U.S. News explains UC Davis ranking error

Colleges & Universities A-Z University of California - Davis
21

<p>"This basically proves you cannot trust US New's rankings all the time, but it does provide the general idea."</p>

<p>The general idea provided by the U.S. News is that UCD ranks in the range of 47-48th spot even with the faculty resources corrected.</p>

<p>"who the hell cares...things like college rankings..</p>

<p>they are there to give you tentatively how the school fares overall.."</p>

<p>Obviously the OP cares enough to post that U.S. News has again made a mistake in the 2007 ranking when it did not.</p>

<p>"Again, I don't have any material proof to validate my opinion, but I believe the drop for Harvard to the number two spot was political as well. I, for one, felt like the first five rankings remaining mostly unchanged year to year was getting a bit boring and US News decided to switch it up and spark a little interest in the area by raising Princeton to number one. Now, why didn't they do this last year or the year before, or even next year for that matter? Like I said, it's my opinion and it makes sense to me."</p>

<p>Translation: I have nothing to back up my claims except for my own biased opinion of UC Davis. However, instead of stating that U.S. News is biased against UC Davis, I'll say that U.S. News changed the top rankings, because it was boring. Oh yes, disregard the fact that I said that U.S. News would receive "ill disposition" by randomly dropping rankings. But hey, who cares if those two contradictory opinions don't make sense? As long as it makes sense to me, that's all it matters. By the way, prove me wrong with solid facts even though I'm just using my biased opinion. Oh yeah, even if you do, I'll just drop another "it's my opinion and it makes sense to me."</p>

<p>Sorry, no thanks. I'm not going to bother with an overzealous fanatic who already has his/her mind set. UC Davis is ranked 47th even after the faculty resource mistake has been corrected. This should have quashed all claims that UCD is better than UCSB and UCI based on the U.S. News rankings. Sure, U.S. News rankings is far from perfect, but the categories affecting the rankings aren't all stacked against UC Davis.</p>

22

<p>TheRighteous, although you make a number of good points established through pure logic, I can't help but look down upon you because of your perceived intent. It feels to me like you're just trying to stir up trouble, instead of trying to offer insight. </p>

<p>Rankings are based off of mathematical formulas that take into consideration the quantifiable qualities in a school. So in that respect, they are accurate. However, you can't, and in fact, you'd be wrong to attack someone for holding a school in higher esteem than it's rank calls for. Just like there's more to admissions than just numbers, there is more to schools than just ranking. I hope you can understand this and stop trying to cause trouble.</p>

<p>I'm not defending anyone in this thread. I agree there's a lot of conjecture and hearsay being thrown about, but nothing that warrants the vitriol you have been spewing.</p>

23

<p>Nate.
Colleges don't care about their US News rankings? Of course they don't preach to it like the bible but they do take notice of it, it is like the SAT score of the school, it does not tell you exactly how great the school purely is. The SAT has been proven to not accurately test a student's ability to preform in school but we use it anyways don't we? And therefore it is important! Just because we know it doesn't test our true abilities and skill we strive to do the best we can because we know that people care about and may even judge your intelligence on it. UCD took the time to announce that correction, they took the time to contact US NEWS and figure out what went wrong.. They CARE. </p>

<p>The conclusion is that although US NEWS may inaccurately portray a school, the rankings are very important since it is the only system the general public can refer to.</p>

24

<p>Wow, my last post was terrible. I basically provided a baseless argument with no facts and asked righteous to alter his argument to fit my opinion.</p>

<p>That's pretty much what happens when you've been living off 4 hours of sleep a night for the last week studying for finals. Sorry to everyone that had to read that abomination. I posted that just as I left to study for a 8am final, in my defense, so hopefully I don't still look stupid :p.</p>

<p>In conclusion, I'd like to say that I once cared about US News' ranking of Davis, but honestly, as time passes I care less and less. Whatever happens happens, c'est la vie!</p>

25

<p>megathunder we all know what we've got here and how awesome it is. That's all that matters dude. </p>

<p>Go Ags!</p>

26

<p>nate,</p>

<p>"There is no way in hell all the 23 schools that they rank above UMich are better than UMich in their so-called "Top Schools" rankings."</p>

<p>u.s. news (in so long as they don't screw up with the raw data like with davis) is a perfect ranking of schools in order of best to worst...as what they define that to be</p>

<p>but it takes into account a whole lot of factors like financial aid and the area surrounding it and how "happy" the students are with the school...</p>

<p>so it's perfectly reasonable for 23 schools to be higher than UMich---based on whatever factors they decide it to be.</p>

27

<p>I don't think anyone is trying to attract prospective students to any particular UC. They are just showing school spirit. None of the UC's except maybe 1 or 2 are struggling to find applicants. Thus, each year many qualified applicants are being denied to some UC's in the state. Although the computations used to score points in these rankings may be objective, the formulas that they choose to issue points are subjective. The bottom line is that people shouldn't put too much emphasis on what some lowly rag says. </p>

<p>I consider all the UC's to be great schools, even UC Riverside which is an up and coming school.</p>

28

<p>Hey Righteous, sorry for calling you names. I didn't mean to offend you. </p>

<p>It's just that I've just never been a fan of magazine rankings.</p>

29

<p>"Hey Righteous, sorry for calling you names. I didn't mean to offend you."</p>

<p>Don't worry about it, I don't take offense to such things.</p>

<p>But the point remains. The argument that UCD should be ranked higher in the U.S. News is completely incorrect. Yes, it may be ranked higher for each person, but don't use false information to skew a published ranking so it fits your own personal ranking. The mistake happened in 2006's ranking, not 2007's. The mistake has been corrected. The ranking, as it stands, is as it was intended to be. Now, we can argue over how inaccurate U.S. News rankings are all day, but that doesn't change the fact that there is no mistake in its rankings based on the methodology. So, if you want to use the U.S. News ranking as a gauge/indicator of what a school is best fit for you, then use it. It no longer has the error that was present in 2006's.</p>

