<p>“The journalists compare MANY elements and shed light on the differences in performance, comfort, price, gas mileage … name it. There has to be “some” basis behind the opinion.”</p>
<p>The basis can be subconscious, Xiggi. It doesn’t have to be concrete.</p>
<p>Maybe, I saw a beautiful blonde woman in a red Miata, and I now love the car.</p>
<p>True. ;)</p>
<p>Bernie Machen could of shafted Penn State, Syracuse, George Washington, University of Maryland, UIUC, and the University of Miami so that UF could skate up the rankings. He did nothing of the sort and they received a fair assessment in my opinion. Malicious intent was not his objective (unlike Clemson University).</p>
<p>Floridians are just upset because the truth hurts. Remember the Gainesville Sun is the newspaper that broke the story. I would also argue there may of been a hidden agenda on the local level.</p>
<p>Dstark, adding criteria such as reputation of graduate schools, reputation of professors (teaching or simply offering substance to the website,) or similar items that are suposedly NOT part of the current survey does not trouble me at all. In the end, each element would represent a 8% to 10% of a total score. So what if Berkeley or Michigan score all 5.00 in the above described categories? At least, we will know HOW respondents score and how they form their opinions.</p>
<p>
Why would I hate the fact that UF is having such success? I LOVE that UF is having great success. But to raise your own program up by pulling other state U’s down…that is what has people is the state of Florida bothered by this. There is healthy competition, lifting your self up and lifting the entire state program up. Then there is lifting yourself up and at the same time dragging others down. THAT is the perception in Florida today. </p>
<p>Say you take Organic Chem, your smart and you get 93-96 on exams. You could tutor others, have group study sessions. And in the process, you would help yourself and classmates. You probably might even start getting 98-100’s given the additional understanding you gain while you help othesr. Or you could help no one, and when asked, given information that makes concepts more confusing. Or you could even make blatant errors in explaining things to classmates. Does their poorer grades make your A any better? And how about your reputation. And when it comes to group projects and lab partners, is that going to help you or hurt you?</p>
<p><a href=“http://www.tampabay.com/opinion/editorials/article1011155.ece[/url]”>http://www.tampabay.com/opinion/editorials/article1011155.ece</a></p>
<p>Because xiggi,</p>
<p>Once I’m told how to judge, it’s not my belief anymore is it?
What if I don’t care about large class sizes? What if I do?</p>
<p>It’s my opinion. I don’t need to be told to judge a school based on how many classes are under 20. That’s already in the USNWR (and I think it’s bs). I don’t need to judge a school based on average SAT scores. (That’s in the USNWR already and that’s bs too. )</p>
<p>Who decides what the questions are in PA?
And who decides which answers are worth 8% and which are worth 10%?</p>
<p>What if I think something is worth 50% and it only gets a 10% share of the ranking?</p>
<p>Then my opinion isn’t really affected is it?</p>
<p>In the end, PA is just accumulated opinions, educated or not.</p>
<p>It’s not rocket science. It is never going to be rocket science. Never. </p>
<p>It doesn’t become rocket science by making the questions specific and making up percentages on how much each answer is worth.</p>
<p>
You’d probably go ape ****. :)</p>
<p>
Yes, so we can call them “fools” on an anonymous internet message board for not seeing it “our” way.</p>
<p>Sorry, but Berkeley and Michigan offer more “distinguished” academic programs than other research universities…the result is an accurate response to this question…despite allegations of “cooking the books”.</p>
<p>“Then there is lifting yourself up and at the same time dragging others down. THAT is the perception in Florida today.”</p>
<p>I understand what you are saying, but from a national perspective he was spot on in regards to the institions within Florida. Will also concede he should of ranked UF strong and not distinguished. But seeing as how he is the President of UF he should be given a pass (besides I do not think US News even counts his vote anyways).</p>
<p>Keep in mind the University of Florida is one of the largest research universities in the nation, contributes nearly $6 billion annually to Florida’s economy, and is responsible for nearly 75,000 jobs.</p>
<p>P2N,
“Florida State has more nationally ranked programs than Miami, btw.”</p>
<p>Gee, nobody even said anything about that…you trying to justify FSU even being near Miami’s ranking in Bernie Macs clown survey? Face it, in most OBJECTIVE measures, FSU (and UF for that matter) are behind Miami (Admission Rate, Test scores, GPA, class rank, Medical, Business, Marine Science programs, etc.). Just be thankful Bernie is deflecting attention from President No-Accountability leaving…passing that Chipley motel with the “VACANCY” sign lit up. </p>
