RML Rankings

College Search & Selection
41

<p>“Some university professors and university presidents do know what they are talking about and might even respond to surveys with knowledge and integrity. There are plenty of examples and recent scandals that clearly show that the surveys submitted to USNews are not necessarily filled by people who share such positive traits. Liars and manipulators are hardly absent from the PA surveys, and neither are they from this forum.”</p>

<p>Xiggi, outliers are automatically removed from the PA average. I am sure some presidents will give their own institution (and whatever other institution they may irrationally provide inflated scores to) higher ratings than warranted. </p>

<p>Say president of Unviversity X (an average university that probably deserves a rating of 3/5) gives his university an inflated rating of 4. He/She may even have an agreement with 3 or 4 other presidents where they would inflate each other’s university’s score. That’s 4 or 5 questionable votes going toward a university. Does it truly improve a school’s overall average when an additional 40 or 50 presidents familiar with those universities giving their honest feedback? One can even argue for that just as there are presidents and his/her allies inflating their own school’s ratings, there are presidents from rival schools who are probably deflating those school’s ratings. So what you would get is the following ratings for University X:</p>

<p>Four or five voters (President of University X and his/her allies) would give University X ratings of 4</p>

<p>40-50 voters would give University X a fair rating of 3</p>

<p>Four or five voters (rivals of University X) would give University X an unfair rating of 2</p>

<p>The USNWR receives 60 PA ratings for university X and, via their own process, cancels out three ratings of 4 and three ratings of 2, leaving University X with a bunch of ratings of 3 and only one or two scores of 2 and one or two scores of 4. </p>

<p>In short, the inflators and deflators cancel each other out…if not arithmetically, then procedurally. </p>

<p>Obviously the above example is completely fabricated, and admittedly conveniently “clean”, but you get the point. I am sure there are some cases where a university gets a slightly higher or lower PA than it deserves, but I find it hard to believe that university presidents in their collective can be so twisted and corrupt that they would completely screw up the entire PA system. By that same token, it is also important to understand what the PA sets out to measure. It is intended to measure sentiment and opinion, not fact. And like any rating, it cannot be completely accurate. A PA rating of 4.3 does not signifiy that a university is better known and more highly regarded than a PA rating of 4.1.</p>

42

<p>xiggi, I don’t know where you went to college but I’m terribly baffled that your undergrad did not put importance on research. Research is important for those serious college students. Even at small LAC-like schools, research is done seriously. A friend of mine who went to Dartmouth College and majored in biology was pretty much involved with research works whilst he was there. He later won Fulbright to study tropical biology in a university in Southeast Asia. </p>

<p>And, again, I couldn’t possibly have manipulated the ranking. I have no reason to do that. All the four major rankings were each assigned an equal weight.</p>

<p>And lastly, I feel bad that your line of thinking does not align well with those of elite people in the academe.</p>

43

<p>hawkette: can you enlighten me of what your undergrad major in college and where did you spend it at? I’m surprised you graduated from college without having yourself indulged in some research (minor or major) works. </p>

<p>Research isn’t confined in engineering. There’s a lot of research works for students who major in physics, chem, biology, and even in mathematics, statistics and economics. Heck, even finance and marketing majors do some amount of research works at the undergrad level, unless your school is so-so or diploma-mill type… </p>

<p>kvilledeac: Sure UCSF was in the ranking but so are Dartmouth, Brown, Notre Dame and Washington UofStL. In fact, WUStL did very well in the ranking.</p>

44

<p>RML, Xiggi is an alum of a top 10 LAC and is currently a graduate student at one of the “Big 5”. </p>

<p>Hawkette has never shared with us where she went to college.</p>

45

<p>Thanks for telling me that, Alexandre. Now I understand why xiggi is always in rage whenever elite large state universities are mentioned.</p>

46

<p>

</p>

<p>What is the relevance of this??? If anything, this shows Xiggi’s objectivity (although I don’t necessarily agree with his or her arguments). This is because top 10 LACs and the “Big 5” all have high PA scores. Keep in mind that not everyone defends (or attacks) the PA based on where he or she went or goes to school…</p>