30

<p>TheRighteous your logic still does not make up for the negative momentum incurred by UCD because of the error. Parents and students see the rankings and wonder why the school dropped so far. This causes them to decide against UCD unfairly. This did not happen inside of a bubble. Also as I have already pointed out to you, UC Davis rose back up in the rankings for 2007 while the other UC schools dropped. An error like this (quite bad) takes more than a year to correct.</p>

31

<p>"TheRighteous your logic still does not make up for the negative momentum incurred by UCD because of the error. Parents and students see the rankings and wonder why the school dropped so far. This causes them to decide against UCD unfairly. This did not happen inside of a bubble."</p>

<p>Explain the context that you are using "negative momentum."</p>

<p>"Also as I have already pointed out to you, UC Davis rose back up in the rankings for 2007 while the other UC schools dropped. An error like this (quite bad) takes more than a year to correct."</p>

<p>Sure UCD went up 1 spot, but realize that it dropped over 8 spots the year before. That means it has dropped 7 spots while the other UC's dropped only 1 or two even with the mistake corrected for.</p>

<p>***By the way, answer only on one thread, I don't want to have to answer you twice for the sake of not taking up space.</p>

32

<p>An error like this (quite bad) takes more than a year to correct.</p>

33

<p>Your assertion does not account for the damage that was done. Obviously there was damage to the school's reputation. I assert that it takes time to correct such damage. This notion can be proven by many other instances of negative publicity bringing about loss of repuation. There is damage caused by the negative publicity whether you wish to acknowledge it or not.</p>

<p>You also fail to account for the fact that in one years time other schools could have improved a great deal thereby thwarting UCD's ability to regain its previous rank in spite of the 2006 error being corrected.</p>

34

<p>"This notion can be proven by many other instances of negative publicity bringing about loss of repuation."</p>

<p>These negative publicities are not mistakes on the part of the university. UCD and these other schools with negative publicity are not comparable to each other. Besides, even if there were negative publicity, it should be negative publicity for U.S. News.</p>

<p>And you have yet to provide a solid proof of such instances other than stating that they exist.</p>

<p>"I assert that it takes time to correct such damage."</p>

<p>Since UCD are not comparable to these schools with negative publicity, your assertion is wrong.</p>

<p>"You also fail to account for the fact that in one years time other schools could have improved a great deal thereby thwarting UCD's ability to regain its previous rank in spite of the 2006 error being corrected."</p>

<p>This has nothing to do with other UC's. The rankings of UC's are not interdependent since universities can have the same rank as seen with the ranking of UCSB and UCD.</p>

35

<p>"The argument that UCD should be ranked higher in the U.S. News is completely incorrect."</p>

<p>Also I NEVER even made this assertion. I said that UCD had dropped in the rankings due to an error, and it will take time to correct the damage from that. That is a completely different assertion. Once again you are putting words into my mouth.</p>

36

<p>"Do you even know what actually happened??? UCD misreported to US News, not the other way around. (yes human error) US News acknowleged the misreporting when given the correct information."</p>

<p>I don't understand why you think it will take time to recover.... The ONE mistake has now been fixed, what is there to recover from? Maybe at the time it would have been at a higher rank but other schools make improvements and as of this point, the US NEWS rankings is correct and nothing is falsified. I think what the Righteous did was the right thing to do. The OP was making claims that UCD is Ranked higher than in actuality and asserting the reason for the hike in admissions rate due to the fact that UCD is going to become the next flagship school. </p>

<p>This fantastical imagination misinterprets the school and would inaccurately deceive people into believing that. Bottom line, UCD is a great school and is about equal to UCSB and UCI but nothing the OP said is true or has factual context.</p>

37

<p>Caltech04 first of all you speak as if there is a huge difference between the schools, there isn't. The differences in both scores and rankings are really pretty small as far as that goes. I understand the point trying to be made here, but I would also have to agree that UCD did not walk away from this mistake unscathed. For a full year the US News was circulated with an much lowered rank for UCD. Naturally there are students who did not apply or accepted to other schools because of this situation. So yes UCD was and is still feeling the effects of the improper ranking. Perhaps not to the degree as some of the students here have stated, but there is a consequence.</p>

38

<p>^Again such harsh words (bullying) against young and enthusiastic kids. This is a message board and nothing more. Surely you can get your point across without being so unkind. Caring about helping individuals instead of an unrealistic quest for pure accuracy should be the goal here. Everyone who comes on here and reads these boards should be advised that these are all only opinions and perceptions. If you have serious questions take them to your school guidance counselor. Don't trust what folks say on here that much if your concerns are important. Often times posters are inaccurate, but no one should assume intentional malice. Youthful exuberance is best tempered with kind and gentle correction.</p>

39

<p>Hey, Righteous is not trying to put down the school, he is merely pointing out that the OP has exaggerated the facts to his own opinions. When I first read it, it basically told me UCD is supposed to be #4 ranked and will soon be as good as UCLA and CAL. While this may someday become possible, it it not backed by any solid evidence(opinion) and may sway any confused student into choosing one school over another due to some inaccurate information.
I am glad it was pointed out.</p>

40

<p>In life it is not what you say, it is how you say it that counts. There is no need to be intentionally unkind. I am certain the OP didn't mean to deliberatly spread incorrect information. He is a young person with a lot of excitement for his school. He can just as easily be corrected with out harshness and bullying.</p>