<p>In fact, a comparison between UCLA and Northwestern’s last year’s data shows how sigificant the effect of this overstatement of NAE % is.</p>
<p>Northwestern beat UCLA in every single category except NAE %. UCLA’s % was 14.1% vs Northwestern’s 5%. But the true % for UCLA should really be more like 6% or so (just a guess). The result of this overstatement? UCLA was ranked 13th while Northwestern was ranked 20th. Had UCLA not overstated, it would probably go from the 13th to outside the top-20.</p>
<p>NAE stands for National Academy of Engineering. It’s the most prestigious academic honor one can get in the engineering field in the US. Usually when people get it, they are already well-established and not early in their career. So in most schools, a lot of them with NAE membership are often emeritus (retired) professors instead of full-time active ones. At Northwestern, it’s 50/50 split. That is, if Northwestern includes the retired professors, its % would double. Furthermore, in certain schools, some of them can also be part-time or adjunct (at Northwestern, part-time/adjunct are very rare but in others, they can be significant). For USN ranking, only the full-time active faculty should be counted. USC’s NAE number was overstated because it includes emeritus professors, alums, or people that aren’t faculty members (board of trustee member, CEOs, or past researchers…). This overstatement inflated its overall ranking (not specialty rankings which depend solely on peer assessment).</p>
<p>I’m a big Matt Barkley fan, and I think he’d be more than up to the challenge. But Aaron Corp is extremely seasoned and has only thrown 1 interception in practice all spring (against a secondary that returns 4 starters from the #1 pass defense in the country last year) Given how Carroll hates turnovers, that’s why he’s saying Corp is the starter right now.</p>
<p>Barkley is the QB of the future, though. He’s going to be on people’s Heisman short list soon enough.</p>
<p>(never mind the fact that people said that about Joe McKnight <em>cough</em>)</p>
<p>^ Pete Carroll is so cool…he’ll make the right choice and have the team ready.
I’m glad this year we play in Berkeley…and the game is not in November. ;)</p>
<p>UCBChemEGrad,
I saw those numbers before. Those numbers include emeritus professors. But anyway, as you can see, MIT/Stanford/Berkeley have significantly more than USC but in the US News ranking, USC is #1 in that category (over 18% when it’s really more like 6% or so). That’s why it’s number (actually %) is overstated. Also, UCLA and Northwestern really have the same number. But in US News, the percentage is 14.1% for UCLA and only 5% for Northwestern.</p>
<p>But in the past 6 seasons, USC has had teams with identical records go instead of them to the BCS title game 3 times. That, I am getting tired of.</p>
<p>You guys can joke about it but seriously, does anyone actually believe that USC should be rated higher than Michigan at the graduate level for engineering? I can’t believe that a program without any top 10 specialities at the graduate level could be rated so high. It makes no sense to me at all.</p>
<p>a) people think you can actually rank universities, like they were football teams
b) people get so outraged when they think USC is overranked (much like the football team )</p>
<p>Regarding the new QB: I don’t think Matt Barkley will do well his freshman year. He couldn’t even do well in high school last year and he was 19… much older than some of the other QBs he played against. But he has potential for being a top player. Just wonder how he’ll do under pressure his freshman year.</p>
It’s still USC and the rest…</p>