<p>Thanks for the info on faculty resources.. this method probably works better for large universities than LACs though.</p>
<p>Can anyone explain the 'graduation and retention ranks'.. if you look at my post above.. it looks like that some schools are tied which probably shouldn't be.</p>
<p>I've read somewhere on CollegeConfidential that USN&WR ranks graduation and retention ranks based on the difference between the expected percentage and the actual percentage. This places schools like Pomona, where expected percentage is already high and actual percentage can only be one or two points higher, at a disadvantage. I can't remember where I read this, so can somebody confirm?</p>
<p>A.E you say...I can think of far better ways this statistic could be computed.</p>
<p>What are those ways.....</p>
<p>
[quote]
A.E you say...I can think of far better ways this statistic could be computed.</p>
<p>What are those ways.....
[/quote]
I think a better method would be to compute the expected salary of a typical professor at various increments in his career. What can a professor at a given school expect to make in his first year, after five years, after ten years, and so on. This data could be collected from the salaries of current and recent of professors, and could also be computed using expected salary increases of current professors. That way, a college that just happens to have more senior professors than another whose seniormost professors have all just recently retired won't appear to give better pay to its professors. This cuts down on the variance that emerges from the process of evaluating faculty salaries that johnwesley describes. The main drawback, of course, is that it gives schools yet another opportunity to fudge numbers. The question of the superiority of this method is a matter of whether we think the administrations in top schools can be trusted to report truthful and accurate numbers for this.</p>
<p>In schools with very large faculties, these numbers more closely approach each other but, at schools with small faculties, such as the nation's top LACs, there is considerably more variance from year to year in the statistic as it is now.</p>
<p>A.E. works for me...still don't think the rankings done by USN&WR are much to worry about.....there is no school that is better than Pomona there are several that are as good but none that are better better....LAC or NU</p>
<p>Hmmm... I don't know if you can say that tommybill. When you start saying that, we arrive at a 'slippery slope' where we start to question, "Well, if there's no school better than Pomona, is there no LAC better than Wesleyan? Than Colgate? Than Bates? Than Rhodes? Than Skidmore? To all of those questions, I would say, "Nope - there are better schools."</p>
<p>I think what tommybill was implying is that once you reach a certain level, the difference in the quality of education you are going to get at a particular school is fairly negligible. I would say that this line is at about the top 15 national unis, and the top 10 LACs (not to say there aren't many exceptions outside these parameters). Once you cross that line, how good the school is will depend on how much you are willing to take out of it, and the limit to your success becomes what you are willing to put in, not the institution you are at.</p>
<p>Agreed. Though tommybill provides us with a good lesson that the way in which you say something can really affect a message... I don't think I was out of line for interpreting it in that fashion.</p>
<p>"Well, if there's no school better than Pomona, is there no LAC better than Wesleyan? Than Colgate? Than Bates? Than Rhodes? Than Skidmore? To all of those questions, I would say, "Nope - there are better schools."</p>
<p>The above may be true, I don’t know for sure but I tend to agree.</p>
<p>Now the Question, are there schools that are better than Pomona? I think once you reach a certain level, the difference in the quality of education you are going to get at a particular school is fairly negligible.</p>
<p>Now what is the punishment for plagiarism on CC?</p>
<p>I don't mind...</p>
<p>^^
[quote]
Now what is the punishment for plagiarism on CC?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>From where did that come?</p>
<p>I used the line "once you reach a certain level, the difference in the quality of education you are going to get at a particular school is fairly negligible." which I cut from brassmonkey's post 87 ....I plagiarize brassmonkey's work......</p>
<p>
[quote]
I think what tommybill was implying is that once you reach a certain level, the difference in the quality of education you are going to get at a particular school is fairly negligible. I would say that this line is at about the top 15 national unis, and the top 10 LACs (not to say there aren't many exceptions outside these parameters). Once you cross that line, how good the school is will depend on how much you are willing to take out of it, and the limit to your success becomes what you are willing to put in, not the institution you are at.
[/quote]
You're entitled to that opinion, but I see plenty of differences between the 10th ranked college and the 1st ranked college. In fact, I consider WASP to be a cut above the rest of the top 10. I'm sure there are plenty of people who agree with me and plenty who agree with you; those who agree with you will find the central question in this thread uninteresting, and that's fine, as they're entitled to their belief.</p>
<p>,Quote:</p>
<p>“I see plenty of differences between the 10th ranked college and the 1st ranked college.”</p>
<p>You're entitled to that opinion, but I would like to know your opinion on what the differences are? It’s just possible that I have overlooked something you would be able to point out to me, which would alter my thinking. Also, I would like to know if you are considering only the USN&WR ranking, and if so why.</p>
<p>From "The Influence of the U.S. News and World Report Collegiate Rankings on the Matriculation Decision of High-Ability Students: 1995-2004"
<a href="http://www.ilr.cornell.edu/cheri/wp/cheri_wp76.pdf%5B/url%5D">http://www.ilr.cornell.edu/cheri/wp/cheri_wp76.pdf</a></p>
<p>"(high quality) applicants are more likely to attend a school that is higher ranked by even a few places", hence increasing the quality of the student body and the school as a whole.</p>
<p>Many of us hate rankings, including USNWR, but a few spots can make a difference.</p>
<p>^^^except that it doesn't seem to be borne out by any evidence; the first ten LACs listed last year are all over the map in terms of selectivity -- Carleton ranked #6 is 14th in selectivity; Middlebury, #5 is 8th in selectivity; #1 Williams is fourth in selectivity. Not to mention, Pomona.</p>
<p>"(high quality) applicants are more likely to attend a school that is higher ranked by even a few places", hence increasing the quality of the student body and the school as a whole."</p>
<p>That makes me kind of sad that really intelligent people would make a decision on what college to attend based so heavily on a number (and who is to say usnwr is the big authority on what constitutes a great education. I mean, when we're getting down to the 7th ranked school vs the 10th ranked vs the 2nd ranked, I think that it's getting very close in quality. I applied to Pomona because I felt like it would be a great intellectual environment with people who I would mesh with and a great climate/atmosphere to boot. Numbers was one of the last things on my mind when deciding.</p>
<p>That seems to be true of most who matriculated^</p>
<p>Besides the fact that these rankings are nonsense. It's the same east coast "bias" you find in sports rankings etc. Pomona was up to 2 or 3 a few years ago and the school only keeps improving as it falls down these ridiculous rankings.</p>
<p>I don't support the rankings either. Everyone knows these schools are good in their own right.</p>