<p>it is necessary to keep in mind that wildwoodscott’s son may be an exception to the trend of engineering students at GCC. i have nothing against gcc, but i am gonna guess her son is one of the few students there going to top grad schools</p>
<p>
Based on the stats at collegeboard.com, GCC does appear to be more selective than Calvin. However, the most popular college guide in the country, from US News and World Report, still rates Calvin significantly higher. They currently have Calvin as #112 in the National Liberal Arts College ranking, while GCC is classified as “Tier 3”. This difference reflects the fact that selectivity is only one of the factors addressed in the USN&WR rankings.</p>
<p>
I don’t have the latest rankings, but the 2008 USN&WR rankings, for undergraduate engineering at schools without graduate programs, were posted [url=<a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/engineering-majors/382751-usnews-2008-engineering-ranking-compilation-3.html]here[/url”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/engineering-majors/382751-usnews-2008-engineering-ranking-compilation-3.html]here[/url</a>] at collegeconfidential (scroll down to post #39). Calvin was ranked higher than GCC for undergraduate engineering at that time (#47 vs. #65).</p>
<p>Thanks for the link corbett. I have been looking for a list longer than 25.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Corbett - I guess my only comment here would be to use caution in using the USN&WR rankings for anything. They are based on some limited factors and do not always yield good results. This appears to be one such example.</p>
<p>FWIW Grove City and Calvin are both included in Princeton Reviews Best 371 college list. From my research, I actually like and am impressed by Calvin and it is a school my daughter is considering. However, Grove City IMO is academically superior overall to Calvin. Their really is no valid reason I can think of why USN"WR would have one as a Tier 3 and the other as #112 overall</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>From what I’ve heard (and seems to be true in other instances), Conservative colleges (politically) get ranked lower than their Liberal counterparts in USNWR - mainly due to the aspect of educators rating each other - the stats tilt liberal. Then too, reputation is often based on name alone with some of those doing the rating having no idea what actually goes on in the school. </p>
<p>Hearsay, of course, but completely plausible for both.</p>
<p>Interestingly enough - I just looked at Forbes List for 2009. GCC ranks #364. Calvin ranks #455.</p>
<p>Personally, while I don’t really have a horse in this race (between Calvin and GCC esp for Engineering), I prefer Forbes List in that they rank schools by what graduates and profs have done plus debt accumulated (and not prestige or peer thoughts). I DO wish they would change part of their rating system - that which relies on “Rate My Professors…” but I have beefs with all rankings in one way or another. I just think Forbes criteria is better than USNWR - not that they are perfect by any means. Even within a school, departments differ greatly.</p>
<p>
I actually agree, but it’s also true that the USN&WR rankings are by far the most popular and recognized college rankings. For better or worse, they are the reference that most Americans turn to for evaluating or comparing different schools. So the USN&WR rankings are highly influential, whether we like it or not. </p>
<p>I found a paper copy of the 2008 USN&WR rankings, which is a couple years out of date, but which has Calvin and GCC rated similarly as in 2010. At that time, Calvin was rated significantly better than GCC in terms of:</p>
<ul>
<li>Peer Assessment (2.9 vs. 2.3, higher is better)</li>
<li>% classes of 50 or more (1% vs. 8%, lower is better)</li>
<li>Alumni giving rate (33% vs. 23%, higher is better)</li>
</ul>
<p>I agree that the USN&WR peer assessment score has a shaky basis. Nonetheless, the differences in PA score, as well as the overall differences in ranking, may reveal something about the way that these two schools are perceived by secular employers or graduate schools.</p>
<p>Gotta agree. The lists have one, and only one objective. Sell magazines, manuals, and books. End of story.</p>
<p>They can be useful in gathering data and a few opinions in a single publication, but it is laughable how so many people place so much value on these meaningless assessments.</p>
<p>And they are meaningless, because in the end, for any and all individuals going to college, they will be of no value in forecasting one’s success, growth, development and future. And that’s how people portend to employ these things. </p>
<p>Pace and Astin have this thing as “right” as anyones can, imo. The ultimate measure of an institution’s merit is how much value does it add to the life …and lives …of its students vis a vis other insitutions and/or simply growing older, spending one’s days in other ventures. So much of this is this industry’s attempts …oh so successful… to play to people’s egos and insecurities. And we take the bait. And so do college/university presidents. </p>
<p>But when you look at who is most asked and responses most weighted about opinions???</p>
<p>College presidents & next in lines. </p>
<p>The advice offered here of go and see, talk, really ask TOUGH, non-softball questions and listen for genuine answers. Talk to kids. Many kids. Talk to profs and challenge them to candor, that which they’ve allegedly been trained to pursue. Take cheerleading for what it is. Another attempt to get you and yours to spend more time and money than most of us will on any other purchase in our entire lives. Visit and spend some time on those places that seem to make more sense than others.</p>
<p>And that is what Pace and Astin conclude. The primary measure of real value is …time. How students spend it, collectively. Because that will determine growth, development, learning. It’s the great neutralizer to all the chest-thumping, and gets to real substantive issues.</p>
<p>That said, Corbett’s points are well taken. There is a certain reoccurring consistency. here … and they are really not so miniscule as it seems in comparing them head to head. Approx. 25% , 700%, and nearly 50% diff in the 3 categories asking for both perception, class size, and support from among those who’ve been there. The differentials are substantial in every area. btw, the middle one is key to how GCC keeps its costs so low.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>On this you and I agree 100%. And since we’re on a Christian board, can I also offer, visit colleges that seem to make sense, ask good questions all around, and pray - then follow God’s leading. I would think both GCC and Calvin would be worth a visit - along with secular Engineering schools + their counterpart Christian clubs.</p>