<p>My take is that the Shiangtao (sp) list, in it of itself, is a lot better.</p>
<p>We are discussing Newsweek, sorry</p>
<p>right... and in their methodolgy they explain that they used part of two rankings to compile their own... and my contention is that either of those two lists -- by themselves -- is better than this mix-mash. So, I AM discussing NEWSWEEK</p>
<p>Oh ok, I don't know what the Shiangtao list is but I'd be happy to argue about it with you!</p>
<p><a href="http://ed.sjtu.edu.cn/ranking.htm%5B/url%5D">http://ed.sjtu.edu.cn/ranking.htm</a></p>
<p>All rankings are rediculous. I can't think of a practical application for them!</p>
<p>Practical use for college rankings: "You are a complete failure as a human being because your alma mater ranked 3 spots below mine on the 'Best College Logo' list in the magazine 'Embroidery Monthly.'"</p>
<p>All ranking lists have value if done carefully. The important thing to remember is that they highlight different characteristics which are more appropriate for different audiences.</p>
<p>The USNews plays to the mostly US applicants to undergrad.</p>
<p>The Newsweek/Shanghai/Times lists apply heavily to foreigners who are applying to grad school (mostly Phd). </p>
<p>While I don't agree with their specific choice of weights (I think Shanghai is the best of the 3) these lists are helpful to foreigners who often have no good info in their home countries about US schools and often rely on word of mouth which is less reliable still. Foreign students are a huge minority -- sometimes majority -- of grad students in technical fields such as engineering, science, econ, math, business, medicine. So they (esp Shanghai) chose weights which reflect this demand.</p>
<p>Moreover, many of the things that undergrads value -- sports, social atmosphere, extracurricular activities, summers abroad -- are nearly useless or irrelevant in a grad context. Except for Law/MBA you'll probably find that all that "balance" that helped get you into a great undergrad program will mean diddly for helping you enter and succeed in PhD programs.</p>
<p>Foreign students understand this and are trained for this. That is why they are often better prepared than Americans to do graduate work in technical fields unless the Americans took the most heavily mathematical workload possible.</p>
<p>Does anybody know of any rankings where Harvard was not on the top?
I am beginning to hate Harvard for it being Harvard.</p>
<p>Yes, in terms of undergraduate education quality, Caltech and Yale beat out Harvard.</p>
<p>Do you have any way to back up that statement?</p>
<p>"All ranking lists have value if done carefully."</p>
<ul>
<li>So pretty much only rankings with which you agree, right?</li>
</ul>
<p>
[quote]
Yes, in terms of undergraduate education quality, Caltech and Yale beat out Harvard.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>That would depend on what you're studying. If you wanted pre-med, would you really choose CalTech over Hahfurd?</p>
<p>UMASS at Amherst</p>
<p>lol yea, just thinking that...</p>
<p>UC San Francisco?? Are you serious???</p>
<p>This sucks, why my university is on the bottom.</p>
<p>Obviously this list was prepared before Montana State made International news. Otherwise, I'm sure it would have been in the top 10.</p>
<p>Uh.. Uchicago is #2 in econ, not #1. Also that shouldn't make it great. Stern is #2 in finance and Georgetown's #1 for IR. Takes more than one thing to make a good college.</p>
<p>by the way this ranking is ridiculous because its methodology is ridiculous. Us News is the best ranking despite WUSTL being ranked too highly. That is all.</p>
<p>well since this combines two rankings it appears to be a better measurment of both especially since people have pointed to one or the other. It defintitely shows the strengths of Canadians universities. U of T number 18 way ahead of McGill at 42. I think it puts a more accurate look at Canuck universities than any ranking I've seen.</p>