US NEWS 2013 Ranking Predictions

[g0ld3n]

<p>^The irony in that post is almost unfathomable, especially since indisputably USC was always in the shadow of UCLA until the last decade (even in football in the 90s)…Don’t worry I won’t throw a tantrum, this thread has been extremely entertaining for me. </p>

<p>And RML, I wanted to get involved in either CS or Behavioral Neuroscience as a career (equally passionate about both). I got into UCLA for Neuro and Berkeley for CS. Ultimately I talked to family and professionals in both fields and decided to go the Neuro MD/Ph.D route after undergrad instead of the CS route. Undoubtedly both schools are literally the top of the nation in their fields of specialty. I currently work in a lab I’m extremely interested in joining for grad school. Hopefully it works out. I just find it really funny and amusing that any departmental comparison between Cal and UCLA you think is a “trash story.” That actually made me laugh in real life, and is why I would refuse to even attempt to engage in discussion with you. </p>

<p>Here’s their respective grad department rankings.</p>

<p>[Best</a> Behavioral Neuroscience Programs | Top Psychology Schools | US News Best Graduate Schools](<a href=“http://grad-schools.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-graduate-schools/top-humanities-schools/behavioral-neuroscience-rankings]Best”>http://grad-schools.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-graduate-schools/top-humanities-schools/behavioral-neuroscience-rankings)</p>

<p>[Best</a> Computer Engineering Programs | Top Engineering Schools | US News Graduate Schools](<a href=“http://grad-schools.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-graduate-schools/top-engineering-schools/computer-engineering-rankings]Best”>http://grad-schools.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-graduate-schools/top-engineering-schools/computer-engineering-rankings)</p>

[askjeeves]

<p>

UCLA students have such an inferiority complex. But they are always in the shadow of Berkeley that has to be hard. Also now that USC is Southern California’s leading university (minus Caltech) that is even harder for them to swallow. So Bears, let them throw their tantrum and tarnish the rep of UCLA.

</p>

<p>From what I’ve read throughout this thread it seems like the UCLA kids are at least trying to justify their arguments with some evidence or sources, while Berkeley boosters like RML simply make unsubstantiated assertions with little basis and overt immaturity.</p>

[beyphy]

<p>

ARWU: +8
Undergrad Engineering Rank: +13
High School Counselor Rank: +14
Undergrad Business Rank: Infinite…but probably +10-15</p>

<p>Shall I put up grad rankings and faculty achievement gaps?

</p>

<p>like i can’t do the same? In favor of UCLA</p>

<p>Nytimes: +19</p>

<p>Forbes: +15 (in before ‘forbes is an invalid ranking’ comment.)</p>

<p>

The top philosophy programs according to NRC (Reputational Ranking) are:</p>

<p>Tier 1: Rutgers, Princeton, and Michigan
Tier 2: NYU, Cornell, Berkeley, MIT, UChicago, Pittsburgh, BU, Duke, Brown, Notre Dame, and Harvard</p>

<p>Honorable Mention: Columbia, Stanford, and UNC-Chapel Hill

</p>

<p>The only respectable ranking in philosophy ranking is the PhilosophicalGourmet. It’s a poll conducted by some of the most eminent philosophical professors within the field, and it’s conducted biannually. </p>

<p>In the ranking, Notre Dame (18) Brown (19) and Chicago (20) barely break the top 20; Duke (24) barely cracks the top 25. Compare that to Berkeley (14) and UCLA (11)</p>

<p>[The</a> Philosophical Gourmet Report 2011 :: Overall Rankings](<a href=“http://www.philosophicalgourmet.com/overall.asp]The”>http://www.philosophicalgourmet.com/overall.asp)</p>

<p>

I’m sure all of these places are great places to get an undergraduate Philosophy education.

</p>

<p>relevent: </p>

<p>[The</a> Philosophical Gourmet Report 2011 :: Undergraduate Study](<a href=“http://www.philosophicalgourmet.com/undergrad.asp]The”>http://www.philosophicalgourmet.com/undergrad.asp)</p>

[rjkofnovi]

<p>^^^Of course Michigan is highly ranked in all polls pertaining to philosophy. Next…</p>

[bclintonk]

<p>Yes, the Philosophical Gourmet is based on much more recent survey data than NRC, which was pretty much out-of-date before it was ever published, with 2011 rankings based on data that was initially collected in 2006. Philosophical Gourmet ranks schools by their mean score, but PG also reports median scores. If you look at the medians, you get this interesting clustering:</p>

