THES London Times Ranking vs. US News World Report

College Search & Selection
61

<p>Barrons, that is because fortune 500 firms tend to recruit locally. Hence you will see MANY midwestern schools on that list. Ivy grads tend to be entrepreneurs/ consultants/ bankers. </p>

<p>West Sidee, of course! How many Berkeley engineers are in New York? People tend to live near where they went to school!</p>

62

<p>^ There's quite a few Berkeley engineers in New York actually. Berkeley is heavily recruited by New York firms. Especially since New Yorkers don't want San Francisco to become the new Financial capital of the USA. (think tech boom and Yankee's acquisition strategy of Giambi)</p>

63

<p>
[quote]
1. Different method of counting SAT for public and private schools.
2. Faulty method of overstating endowment
3. Use of statistics that has zero correlation with student education such as "yield rate" which studies have shown can be managed.
4. Ignores vital component of Baynesian econometrics, KISS (Keep it Simple Stupid)

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Why don't you prove to us how they do this.</p>

64

<p>Westside says,</p>

<p>“I just didn't want to post the international rankings because it was too depressing.”
Freekin’ hilarious man….you’ve posted these ratings all over CC including the forum of every Ivy school and most of the UC’s in the past, rating obsessed aren’t we Westside..</p>

<p>Westside says,</p>

<p>“this ranking does give you a good idea of how important the international prestige of schools are…”
[Westside defends ranking]
“No. London Times reflects overall university prestige.”
[Westside defends ranking]
“In fact, all bashers of London Times are in fact leading this country in the wrong direction…”
[Westside defends ranking]</p>

<p>“As you can see from the poor attitude of some on this board, defending rankings at all costs seems to be the norm.” [oops!]</p>

<p>Westside you started this thread--on ranking! You kill me man!</p>

<p>When ya gonna post the Times of Libya ranking?</p>

65

<br>


<br>

<p>Obviously knowing what I am talking about is a prerequisite to a debate. Therefore, you fail.</p>

66

<br>


<br>

<p>When ya gonna post the Times of Libya ranking?>>>>>>>>>></p>

<p>Like I said, I prefer the London times ranking because they provide emphasis on actual research and academic excellence. On an international level, a common standard to judge universities has always been on its ability to produce groundbreaking progressive research and leading the world in thought progress. This to me is much more enlightening than US News flawed emphasis on private schools. </p>

<p>I seek legitimate arguments. Defending stagnant positions would be those on the side of US News, not the new THES rankings. So far, I have not seen one legitimate argument for US News and the flaws in their ranking that I have pointed out.</p>

67

<p>West Sidee you don't know what you are talking about.</p>

68

<p>^ Obviously, I know enough to irritate you into making false accusations. In that case, I win.</p>

<p>London Times is obviously more revolutionary, because it irritates people who cannot make legitimate arguments. Hence, the evolution of society has begun.</p>

<p>Here are the statistical faults of US News and World Rankings, and any statistician would agree with me:</p>

<ol>
<li>Different method of counting SAT for public and private schools.</li>
<li>Faulty method of overstating endowment</li>
<li>Use of statistics that has zero correlation with student education such as "yield rate" which studies have shown can be managed.</li>
<li>Ignores vital component of Baynesian econometrics, KISS (Keep it Simple Stupid)</li>
</ol>

69

<p>I'm not going to provide proof of your statements that's your job. If you aren't going to show proof then I will disregard them as false.</p>

70

<ol>
<li>US News uses best verbal + best math for Private School SAT scores, while US News uses best one sitting scores for most Public schools. This is why it matters and the SAT methodology for privates and publics is flawed. </li>
</ol>

<p>If you look at your own SAT score, usually u will find a 30-50 point discrepancy in your best math+best verbal and your best one sitting score. Most applicants to top 30 schools take the SAT 2 or 3 times. </p>

<ol>
<li><p>Only 5% of endowments are used for Private schools in a year. So a 5 Billion dollar endowment for Harvard is the same as a federal grant of 250 million to UCLA. However, the current US News formula does not reflect this discrepancy. </p></li>
<li><p>THere are many many useless statistics used for US News rankings. Yield rate has nothing to do with academic excellence, and it can be managed. Also, Alumni donation rate is rather ridiculous. In that case, why not have number of alumni as well? To reflect the breadth and depth of an alumni network? See, it gets too political, and it should have more emphasis on factors of academic excellence. </p></li>
<li><p>If you study Baynesian economics, than you will know what I am talking about. THES London Times ranking is much more scientifically accurate to the principals of Baynesian economics over the US News.</p></li>
</ol>