<p>Again, as Hawkette said, this may be the first crack in the wall of peer assessment</p>
<p>University of Miami has the edge in research expenditures $325 million last year. Whereas FSU only had $211 million. However FSU has better graduate programs and a stronger faculty. Without the Miller School of Medicine the University of Miami would have lousy research expenditures, and the FSU College of Medicine is brand new and needs time to develop.</p>
<p>bclintonk has already shown how Machen’s ratings are pretty close to the average ratings from last year. Nothing else to discuss.</p>
<p>I have no problem discussing Machen’s rating. I will talk about it till the cows come home if posters like.</p>
<p>I guess what we learned here is that Floridian’s are ultra sensitive, and they believe that Machen’s assessment was too harsh. It was regrettable that it got leaked out, but by and large it was spot on. Granted his assessment of UF was too high and John Hopkins, Duke, and Cornell were too low.</p>
<p>SSobick, when I said “nothing else to discuss” I was talking about the bashing that really has no foundation at this point now that we’ve compared Machen’s ratings to national averages.</p>
<p>Anyone who fills out a survey will have outliers – it comes with the territory.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>UCB, one could expect a different statement from someone as intelligent and well-educated as you are. You keep on making a point that I did not make, namely that I’d have a problem with Cal earning a very high rating. I have often corrected you on this, but you insist on raising the same issue. As you should know by know, my “issue” is not with the score but with the attempts to explain the scores through “scientific” correlations, or with simplistic analyses of what the PA is … supposed to be measuring. </p>
<p>As I wrote before, the PA fans are merely running in circles trying to explain the inexplicable, or refusing to admit that the PA survey is a mere reputational survey that is long on “opinions,” very short on supporting data, and in the case of the outliers such as Berkeley one that cannot be correlated to … fill the blanks with the criteria du jour! </p>
<p>We have been there many times before, and there is no problem in agreeing to disagree. There is, however, a problem when one insists on misrepresenting the other side position. </p>
<p>HTH</p>
<p>Goufgators - I concur</p>
<p>It is a mix between an art & science sort of speak.</p>
<p>“As I wrote before, the PA defendent are merely running in circles trying to explain the inexplicable, or refusing to admit that the PA survey is a mere reputational survey that is long on “opinions” and very short on supporting data.”</p>
<p>PA is long on opinions. That’s what PA is. </p>
<p>I want to read those opinions.</p>
<p>And if I don’t agree, I’ll think those opinions are nonsense. :)</p>
<p>PA is not scientific.</p>
<p>What you would like to see added to PA Xiggi, doesn’t make PA scientific either. It will still be opinions.</p>
<p>It will never be scientific. </p>
<p>So Xiggi, why do you pretend that what you want makes PA more scientific?</p>
<p>I don’t get that Xiggi. </p>
<p>And Xiggi, none of the parts of USNWR rankings are scientific. Do you believe the other parts of USNWR rankings are scientific?</p>
<p>I’m sure many of the so called objective numbers are being manipulated as well.</p>
<p>Xiggi, using data does not make a ranking scientific.</p>
<p>“As I wrote before, the PA fans are merely running in circles trying to explain the inexplicable, or refusing to admit that the PA survey is a mere reputational survey that is long on “opinions,” very short on supporting data, and in the case of the outliers such as Berkeley one that cannot be correlated to … fill the blanks with the criteria du jour!”</p>
<p>OK Xiggi, you like to use the internet.</p>
<p>I’m serious now, because you like data.</p>
<p>Go to UC Berkeley’s website and check out the academic programs.
Then tell me which schools have academic programs with more depth and breadth than UC Berkeley.</p>
<p>^^^And then check Michigan’s. They have even more breadth than Berkeley.</p>
<p>For some reason that data doesn’t seem to count. ;)</p>
<p>Siserune, [Post</a> #97](<a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/1062763515-post97.html]Post”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/1062763515-post97.html):
</p>
<p>No one said a single school could alter the outcome of such a large survey. But such surveys could be easily influenced by a group of like-minded raters. I’d suggest this is one reason why marketing campaigns exist and professional associations meet for drinks. Clearly Machen cooked his results, are you suggesting it is impossible to game the system?</p>
<p>Xiggi wrote about why a professional person, such as Machen, would do this; why should it be relegated only to him? Seems he just got caught with his pants down.</p>