<p>I really love how state flagship alumni will criticize the subjectivity and unreliability of the USNWR rankings (which is a fair criticism), but at the same time defend to no end the only part of it (the PA) that is most favorable to their state flagships…</p>

47

<p>

</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Haha, RML. I am afraid that after all our discussions and posts, you still do not understand the nature of our disagreements. And you surely do not know how I feel about large state universities – unless you’d read my posts about the University of Texas! </p>

<p>As far as the importance I or the schools I attended place on research, I am afraid that you could not be more wrong. But that is not really relevant here.</p>

48

<p>Alex, CMC is ranked #11. :p</p>

49

<p>CMC? haha! I don’t mean to bash CMC, but I guess no one in England has heard of that school. lol … No wonder why xiggi always makes a hell lot of effort to bash Berkeley or those schools that are significantly more prestigious than that small school in SoCal. lol</p>

50

<p>

<em>shrugs</em> Heck, most people in California haven’t heard of CMC. </p>

<p>Also, RML, I would guess a lot of Californians don’t know what “Cal” is.</p>

51

<p>The vast majority of students go through life at college without participating in research that will be considered for publish. Even for those who do have involvement, it will likely be an inconsequential task like feeding inch worms. There just isn’t much undergrads can offer towards serious research other than warm bodies.</p>

52

<p>

OK, RML. Let’s look at the UC survey data.</p>

<p>70% of UC undergrads have never taken a research seminar
78% of UC undergrads have never taken a research class
81% of UC undergrads have never done an independent study
83% of UC undergrads have never helped with research for course credit
91% of UC undergrads have never helped with research for pay
81% of UC undergrads have never helped with research as a volunteer
84% of UC undergrads have never worked on a creative project for course credit
96% of UC undergrads have never worked on a creative project for pay
93% of UC undergrads have never worked on a creative project as a volunteer
90% of UC undergrads have never completed an internship with a faculty member</p>

<p>According to your own definition, somewhere between 80% and 90% of UC undergraduates are not serious students. </p>

<p>If you want to impress us, show us a 100% undergraduate research rate like that of Princeton and Reed. Until then, there is absolutely zero proof that the research done by Berkeley undergraduates is any more impressive than that of any other university or LAC.</p>

53

<p>“A 2008 student survey found that 52% of Berkeley seniors have assisted faculty with research or creative projects. (UCUES Survey, 2008)”</p>

<p>[Facts</a> at a glance - UC Berkeley](<a href=“By the numbers - University of California, Berkeley”>By the numbers - University of California, Berkeley)</p>

54

<p>^ Because someone keeps bringing it up, and someone, who actually attended, feels the need to correct misinformation. </p>

<p>

heh…no, but it did have a heavy hand in developing the tool used to usher in an era of world peace and the frightening potential to wipe mankind from the face of it.</p>

55

<p>^ Sorry I deleted my comment before I thought anyone posted in response to it. </p>

<p>And is one’s opinion really “misinformation”?</p>

56

<p>Honestly, I don’t think this is comparable. These 3 are simply not in the same class. In terms of faculty distinction, faculty strength, Berkeley is 1000 miles ahead.</p>

<p>National academy of science members:
Berkeley (130 members: Note, tied to Stanford, only Harvard has more)
Vanderbilt (4 members)
Emory (3 members)</p>

<p>Source: [National</a> Academy of Sciences:](<a href=“http://www.nasonline.org/site/Dir?sid=1011&view=basic&pg=srch]National”>National Academy of Sciences)</p>

<p>National academy of engineering members:
Berkeley (74 members)
Vandebilt (2)
Emory (0)
source: [Members</a> By Parent Institution](<a href=“http://www.nae.edu/nae/naepub.nsf/Members+By+Parent+InstitutionA?openview]Members”>http://www.nae.edu/nae/naepub.nsf/Members+By+Parent+InstitutionA?openview)</p>

<p>I know Berkely does not have a medical school. For all those Berkely bashers, which Emory’s department or Vanderbilt’s department are better than Berkeley’s? Don’t compare medical schools, because Berkely doesn’t have one.</p>