<ol>
<li>NYU 5.0</li>
<li>(tie) Rutgers, Princeton, Michigan 4.5</li>
<li>(tie) Harvard, Pitt, MIT, Yale, Stanford, UNC-Chapel Hill, Columbia, UCLA, USC, CUNY, Cornell, Arizona, UC Berkeley 4.0</li>
<li>(tie) Notre Dame, Brown, Chicago, Texas 3.5</li>
<li>(tie) UCSD, Wisconsin, Duke, Indiana, Ohio State, Colorado, UMass-Amherst, UC Irvine, Penn, Northwestern, UC Riverside, U Maryland, U Miami, WUSTL, Georgetown 3.0 </li>
</ol>

<p>That clustering makes it clear that Michigan philosophy ranks among the true elites in the field. UCLA and UC Berkeley are the next rank back, still among some pretty elite company that includes 4 members of the HYPSM group (only Princeton’s a notch ahead, at Michigan’s level) plus two other Ivies, Cornell and Columbia, both historically strong in philosophy. Two otherwise undistinguished publics, Pitt and Arizona, also make that group; they’ve been anomalously strong in philosophy for a long time. Also making an appearance in that group is CUNY, largely on the strength of a single faculty member, Saul Kripke, one of the most influential philosophers of our time, who was at Princeton for a long time but apparently decided he prefers life in the city.</p>

<p>Brown and Chicago are another notch back, strong but not quite at the elite level at the present moment.</p>

<p>Duke is yet another notch back in a group consisting mostly of better-than-average publics. These schools have very good philosophy departments but no one would mistake them for the cream of the crop.</p>

[UCBChemEGrad]

<p>The original:
[California</a> Fight Song - “Big C” - YouTube](<a href=“- YouTube”>- YouTube)</p>

<p>The imposter:
[UCLA</a> Bruins fight song sons of westwood - YouTube](<a href=“UCLA Bruins fight song sons of westwood - YouTube”>UCLA Bruins fight song sons of westwood - YouTube)</p>

[beyphy]

<p>

"I picked up the telephone and called in from somewhere, and the phone operator said, ‘University of California.’ And I said, ‘Is this Berkeley?’ She said, ‘No.’ I said, ‘Well, who have I gotten to?’ ‘UCLA.’ I said, ‘Why didn’t you say UCLA?’ ‘Oh,’ she said, ‘we’re instructed to say University of California.’ So the next morning I went to the office and wrote a memo; I said, ‘Will you please instruct the operators, as of noon today, when they answer the phone to say, “UCLA.”’ And they said, ‘You know they won’t like it at Berkeley.’ And I said, ‘Well, let’s just see. There are a few things maybe we can do around here without getting their permission.’"

</p>

<p>[University</a> of California, Los Angeles - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia](<a href=“University of California, Los Angeles - Wikipedia”>University of California, Los Angeles - Wikipedia)</p>

<p>And we’ve been doing things without their permission eeeeeeeever since.</p>

<p>There’s also a funny poster in our administrative building, Murphy Hall, that has a quote from the chancelor of Berkeley in the '20s saying something like “The southern branch of the university of california…will never offer graduate studies.” or something like that. I guess we showed him. And afterwards it says “Succeeding against heavy lobbying from Berkeley, UCLA was able to establish its graduate programs.” Always makes me laugh when i pass it.</p>

<p>The relationship between Berkeley and UCLA more accurately portrayed is “the oppressor” vs “the hero” (respectively :))</p>

[goldenboy8784]

<p>

@bclintonk

Yes, the Philosophical Gourmet is based on much more recent survey data than NRC, which was pretty much out-of-date before it was ever published, with 2011 rankings based on data that was initially collected in 2006.

Let me get this straight, rankings from 5 years ago are “out-of-date”? You do realize the academic reputation of departments change at a glacial rate right? The NRC is the foremost authority on evaluating doctoral programs in the country that takes into account various factors besides Peer Reputation which is all that The Philosophical Gourmet considers.</p>

<p>

@bclintonk

Brown and Chicago are another notch back, strong but not quite at the elite level at the present moment.</p>

<p>Duke is yet another notch back in a group consisting mostly of better-than-average publics. These schools have very good philosophy departments but no one would mistake them for the cream of the crop.

