<p>In looking at the 1995 NRC rankings for linguistics (yeah, I know they're old), I saw Michigan was placed rather low:</p>
<p>1 MIT 4.79
2 Stanford 4.59
3 UCLA 4.56
4 Massachusetts 4.44
5 Penn 4.16
6 Chicago 3.97
7 Cal Berkeley 3.97
8 Ohio State 3.80
9 Cornell 3.78
10 Cal Santa Cruz 3.66
...
31 Michigan 2.37</p>
<p>Yet, in the (slightly more recent) Gourman undergrad rankings, Michigan is placed much higher:</p>
<p>UCLA
U Chicago
UC Berkeley
U Penn
Cornell
UC San Diego
Yale
U Illinois Urbana Champaign
Stanford
MIT
U Michigan Ann Arbor</p>
<p>Yes, I know grad and undergrad aren't the same, but there shouldn't be such a wide gap in quality. And although the ranking is from two different sources, there usually isn't such a large difference; the NRC ranking and the newer US News grad rankings, for example, tend to be very similar. I don't think the slight difference in time matters much either, as schools tend to change very slowly. So I'm wondering: what made Michigan place so high in one ranking, yet so low in another, for linguistics?</p>
<p>I'm wondering whether Gourman placed Michigan so high because of a personal bias, though I dunno.</p>
<p>Thoughts/insights/opinions on Michigan's ling program?</p>