not flacks for a specific university, know that you measure the academic quality of an institution by its outputs, not its inputs. For undergrads, you would look at (1) first year salary (2) 20 year salary (3) percent who went to top ranked grad and professional schools (as measured by criteria similar to (1) and (2) ) and so forth. </p>
<p>This is really no different than how most measure the sports quality of an institution, which is measured by championships, true, but even more by how many alums go in to play for the pros. </p>
<p>So looking at FSU, how does it stack up on academic quality?</p>
<p>It is ridiculous to even say that a school is “underrated” or “overrated” by US News because, other than the peer review, its inputs are all hard facts–not estimations or assigned scores like some other ranking systems. Even the peer review is done, I feel, with a pretty solid method. The final result is very similar to what one would expect, at least, when it comes to the peer review.</p>
<p>So please give me a reason why FSU is supposedly 40 spots underrated.</p>
<p>“It is ridiculous to even say that a school is “underrated” or “overrated” by US News because, other than the peer review, its inputs are all hard facts–not estimations or assigned scores like some other ranking systems. Even the peer review is done, I feel, with a pretty solid method. The final result is very similar to what one would expect, at least, when it comes to the peer review.”</p>
<p>Please put down the Kool ade. First, peer review is subjective and there is rampant CHEATING going on there. US News really should drop it all together, as the data is tainted.</p>
<p>Second- Not all of the data is “hard”. fFor example, US News gives points for a low student/faculty ratio, yet there is no proof that I know of that lowering this ratio improves the aggregate undergraduate education. Some of the rest of the data may be “hard”, but the way it is manipulated and the percentages given to certain categories is a joke. 7.5% given to SAT scores, the ONLY standardized measure of student body quality? Right.</p>
<p>Finally, US NEWS doesn’t fact check and allows the univerities to self report. Schoools like UC Irvine are allowed to lire about their top 10% in class openly and still be jumped in the rankings. </p>
<p>In sum- you can tout the greatness of the US NEWS methodology, but most who scrutanize the methadology will see glaring problems that cause severe shifts in rankings.</p>
<p>"For undergrads, you would look at (1) first year salary (2) 20 year salary (3) percent whowent to top ranked grad and professional schools (as measured by criteria similar to (1) and (2) ) and so forth. "</p>
<p>(1) Wrong- maybe starting salary by field, adjusted geographically
(2) Wrong- not all jobs are created equal and some people give up salary to work in an environment they enjoy better. Also, if you were going to use #2, you would have to adjust as i suggested for #1 to compare apples to apples.</p>
<p>(3) Wrong, again! many people who go back to get an Masters or MBA go back to further their career and will not quit their job to go back to school. Therefore, the local university will do just fine. Also, the chances of a school’s students gaining acceptance to a top grad/prof program is a direct function of the student bodie’s SAT score. In the aggregate, a higher SAT score will lead to higher LSAT, GRE,GMAT, MCAT, DAT, etc scores. </p>
<p>"This is really no different than how most measure the sports quality of an institution, which is measured by championships, true, but even more by how many alums go in to play for the pros. "</p>
<p>Wrong, yet again! You measure the strength of a program largely by it’s success. I can’t think of a situation where a winning program would be less thought of because it isn’t producing professional athaletes. </p>
<p>If you really think that the overall academic experience between going to, say Marryland and FSU is going to differ signifigantly, I really think you have your head in the clouds.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Source?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Do you know anybody who is serious about their academics who would actually prefer to be in a massive lecture hall than a 20-person class? (that is, for reasons other than "because I want to blend in/be able to surf the web/not participate)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Fine, but you still haven’t shown me that FSU is “underranked by at least 40 spots”.</p>
<p>^^^^
1)50% of California’s high schools don’t rank. Now, take that fact along with the average SAT scores of these schools coupled with their “official” top 10% in class numbers and compare the scores with ANY school even near the same to 10% and it is EASY to see how they game the system.</p>
<p>2) Just because YOU prefer small classes doesn’t mean everyone learns best that way. I know many who, like myself learn better when there isn’t a prof whio is intimate enough to be up their a$$ the entire class. Not everyone learns the same way and I have NEVER seen real quantifiabe evidence that smaller class size increases academic quality, even though I search for it. What I do see is a NEGATIVE correllation between tons of money being thrown at academis and the quality of the products (the graduates).</p>
<p>On a related note, wouldn’t it be more fair to the tax payers to find the teachers who are capable of teaching well to large groups and to model classroom systems after what they do rather than going the other way and forcing smaller class sizes at a very heavy tax burdon?</p>
<p>3) why do I feel FSU is underranked? None of the schools in the ~100 “band” can boast a list like this, which shows FSU’s rich history of excellence. Again, 6 nobel faculty mambers are on the list. FSU has contributed HEAVILY to society in MANY facets. Contributing to and changing society, history and culture are very valid measures of a school. These are measures that USNEWS doesn’t attempt to capture.</p>
<p><a href=“http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Florida_State_University_people[/url]”>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Florida_State_University_people</a></p>
<p>I’ve made my case. You can disagree, that’s OKay, we just have different ideas of what fair metrics are.</p>
<p>P2N,</p>
<p>Just like the Big Ten Network, ESPN’s $$$$ deal with the SEC includes an SEC “academic” web site to promote SEC academics. Sorry, the implication of these contracts is academics is second to athletics at institutions of higher learning. I like college sports, but this kind of stuff will lead to the ruin of institutions who participate in D-1 if it isn’t put in check. I hope the schools in the ACC have the wisdom to avoid such selling of their academic reputation.</p>
<p>tomlawsky,</p>
<p>good job ducking my question and obfuscating in your reply! </p>
<p>Of course you make adjustments for other factors. Some you even suggest. </p>
<p>But back to the point: Since you dismiss all the accepted measures of academic quality, how would YOU measure it? I guess you just know it when you see it? </p>
<p>And what does Maryland have to do with this discussion?</p>