Chicago and Duke certainly have elite philosophy departments; to say otherwise really diminishes the credibility of The Philosophical Gourmet.</p>

<p>[NRC</a> Rankings Overview: Philosophy - Faculty - The Chronicle of Higher Education](<a href=“http://chronicle.com/article/NRC-Rankings-Overview-/124753/]NRC”>http://chronicle.com/article/NRC-Rankings-Overview-/124753/)</p>

<p>University of Chicago
R-Rank: 3-11
S-Rank: 4-14</p>

<p>Chicago is truly in distinguished company here as only Michigan, Rutgers, Princeton, and Berkeley have both R and S ratings whose upper ranges are at 15 or below.</p>

<p>Duke
R-Rank: 5-20
S-Rank: 8-20</p>

<p>Duke also ranks as among the top philosophy programs in the nation with only NYU, MIT, Rutgers, Princeton, and Michigan clearly exceeding it when you look at both the R and the S Ranks.</p>

<p>The R-Rank measures the traditional reputation of the program while the S-Rank calculates which programs offer resources faculty consider to be most in line with what an elite philosophy department should look like. When used together, there isn’t a more powerful tool when evaluating the quality of a doctoral program.</p>

<p>As Brian Leiter states though, it is most important to attend a university with a strong undergraduate academic focus rather than a glitzy graduate powerhouse to prepare oneself for entrance into the nation’s elite PhD programs. He specifically recommends Brown and Yale over Michigan and Texas for example for this reason.</p>

[beyphy]

<p>

You do realize the academic reputation of departments change at a glacial rate right?

</p>

<p>Not in philosophy. There are key people who, if they made transitions to other departments would increase those department’s rankings dramatically. USC, for example, was able to take two very well regarded professors from Oxford, which propelled them from 17 to 11. (they also hired other people.)</p>

<p>Another example with Paul Guyer (basically the world’s foremost Kant scholar.)</p>

<p>[Leiter</a> Reports: A Philosophy Blog: Guyer from Penn to Brown](<a href=“http://leiterreports.typepad.com/blog/2011/11/guyer-from-penn-to-brown.html]Leiter”>http://leiterreports.typepad.com/blog/2011/11/guyer-from-penn-to-brown.html)</p>

<p>

Chicago and Duke certainly have elite philosophy departments; to say otherwise really diminishes the credibility of The Philosophical Gourmet.

</p>

<p>Wah wah, this ranking conflicts with my uninformed intuitions, therefore it’s invalid…</p>

<p>The truth is, I’d trust professional philosophers, who are the ones doing the rating, and hiring of people from other departments much more than i would the NRC.</p>

<p>Here’s another Leiter post, which severely undermines the credibility of the NRC ranking:</p>

<p>[Leiter</a> Reports: A Philosophy Blog: A Quick Guide to the New National Research Council (NRC) Rankings](<a href=“http://leiterreports.typepad.com/blog/2010/09/a-quick-guide-to-the-new-national-research-council-rankings.html]Leiter”>http://leiterreports.typepad.com/blog/2010/09/a-quick-guide-to-the-new-national-research-council-rankings.html)</p>

[rjkofnovi]

<p>Is there a difference in those fight songs UCB? This one is very distinctive:</p>

<p>[Michigan</a> Fight Song: The Victors - YouTube](<a href=“- YouTube”>- YouTube)</p>

[bclintonk]

<p>

@goldenboy8784

Let me get this straight, rankings from 5 years ago are “out-of-date”? You do realize the academic reputation of departments change at a glacial rate right?

</p>

<p>LOL. Philosophy is a field with at most a few thousand active practitioners, a few hundred of whom have substantial academic reputations, and probably fewer than 100 of whom have have reputations weighty enough to influence the reputations of the institutions with which they are associated. It’s also a field that doesn’t require labs or other expensive facilities; basically, the schools where the top philosophers are concentrated are going to be the top graduate programs, because that’s where any faculty member who knows anything about the field is going to try to send their top undergrads if they decide to pursue graduate studies. So it’s very much a “name-driven” field. All it takes sometimes is two or three key people dying, retiring, or making lateral moves to drop a philosophy faculty from the top ranks, or a few hiring coups to vault a faculty into the top ranks. Look at Yale’s meteoric rise in the Philosophical Gourmet rankings: #24 in 2004, to #16 by 2006, to #9 in 2009, to #5 in 2011, all because of a handful of strategic hires. None of that is reflected in the NRC rankings. Or look at Columbia’s stumble in the Philosophical Gourmet rankings, from #6 in 2004 to #9 in 2006 to #13 in 2009, before recovering slightly to #11 in 2011, all because of a few key departures and retirements. Or look at Harvard’s steady rise from #9 in 2004, to #7 in 2006, to #6 in 2009, to #5 in 2011. This is not “change at a glacial rate.”</p>

