<p>Percentages are for losers. Most people getting PhDs did their undergrad at a school granting PhDs. Assuming getting a PhD has any real value or is just a way to postpone being unemployed anyway.</p>
<p>^ You seem to have problem with people who get PhDs- whats the deal? Did u major in business in undergrad? I bet you did</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>truly truly well said and worth another read</p>
<p>You know its an issue when the 70-90 schools are m ore desirable than the 30-40 schools as a whole</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Barrons loves the “research dollars” when convenient, but thinks getting a PhD has no value. He probably forgot to differentiate between the PhDs who happen to have earned an undergraduate degree at one of those (loser) schools he’d love to see disappear, and those who earned one at a school you can see on national TV in the Fall.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>there’s a lot of bias against UCLA, and there has been for a long time (it wasn’t even in the Association of American Universities until the 70s) People, mostly going on preconceived notions, think that it’s an inferior school to UVA and Michagan (maybe because it isn’t a flagship in the technical sense?) All of the best public universities are usually tit for tat. in USNWR for example, berkeley is ahead of UCLA which is tied with UVA; in Forbes, berkeley is behind UCLA which is behind UVA; in this ranking, berkeley is ahead of UCLA which is ahead of UVA. I think in all the rankings i’ve listed, all of the universities are ahead of Michigan.</p>
<p>in relation to the OP, i’m glad Caltech is getting the respect that it deserves. I’ve often noted that it isn’t certain that stanford is the best school in california when compared with caltech, and i think this ranking (and the USNWR ranking) help affirm that.</p>
<p>Why isn’t SAT scores and GPA important for rating a school? I think it should be!</p>
<p>Everyone,</p>
<p>The THE ranking is for universities not undergraduate colleges. Plus, it is focused almost solely on research. This is why LACs and, notably, the two undergrad-focused Ivy League schools (Brown and Dartmouth) are ranked where they are… or not ranked at all.</p>
<p>The so-called “teaching” measure actually does not measure teaching quality at all, or even simple things like class sizes. If one goes on THE’s main site and goes to the bottom of the page, one can click on a link for “Rankings methodology fine-tuned for 2011-12” (or search for it). One then will see the criteria and a rather effective challenge from one of the readers (Charles Bozner) that shows how THE “teaching” measures really are not correlated to undergraduate or teaching quality. The THE editor even states “fair point” effectively agreeing that the rankings are flawed!</p>
<p>A further reader (curious) then shows how some countries naturally will have more international students and faculty than others. There is no reply to this point yet.</p>
<p>In effect THE is qualitative and biased towards large primarily research universities. This may make it ok at best when assessing PhD level but rather useless for undergraduate program assessments.</p>
<p>I agree with what admissioner said. I think USNWR is more for undergrad where THE is solely a a research based list. JMO.</p>
<p>“I agree with what admissioner said. I think USNWR is more for undergrad where THE is solely a a research based list.”</p>
<p>USNEWS Top 10
Harvard, Princeton, Yale, Columbia, Cal Tech, MIT, Stanford, Chicago, Penn, Duke</p>
<p>The Times Higher Ed Top 10 (North America)
Cal Tech, Harvard, Stanford, Princeton, Chicago, MIT, UCB, Yale, Columbia, UCLA</p>
<p>If USNEWS is for undergrad and Times Higher Ed is a research based list, then </p>
<p>Harvard, Princeton, Yale, MIT, Stanford, Chicago, Cal Tech and Columbia </p>
<p>seem to be the most “balanced” colleges in terms of undergrad and research.</p>
<p>JamieBrown? OneCircuit / JohnAdams12 / a few other pseudonyms I forget, is that you? When it comes to the criteria of posters popping up under new screen names, I rank you #1.</p>
<p>All of the Canadian universities are greatly overrated by this ranking. And I say this as a Canadian.</p>
<p>How are the Canadian schools overrated? They seem to benefit from the international outlook part but I always thought they had great research.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>in terms of student to faculty ratios, caltech is basically a lac in this regard (3:1)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Universities are institutions that are supposed to fulfill multiple roles. Education, both at the undergraduate and graduate level, is just one of them. Research and, nowadays, innovation are however equally as important. Any valid methodology to rank universities ** has to take into account ** all those 3 dimensions (i.e. education, research, and innovation) and that is precisely what the THE ranking tries to do. USN&WR on the other hand ranks universities mostly by selectivity, prestige and wealth, which are valid measures, but provide only a narrow picture of a university’s mission. </p>
<p>BTW, the main reason why ** world rankings ** like THE do not take selectivity into account in their methodology is because that measure is highly dependent on a particular country’s higher education model. Some countries like the US, the UK, or China have selective admissions. In other countries, particularly in continental Europe, university admission is basically open on the other hand to anyone who holds a particular type of (academic) High School diploma. Admission rates of universities operating under different systems in different countries are not directly comparable then.</p>
<p>Any list that puts Georgetown at #138, below some universities that I need not name here, is dubious. </p>
<p>Peruse some of the universities that ranked higher than Georgetown. Now ask yourself if you can really take this list seriously. </p>
<p>I know this is only one example, but this a glaring oversight.</p>
<p>[The</a> State News :: MSU ranks in top 100 world universities; impact varies](<a href=“http://www.statenews.com/index.php/article/2011/10/msu_ranks_in_top_100_world_universities_impact_varies]The”>MSU ranks in top 100 world universities; impact varies - The State News)</p>
<p>Go State!! Go FRIB!! Go Green & White!! lol~</p>
<p>^^^^For this weekend: GO BLUE!</p>
<p>^^ Indeed!! & Guess What? Paul Bunyan just told me that Michigan is overrated and that Robinson will be exposed come this Saturday!! 
</p>
<p>[Michigan</a> State Spartans Football - YouTube](<a href=“- YouTube”>- YouTube) </p>
<p>SPARTANS!!! BEAT MICHIGAN!!! RAH!!!RAH!!!</p>
<p>Why? Are the Wolverines running out of home games against Northern Michigan, Southern Michigan, Eastern Michigan, Western Michigan, or Central Michigan? They must find a couple of high schools that have better teams that the current opponents this year. </p>
<p>Cannot blame them for borrowing a few pages from Boise State’s playbook. Play nobody all year and the rankings will reward you.</p>