71

<p>I think this is all speculation. I am not convinced this London times ranking actually exist. maybe it was prank post.</p>

72

<p><a href="http://www.thes.co.uk/worldrankings/%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.thes.co.uk/worldrankings/&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>Lately the British have done some compelling thought provoking research.</p>

<p>Just a couple of months ago, the British released a study showing that Black Australian and Polynesian tribes were found in Southern California thousands of years ago.</p>

73

<p>You have to pay to access that site after 14 days...I'm not signing up...What is the point of this thread, West Sidee? Obviously, everyone thinks you're an idiot...you just keep on bashing US News and pointing out so-called "flaws." I'm sure the London Times contains just as many flaws as US News, but, unlike US News, no one cares about it enough to pay to see it.</p>

74

<p>^ LOL!!</p>

<p>I am waiting for people to respond to my criticisms of the US News World Report. So far there aren't any. </p>

<p>I posted the rankings already. Many people here have seen the ranking criteria for US News and London Times. The fact that they aren't responding with valid criticism just shows that they cannot find a valid argument to go against my position. </p>

<p>A basket is a basket, no matter who shoots it. London Times is clearly winning.</p>

75

<p>The Times sample of academics is far too small (1300) for many of them to have much knowledge of other than a few top schools out of their home country. When people can only name a top 5 or top 10 it can skew the rankings. Without knowing the breakdown by country one cannot tell if the sample is even any good.</p>

76

<p>^ That is a valid criticism. however, I am sure that most of the academics overseas got their PhDs in the United States, so they would be more knowledgable of US universities over the rest of the world universities. But given that, the London Times sampling results and the US News World report sampling results should BOTH be accessible to the public. </p>

<p>Now does anyone have any valid viewpoints of my criticisms of the US News World Report?</p>

<ol>
<li>Different method of counting SAT for public and private schools.</li>
<li>Faulty method of overstating endowment</li>
<li>Use of statistics that has zero correlation with student education such as "yield rate" which studies have shown can be managed.</li>
<li>Ignores vital component of Baynesian econometrics, KISS (Keep it Simple Stupid)</li>
</ol>

77

<p>The SAT thing may be valid for some state schools and some privates. Schools are free to report the scores as they wish and it is not possible to say how each does it. </p>

<p>Most privates also do substantial research--JHU, Stanford, Harvard etc. all get a fair amount of grants as do many publics. The endowment measure is generally valid and comparable although some publics have separate foundations that might now be counted as part of the endowment. Wisconsin for one has the Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation with $1.5 Billion that is not counted. Some privates could have multiple endowments too.</p>

<p>Yield has been deleted from the rankings, I believe.</p>

78

<p>^ Well what about the complaints of students at Harvard that say that their professors are inaccessible? And more inaccessible than public schools? </p>

<p>It does deal a great blow to the supposed myth that private schools pay more attention to its students. </p>

<p>Its good to hear that yield rate has been deleted from the rankings. However, the SAT scoring discrepancy is definitely a problem for school rankings. Most students differ at least 30-50 points from their best verbal+ best math and their best one sitting score. Until this issue is standardized, it will continue to be a negative mark on the validity and accuracy of the US News Rankings.</p>

<p>The traditional approach of overemphasizing endowment as a path to academic excellence has been shown to be misleading. Harvard with the largest endowment, has one of the lowest marks for student accessibility to professors. Clearly, alumni donation rate, yield rate, in its autocorrelation has very little to do with how effectively a university educates its students. </p>

<p>Also, revenue from patents are not included in the UC budgeting figures for the US News. UCSF, UC Berkeley, UCLA, UCSD have a significant amount of revenue from patents that is not counted in the US News world report figures.</p>

79

<p>Where is Northwestern!?</p>

80

<p>enders: how about you try google.com...
as ben franklin says "it is better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to open one's mouth and remove all doubt"
but while I'm at it, its in Evanston, Illinois, a posh suburb of Chicago, right on lake michigan.</p>