<p>Duke, on the other hand, has never been regarded by philosophers as being at the super-elite level: #29 in 2004, #27 in 2006, #26 in 2009, #24 in 2011. Not bad, but essentially at the same level as Indiana, Wisconsin, Ohio State, Colorado, and UMass-Amherst over this entire period: rated by its peers as “good” (3), but not “strong” (4) or “distinguished” (5).</p>

[Sparkeye7]

<p>A Photo Tour of the Best Children’s Hospitals 2012-13
6/05/12</p>

<p>[The</a> Honor Roll: A Photo Tour of the Best Children?s Hospitals 2012-13 - US News & World Report](<a href=“http://health.usnews.com/health-news/best-childrens-hospitals/slideshows/a-photo-tour-of-the-best-childrens-hospitals-2012-13?s_cid=related-links:TOP]The”>http://health.usnews.com/health-news/best-childrens-hospitals/slideshows/a-photo-tour-of-the-best-childrens-hospitals-2012-13?s_cid=related-links:TOP)</p>

<p>[U-M’s&lt;/a&gt; C.S. Mott Children’s Hospital earns top rankings from U.S. News & World Report - PR Newswire - The Sacramento Bee](<a href=“http://www.sacbee.com/2012/06/05/4540218/u-ms-cs-mott-childrens-hospital.html]U-M’s”>http://www.sacbee.com/2012/06/05/4540218/u-ms-cs-mott-childrens-hospital.html)</p>

<p>The newest USNWR Best Hospitals (Children), since hospital rankings were brought up earlier.</p>

<p>Best Children’s Hospitals Honor Roll</p>

<p><a href=“http://health.usnews.com/health-news/best-childrens-hospitals/articles/2012/06/05/2012-13-best-childrens-hospitals-the-honor-roll[/url]”>http://health.usnews.com/health-news/best-childrens-hospitals/articles/2012/06/05/2012-13-best-childrens-hospitals-the-honor-roll&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p>TOSU’s Nationwide Children’s Hospital is tied for #8 this year. :)</p>

<h1>5 Children’s Hospital Los Angeles is actually affiliated with the Keck School of Medicine of the University of Southern California.</h1>

<p>*Last but not least, I believe UCLA & Michigan are pretty much tied in this department?! The online free version only shows Top-10… @_@"</p>

[goldenboy8784]

<p>

@bclintonk

Duke, on the other hand, has never been regarded by philosophers as being at the super-elite level: #29 in 2004, #27 in 2006, #26 in 2009, #24 in 2011. Not bad, but essentially at the same level as Indiana, Wisconsin, Ohio State, Colorado, and UMass-Amherst over this entire period: rated by its peers as “good” (3), but not “strong” (4) or “distinguished” (5).

You are basing your perception of a program solely based on what other faculty members think? Almost every other ranking of philosophy programs puts Duke in the top 10, 15, or at least 20. I would trust the combination of all of these studies over one ranking that only focuses on “Peer Assessment” and doesn’t take into account Job Placement, Teacher Quality, Percentage of International Students, GRE Scores, Department Resources, etc. etc.</p>

<p>Essentially the way the Philosophical Gourmet ranking works is a bunch of old philosophers exclaiming “Oh Saul Kripke teaches at CUNY, lets give it a 5!!” Just because there is one eminent philosopher that moves into a department, that doesn’t mean the job placement of those PhD Candidates studying there will exponentially increase or something.</p>

<p>Hirsch Ranking of U.S. Philosophy Programs
[Complete</a> Hirsch Number Rankings of U.S. Philosophy PhD Programs | Certain Doubts](<a href=“http://el-prod.baylor.edu/certain_doubts/?page_id=774]Complete”>http://el-prod.baylor.edu/certain_doubts/?page_id=774)
Chicago: #7
Duke: #9</p>

<p>PhDs.org
[Ranking</a> of Philosophy Graduate Schools — PhDs.org Graduate School Guide](<a href=“http://graduate-school.phds.org/rankings/philosophy/rank/basic#w1]Ranking”>http://graduate-school.phds.org/rankings/philosophy/rank/basic#w1)
Chicago: #1-5
Duke: #8-25</p>

<p>U.S. News World’s Best Schools in Philosophy
[World’s</a> Best Universities in Philosophy; Top Philosophy Universities | US News](<a href=“http://www.usnews.com/education/worlds-best-universities-rankings/best-universities-philosophy]World’s”>http://www.usnews.com/education/worlds-best-universities-rankings/best-universities-philosophy)
Chicago: #6 among American universities
Duke: #17 among American universities</p>

