<p>The thing is we have no reference of how the other administrators rated other insitions (with the exception of Clemson). We have no frame of reference to compare and contrast.</p>
<p>Machen could of pulled a Clemson and rated Penn State, Syracuse, George Washington, University of Maryland, UIUC, and the University of Miami as marginal to give UF more breathing room. This was not the case and they received a fair assessment in my opinion.</p>
<p>He was kind of in a tough spot but UF is clearly ranked too high.</p>
<p>^ As a UF Alumni I agree. But I think he should get a pass for this one little indiscretion. Besides I think US News might throw out his rank of UF anyway (I heard that somewhere).</p>
<p>You will not find a leader more committed to diversity, sustainability, and affordability out there.</p>
<p>[Bernie</a> Machen - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia](<a href=“http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernie_Machen]Bernie”>Bernie Machen - Wikipedia)</p>
<p>How many raters (out of 2K, I suppose) would it take to move the peer number of one school by one-tenth of a point? </p>
<p>Apart from individual manipulation, as Machen has illustrated, how big would the conspiracy need to be to drive the outcome to a certain place? My point is that Machen is no fool and others have suggested that manipulation could be common. How common? Why would Machen do it if there was no chance to change the outcome in a way he wants? He risks losing his good name and the reputation of his employer.</p>
<p>I do not see university presidents as impulsive, nor big risk takers. I do see them regarding US News as BS, but too many follow the ratings to ignore it.</p>
<p>Read this New York Times story about President Machen.</p>
<p>[Public</a> Universities Vie to Join the Top 10 in Academic Rankings - New York Times](<a href=“http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9C02E2DE1031F933A15751C1A9609C8B63&sec=&spon=&&scp=20&sq=Bernie%20Machen&st=cse]Public”>http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9C02E2DE1031F933A15751C1A9609C8B63&sec=&spon=&&scp=20&sq=Bernie%20Machen&st=cse)</p>
<p>Sounds quite similar to Clemson’s story. That does not make it right.</p>
<p>You will also notice Floridians are coming out of the woodwork to take a swipe at UF. They hate the fact that the university is having such success on the field and in the classroom.</p>
<p>Was I supposed to be laughing this hard as I read through the whole survey? This made my Friday.</p>
<p>While president Machen was completing the form, I wonder if he was thinking about UF’s motto: “Civium in moribus rei publicae salus”. (The welfare of the state depends upon the morals of its citizens.)</p>
<p>Bernie Machen is a smart man who knows right from wrong. When he checked 5 on the form, he knew it was wrong.</p>
<p>This is Bernie Machen’s assessment and not the official University of Florida assessment. </p>
<p>Keep that in perspective</p>
<p>As the former President of the University of Utah and a former mid-level administrator at the University of Michigan, Machen would have had the opportunity to view at least two other groups of schools close-up: the Mountain West Conference schools, and the Big Ten/CIC schools.</p>
<p>Mountain West Conference
School/ Machen score / Overall PA score</p>
<p>Air Force (not in survey)
Brigham Young / 2 / 2.9
Colorado State / 3 / 2.8
New Mexico / 2 / 2.7
San Diego State / 3 / 2.7
Texas Christian / 3 / 2.6
UNLV / 2 / 2.4
Utah / 4 / 2.9
Wyoming / 2 / 2.5</p>
<p>These are all pretty middling schools. The national PA rates them all between 2 and 3; likewise, Machen generally gives them 2s or 3s (and remember, he’s got to use whole numbers). The obvious outliers here are Utah, where Machen was President until recently, which he overrates; and in-state arch-rival Brigham Young, which he arguably underrates. But again these kinds of outliers should wash out of the final PA aggregate rating. So far I’m not seeing much evidence of systematic bias.</p>
<p>Big Ten Conference/Committee on Institutional Cooperation</p>
<p>The Big Ten schools not only share an athletic conference. Through the CIC they, along with former Big Ten member the University of Chicago, also cooperate on academic and institutional matters. As a former administrator at Michigan, Machen should know a thing or two about this group of schools.</p>
