<p>
[quote]
IMO, the PA rankings are done like this is a zero-sum game. I think that they would be a better reflection of today's college scene if they showed that it is not a zero sum game and that the size of the pie has gotten bigger.
[/quote]
But at the same time it doesn't make any sense for the lower colleges to continuously climb higher on the PA scale while the top ones are stuck at the ceiling. How can one observe any separation between the schools if at the end of the day, the top 25 schools all have PAs of 4.7s or higher?</p>
<p>That is exactly my point. IMO, many schools have improved to the point where much of the historical differences have been erased and yet the PA scoring does not reflect this evolution. Heck, probably most of the Top 25 should be at 4.7 and above as the differences in the faculty at these colleges as related to the undergraduate experience (which is what the rankings are supposed to be about) are not that great. </p>
<p>There are dozens of examples in the for-profit world where one or two companies will establish a market, but others will come in and copy some of what they have done and/or build on it and relatively quickly be able to offer a very similar product to the original player. IMO, this should be the case as well with undergraduate colleges in America as I don't believe that the competitive advantage of any of these highest-rated colleges warrants the spreads that we see today, eg, </p>
<p>W&M at 3.7 vs U Virginia at 4.3</p>
<p>Tufts at 3.6 vs Brown at 4.4</p>
<p>Rice, Emory and Vanderbilt at 4.0 vs the non-HYP Ivies at 4.3-4.6</p>
<p>USC (4.0) has caught and is now within shouting distance of UCLA (4.0), but I wonder if it has now hit a glass ceiling and whether the academics will permit it to rise to full equality with the historical UC powers.</p>
<p>
[quote]
USC (4.0) has caught and is now within shouting distance of UCLA (4.0), but I wonder if it has now hit a glass ceiling and whether the academics will permit it to rise to full equality with the historical UC powers.
[/quote]
In terms of student quality, as measured by superscored SAT, USC has reached parity with the top UCs. No published CDS makes one skeptical.</p>
<p>When USC faculty start earning Nobel prizes, gain more academy membership, etc. (i.e. more visible accomplishments that "distinguish" a university in an academic's eye), then academics will start to see it as being on par. Until that happens, little change in the PA score will be witnessed, IMO.</p>
<p>ucb,
I concur on what you see as USC's requirements to get greater recognition among academics. That would likey boost its PA score, but who knows as PA is just so subjective. I don't think that over the past twenty years, any school has really been able to break the glass ceiling of the top 20 PA scoring colleges. I doubt that it will be any different for USC.</p>
<p>Probably more important is to consider how relevant (or not) PA scores are to the undergraduate's experience during his/her four years of college. One of my longstanding complaints is that this number is pretty irrelevant to the great majority of students walking these campuses and what it means for their actual undergraduate education. If one is contemplating a career in academia, I might assign greater importance to this "measurement" but otherwise I'd ignore it. As I've said innumerable times, as an undergraduate student, I'd care a lot more about what actually happens in the classroom than in how many obscure awards were won by some professor in some far-off department.</p>
<p>ucbchemegrad notes,"Private schools have risen in perception because USNews ranks on factors that are favorable to privates."</p>
<p>Response: You may be correct. However, when it comes to rankings, perception becomes reality in the minds of both employers and the public. Rising rankings usually will result in more applicants and better applicants. It also brings the school more prominence to employers.</p>
<p>In addition , and I am calling your attention to it today, 3/10/08, state schools are cutting funding! This is affecting a great many institutions in a lot of negative ways. </p>
<p>As for PA scores, this always struck me as being very unreliable. Let's use my daughter's school, University of Cincinnati, as an example, They don't have a great ranking for a doctoral university (tier 3) and a relatively low PA score. Yet, they have some top undergraduate programs that are clearly in the top of the country based on departmental rankings by other magazines: namely: Their conservatory of music (CCM) and their school of Design, Art, Architecture and Planning, not to mention their criminology department and pharmacy school, not to mention having one of the best built-in coop programs in the country.</p>
<p>The PA score also doesn't take into account the experiential education received by schools that have strong coop programs. These have to have some intrinsic, educational value that isn't being counted by the PA score or by US News rankings.</p>
<p>My point is that giving a school an overall rating for PA is ludicrous. There needs to be a breakdown by major or by department.</p>
<p>
[quote]
In addition , and I am calling your attention to it today, 3/10/08, state schools are cutting funding! This is affecting a great many institutions in a lot of negative ways.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Sure, but it's not like the bad economy affects public universities in isolation. I'm sure a recession will have an impact on private university fundraising as well. Not to mention investment performance for endowments.</p>
<p>With regard to California, the budget has not been approved. It's going to be a fight with Dems and Repubs to maintain funding for issues that are important to them. </p>
<p>
[quote]
My point is that giving a school an overall rating for PA is ludicrous. There needs to be a breakdown by major or by department.