<p>At any rate, even Brian Leiter advises that its more important to attend a strong undergraduate institution than a weak undergraduate school with a strong graduate program.</p>

<p>[The</a> Philosophical Gourmet Report 2011 :: Undergraduate Study](<a href=“http://www.philosophicalgourmet.com/undergrad.asp]The”>http://www.philosophicalgourmet.com/undergrad.asp)
*"Over the years, many high school students or their parents have contacted me to inquire how to use the Report with respect to choosing an undergraduate institution. The first point to make is that the focus of this Report is on graduate study only: Pittsburgh may have an outstanding philosophy department, but it might make more sense for a good student interested in philosophy to do his or her undergraduate work at Johns Hopkins or Amherst, where student-faculty ratios are more favorable, and where there is a stronger focus on undergraduate education. Many faculty at major departments did not do their undergraduate work at institutions with top-ranked PhD programs. The tenured faculty at Michigan, for example, includes folks who did undergraduate work at Wesleyan, Tulane, Oberlin, and John Carroll, among other places. The tenured faculty at Texas includes folks who did undergraduate work at Missouri, Michigan State, and UVA. There are eminent philosophers—who have held or now hold tenured posts at top ten departments—who did their undergraduate work at the University of New Mexico, Queens College (New York), and the University of Pittsburgh. It is possible to get good philosophical training in many undergraduate settings.</p>

<p>High school students interested in philosophy would do best to identify schools that have strong reputations for undergraduate education first. Only then, should they look in to the quality of the philosophy department. Some ranked PhD programs have good reputations for undergraduate education, like Princeton, Yale, Brown and Rice, among many others. The larger universities (like Harvard or Michigan or Texas) tend to offer a more mixed undergraduate experience, largely due to their size."*</p>

[bclintonk]

<p>goldenboy,</p>

<p>Now you’re desperately grasping at straws.</p>

<ol>
<li><p>Hirsch is well-intentioned, but basically a lone idiosyncratic crank. His rankings have no following and little or no credibility. Basically not much more than random garbage off the web.</p></li>
<li><p>You completely misread the PhDs.org data. They place Duke #21 in philosophy in the U.S., roughly consistent with the Philosophical Gourmet ranking. Your mistake: you assumed the first column of data was the overall PhD.org ranking, when in fact it only reflected one of the two NRC rankings–in this case, the one Duke did particularly well on. That’s not corroboration of NRC, but rather mere recapitulation of a subset of the outdated and otherwise dubious NRC data. Combining all of PhD.org’s data–also dubious, I might add—they come up with a ranking for Duke that is not materially different from the Philosophical Gourmet ranking, i.e., this is a good-but-not-great philosophy department.</p></li>
<li><p>The “US News World’s Best Schools in Philosophy” is just a restatement of the widely discredited UK-based QS Survey, but in any event, Duke’s #18 in the U.S. in that survey (not #17 as you erroneously report) is also not materially different from the Philosophical Gourmet ranking. Bottom line, no one has ever placed Duke philosophy among the top handful. Ever.</p></li>
<li><p>The Philosophical Gourmet is not, as you erroneously characterize it, a “bunch of old philosophers.” It is a survey of all the major figures in the field. Since they are ultimately the people who determine what is considered quality work in the field, I should think their views would count for a whole lot more than the uninformed musings of some snotty-nosed brat such as yourself.</p></li>
<li><p>I don’t dispute Brian Leiter’s claim that it’s possible to get a reasonably good undergraduate education in philosophy at a wide variety of institutions, so long as they take the discipline seriously, have a sufficient core of faculty active in the field, and make sufficient investments in undergraduate education. I do think, however, that he is extremely wide of the mark in dismissing the quality of undergraduate education in the field at a place like Michigan which has by all accounts one of the world’s outstanding philosophy faculties and, if you take time to examine the program, places an extremely heavy emphasis on undergraduate education, with all faculty pitching in and very nearly all courses taught by tenured or tenure-track faculty, in most cases in small-class settings. I have long maintained that the undergraduate education in philosophy I received at Michigan could have been matched at perhaps 3 or 4 U.S. colleges or universities. Duke was not among them then, nor do I think it is now.</p></li>
</ol>

[beyphy]

<p>

At any rate, even Brian Leiter advises that its more important to attend a strong undergraduate institution than a weak undergraduate school with a strong graduate program.

