<p>There is so much ignorance, misinformation, and flat out bs on this board. </p>
<p>You can't rank schools accurately.
There is no best way to teach.
Using the scientific method in other fields like social science doesn't work.
We don't know.
It's ok that we don't know.</p>
<p>I like Richard Feyman's take on life and he talks about teaching here. </p>
<p>How come when I say it, everybody lables me a moron but when that upstart says it, you all believe him! Of course, Feynman, quite possibly the greatest mind of the century, is absolutely correct. I have always said that learfning is a very personal venture. We each learn differently and have varrying levels of passion for learning. Feynman even says that in his opinion, there is no one right way of teaching. Actual rankings cannot exist. There are simply too many variables to take into account.</p>
<p>"His Lecture on Physics is the best first-year textbook"</p>
<p>These were optional reference texts when I took intro phsyics, and IIRC, they were really too advanced for that level. For one thing, the E&M portions assumed a knowledge of vector calculus that was typically not even taught freshman year. I recall reading that even most of the Cal Tech students who actually took the original course thought it was too difficult/ over their heads.</p>
<p>Feynman's IQ, when he was tested as a high schooler, was 124. If you look at this, it might make you wonder about IQ tests and how accurate they are in measuring intelligence. It also may make you wonder about the validity of other pseudo IQ tests like SAT scores.</p>