[/quote]
I agree. But, I think that if they did break it down by department, currently the highest PA scoring schools will have the most departments at the top of a department ranking.</p>
<p>
[quote]
As I've said innumerable times, as an undergraduate student, I'd care a lot more about what actually happens in the classroom than in how many obscure awards were won by some professor in some far-off department.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Hawkette,
A higher PA score indicates more "distinguished academic programs". An undergraduate student may want to go to a university where a lot of the majors offered are among the most respected programs in academia.</p>
<p>An academic is going to rate the prestige (i.e. distinguish) of a university's programs on factors that are prestigious in their eyes (professors that are considered top in their fields, the level of research output, the cutting edge research that goes on, etc.). </p>
<p>
[quote]
as an undergraduate student, I'd care a lot more about what actually happens in the classroom than in how many obscure awards were won by some professor in some far-off department.
[/quote]
While true, what goes on in the classroom is not visible to academics and does not translate into academic prestige.</p>
<p>Well, if you agree that what happens in the classroom is what should be important to students as they consider various colleges, should this not also disqualify measures of academic prestige (what is that anyway and how does that affect the student's actual college experience??) from being included in a ranking of undergraduate colleges? I don't expect you to agree, but I'm hoping that the wider audience reading this will make the correct individual call and not get caught up in measures of prestige as decided by a bunch of undisclosed academics. Prestige among academics and a buck will buy you a cup of coffee...maybe.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Well, if you agree that what happens in the classroom is what should be important to students as they consider various colleges, should this not also disqualify measures of academic prestige
[/quote]
</p>
<p>No. What happens in the classroom can be measured from more easily obtained objective data, like class size and student/faculty ratio. So, if these factors are important to a prospective college student, they can utilize this data...and many do. You aren't going to be able to get a consensus on what faculty are better teachers, because this is subjective as well. At a university, you will find some professors are fantastic teachers, some are poor teachers, most are average teachers. </p>
<p>The PA score provides another, less tangible, data point regarding the perceptions of academic quality programs. If a student is more interested in top programs, he/she can select a school based on this criteria.</p>
<p>
[quote]
prestige as decided by a bunch of undisclosed academics
[/quote]
IMO, when asking about academic prestige, academics know better than the general public. </p>
<p>I'll agree that an employer PA score would be beneficial as well; however, employers are likely going to have a regional bias since they likely will have little experience among a diverse geographic array of college graduates.</p>
<p>I just graduated this last May from the Marshall School of Business at USC with a concentration in corporate finance. Although I have lived in Los Angeles my entire life, I would love to work in either Hong Kong or Shanghai. I can speak both Mandarin and the Shanghai dialect fluently; furthermore, I can also read and write Chinese. </p>
<p>I am passionate about the sports entertainment business (primarily the NBA) so ideally, I would love to work for a sports marketing/branding firm. I know there’s not a huge market for that in Asia but there are many companies such as IMG with office locations in Hong Kong. </p>
<p>My question is actually two fold, and I would really appreciate it if someone with genuine insight could answer.</p>
<p>1) I’ve heard that the USC degree is looked pretty favorably upon in Asia especially in Hong Kong. But from an employer perspective, is it more like a “Wow, pretty good school!” or a “HOLY ****! Let’s interview him ASAP!”</p>
<p>2) What would be your best advice in trying to land a job in HK or Shanghai? I’ve been applying to countless jobs in the Los Angeles area and to say the least, the process has been futile and rather demoralizing. How’s the job search process in HK/Shanghai? Is it ALL done online like it is in Los Angeles, or do employers in Asia welcome and seriouslly consider resume drops and knocking on doors?</p>
<p>Thank you for your time, and any advice would be greatly appreciated. Thanks!</p>
<p>Generally UCLA is more of a focused pre-grad-professional school than USC, which is more undergrad trade oriented. More UCLA grads go on to b, l, m school than USC, a lot more than USC in some of these fields, adjusted for undergrad enrollment, ~ 1:1.5. The prestigious grad schools across the country have generally a much greater UCLA representation.</p>
<p>I just wanted to add more of a better line of defense for UCLA for this two-year old thread than UCB’s fatuous attempt at unbiasedness. ;)</p>
<p>^^ Nah, hawkette was Emory through and through imho. Nevertheless, he/she might have unknowingly contracted the ‘buckeye fever’ as it is known to be extremely contagious. ;p</p>