57

<p>

</p>

<p>Again, my dear friend RML, you could not be more wrong. </p>

<p>For starters, it does not matter to me which schools are more known in England … or in New England or in the Far East for that matter. The issue of prestige might be incredily important to you, but it is a mistake to believe that everyone is utterly obsessed by the ranking of a school, and that such information is important when selecting a school. I know it must be incredibly surprising to you that some of us actually attempt to measure small elements such as fit, experience, and QUALITY of education over prestige or potential name recognition by every Joe SixPack or other uneducated “blokes” around the globe. Layman’s prestige is an entirely different animal from the recognition in circles that … matter! If really hope you don’t believe that pushing the prestige (or bashing) of a particular school on a site such as College Confidential makes a difference among educated people who DO know the differences between a school in Claremont and one next to San Francisco! </p>

<p>Further, it would be a mistake to believe that everyone receives a pair of pompoms at the end of his or her freshman orientation. Fwiw, I must have been quite a failure at discussing (read promoting) the schools I attended if it took you this long to find out my alma mater. Doesn’t that speak volumes about my crusade to elevate my undergraduate school and bash the “more” prestigious ones that might threaten my little corner of paradise? </p>

<p>And, fwiw, even if I DID spend a good part of my life broadcasting the greatness of the schools I attended, I would have been talking about schools I happen to know in and out since I personally experienced them. </p>

<p>You obviously have not attended any US based school, know very little about our education system, and have demonstrated repeatedly to know little to nothing about the real opportunities and experiences available at our many colleges and universities. Your understanding of our universities is confined to pure hearsay, results of arcane statistics, and fantastic tales that are the figment of one’s extremely vivid imagination. </p>

<p>As usual, you’re confusing the actions of people who happen to merely disagree with your constant and relentless cheerleading with … bashing. Perhaps I should apologize for not sharing that gigantic jar of Berkeley Kool-Aid you seemed to have fallen in a la Obelix. Of course, we could always pay attention to the wise words of UCB: “Because someone keeps bringing it up, and someone, who actually attended, feels the need to correct misinformation.”</p>

<p>That is why UCB is a recognized source for Berkeley; Alexandre for Michigan and Cornell. What is your excuse?</p>

58

<p>

Of course not…and I’ve argued that before.</p>

<p>I was commenting on hippo’s post that had no link. There’s a lot more to “UC” than just UC Berkeley.</p>

59

<p>So I didn’t read the whole thread, but let me guess from the OP what’s been said:</p>

<p>Everyone: You just slammed together 4 reports, all of which have come under considerable fire, three of which have been REALLY harshly criticized, well beyond these pages, and which, at best, each supply some cool information about each school.</p>

<p>RML: BUT THIS IS OBJECTIVE DATA AND RESEARCH! IT’S TRUE!</p>

<p>Everyone: Low-quality data yields low-quality results. Even where this data is verifiable, the theory-of-action of most of these surveys remains entirely speculative with no attachment to any meaningful outcome.</p>

<p>RML: BUT THIS IS OBJECTIVE DATA AND RESEARCH! AND UCB DOES WELL. IT’S TRUE!</p>

<p>…</p>

<p>repeat ad infinitum, ad nauseam.</p>

60

<p>“What is the relevance of this??? If anything, this shows Xiggi’s objectivity (although I don’t necessarily agree with his or her arguments). This is because top 10 LACs and the “Big 5” all have high PA scores. Keep in mind that not everyone defends (or attacks) the PA based on where he or she went or goes to school…”</p>

<p>1) Prodigalson, I was merely responding to RML when I vaguely mentioned where Xiggi went to college, and my intent was, as you pointed out, to validate him, not to discredit him. </p>

<p>2) I totally disagree with your take on the PA. Virtually everybody who attacks the PA does so because universities they feel are inferior to their own receive comparable PA ratings. Of course, the PA score is not that meaningful in real terms. It is merely an accurate reflection of what academe’s elite think. </p>

<p>"I really love how state flagship alumni will criticize the subjectivity and unreliability of the USNWR rankings (which is a fair criticism), but at the same time defend to no end the only part of it (the PA) that is most favorable to their state flagships… "</p>

<p>Really? Please enlighten us. There are 8 public universities that receive PA average ratings of 4.0 or better, as opposed to 21 private universities.</p>