<p>School / Machen score / Overall PA score
Chicago / 4 / 4.6
Illinois / 4 / 4.0
Indiana / 3 / 3.7
Iowa / 4 / 3.5
Michigan / 5 / 4.4
Michigan State / 3 / 3.4
Minnesota / 3 / 3.6
Northwestern / 4 / 4.3
Ohio State / 3 / 3.6
Penn State / 3 / 3.7
Purdue / 4 / 3.7
Wisconsin / 4/ 4.1</p>
<p>Again, it’s hard to say he got any of these egregiously wrong as all his scores are in the ballpark of the national expert consensus, in no case deviating by more than 0.6 from the national score—and remember, he’s constrained to give whole number scores, so if he thinks Michigan is between a 4 and a 5 he’s got to give it one or the other, he can’t give it a 4.5. Arguably some slight “home field advantage” for Iowa (where he got his PhD) and Michigan (where he taught and served as an administrator), but not major deviations from the national consensus, and any minor subjective preferences of this kind will be washed out by the scores of other survey participants. But in general, the consensus would be that among this group of schools Chicago, Northwestern, Michigan, Illinois, and Wisconsin form the top group; many would add Purdue on the strength of its science and engineering, as does Machen, who also adds Iowa—though he’s an outlier on that one, and not influential enough to budge Iowa in the overall PA rating. And even the weaker schools in the Big Ten are very strong academically, as reflected in their PA ratings which generally fall closer to 4 than to 3. Notice that Machen gives this group 3s, presumably to distinguish them from his 4s.</p>
<p>Notice also the larger pattern. Apart from his aberrant scoring of Florida and Utah, Machen clearly thinks the Big Ten/CIC schools are stronger as a group than the Mountain West, SEC, and Florida schools. That accords with the industry-wide consensus as well as the overall U.S. News rankings. These are not wild uninformed guesses, as the PA’s critics so endlessly charge. They’re thoughtful, informed judgments by someone who through the course of distinguished and varied academic career as undergrad, grad student, professor, mid-level administrator, and university president has had a great deal of interaction with very different groups of schools in widely dispersed parts of the country. </p>
<p>I actually think Bernie’s doing a pretty good job with this, and the closer you look at the data, the more it does to debunk the prejudices of the PA’s critics, rather than debunking the PA itself as the critics contend.</p>
<p>"I actually think Bernie’s doing a pretty good job with this, and the closer you look at the data, the more it does to debunk the prejudices of the PA’s critics, rather than debunking the PA itself as the critics contend. "</p>
<p>Thank you bclinktonk - and on that note I will retire from this thread.</p>
<p>One last thing to note: University of Utah had over $300 million in research last year.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Small correction, he was the Provost for awhile.</p>
<p>Machen is just doing what other schools do to manipulate the rankings. He has already stated he wants UF to be a top 10 public university. To accomplish this, his rankings reflect his desire to achieve this goal.</p>
<p>Florida obviously isn’t on the same degree as Harvard or Princeton, but you really can’t blame Machen for trying to further his university at the slight expense of others, a strategy most universities employ in such rankings. Pretty much every school employs these policies -looking at you Clemson- but UF is going to be the only one the mudslingers are targeting in the national spotlight.</p>
<p>Can you blame Machen as much as the inherently flawed system itself?</p>
<p>Hate the game not the player</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Yeah, Montana=Auburn=Dartmouth=Brown. That sounds dead on to me.</p>
<p>Dartmouth and Brown are basically Liberal Arts Colleges with a few Graduate Programs here and there.</p>
<p>Once again hate the system, but do not blame Machen for the flaws in the Peer Assessment criteria.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Exactly. Living is easy, with eyes closed.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Ah, so undergraduate education assessment is based on the strength and number of graduate programs? Good to know.</p>