</p>

<p>Leiter also says:</p>

<p>

Elsewhere in the Report I suggest that students consider the overall resources and quality of universities they are considering attending. Although philosophy is a specialized enough field that a strong philosophy program is reason enough to attend a particular school, many students may find it helpful to have some perspective on what schools have to offer beyond philosophy. There are now a number of “world rankings” of universities, of varying degrees of credibility and good sense—one can find them easily enough through an Internet search. I’ll confine myself here just to Anglophone universities. In the U.S., there are three broad tiers of strong research universities; I list only those with PhD programs in philosophy.</p>

<p>At the very top (alphabetically): Columbia University; Cornell University; Harvard University; Massachussetts Institute of Technology; Princeton University; Stanford University; University of California, Berkeley; University of California, Los Angeles; University of Chicago; University of Michigan, Ann Arbor; Yale University.</p>

<p>A notch below (not as outstanding in as many areas, but still offering substantial intellectual resources across many fields of study): Brown University; Carnegie-Mellon University; Duke University; Johns Hopkins University; New York University; Northwestern University; University of California, San Diego; University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign; University of Minnesota, Minneapolis-St. Paul (maybe); University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill; University of Pennsylvania; University of Texas, Austin; University of Washington, Seattle (maybe); University of Wisconsin, Madison.

</p>

<p>[The</a> Philosophical Gourmet Report 2011 :: Top Research Universities](<a href=“http://www.philosophicalgourmet.com/topresearch.asp]The”>http://www.philosophicalgourmet.com/topresearch.asp)</p>

[system]

<p>When do the rankings come out anyways?</p>

[bluedog]

<p>

When do the rankings come out anyways?

</p>

<p>Sometime in September. Last year they went live on their website on September 13. Definitely when I saw this thread title, I was expecting to see a arguments about the quality of various PhD Philosophy programs as well as Pac-12 fight songs. :)</p>

[Alexandre]

<p>“As Brian Leiter states though, it is most important to attend a university with a strong undergraduate academic focus rather than a glitzy graduate powerhouse to prepare oneself for entrance into the nation’s elite PhD programs. He specifically recommends Brown and Yale over Michigan and Texas for example for this reason.”</p>

<p>Brian Leiter never recommended Brown and Yale over Michigan or Texas. He merely suggested that larger programs should be approached with caution because of their size. That argument does not make sense mind you, as Philosophy attracts very few undergraduate concentrators (~40-50 annually at Michigan). Considering the size of Michigan’s Philosophy faculty (~30), it is no wonder that class size in majors such as Philosophy tend to be small. </p>

<p>And is there any reason you left Harvard out goldenboy? He clearly mentioned Harvard along with Michigan and Texas-Austin.</p>

[Sparkeye7]

<p>

I gave a presentation at the forum called “U.S.News & World Report’s Best Colleges: Details Behind Last Year’s Changes and What Will Be New for the Upcoming Rankings.”

</p>

<p>Oh no, this better be good!! lol</p>

<p>Actually, I am not concerned at all!! No matter what changes U.S News tries to make in the future, tOSU will only be moving up not down the rankings. Unless they really screw it up… :)</p>

<p>[U.S&lt;/a&gt;. News Presents at Association for Institutional Research 2012 Forum - Morse Code: Inside the College Rankings (usnews.com)](<a href=“http://www.usnews.com/education/blogs/college-rankings-blog/2012/06/07/us-news-presents-at-association-for-institutional-research-2012-forum]U.S”>http://www.usnews.com/education/blogs/college-rankings-blog/2012/06/07/us-news-presents-at-association-for-institutional-research-2012-forum)</p>

[goldenboy8784]

<p>

@bclintonk

4. The Philosophical Gourmet is not, as you erroneously characterize it, a “bunch of old philosophers.” It is a survey of all the major figures in the field. Since they are ultimately the people who determine what is considered quality work in the field, I should think their views would count for a whole lot more than the uninformed musings of some snotty-nosed brat such as yourself

I don’t contend that they are in a fine position to evaluate the quality of the philosophy faculty at other schools but their views don’t neccessarily dictate the PhD prospects of graduate candidates at philosophy departments at these various universities nor can they predict how undergraduates will benefit from a certain program and fare in graduate school admission. Essentially, there are other factors to consider besides how reputable the faculty is in the field.</p>

<p>At any rate, I don’t think Duke Philosophy is in the top 5 or top 10 at the graduate level. It is definitely a top 20 PhD program though and that material difference between being top 20 versus being top 25 is one that matters to me and I would venture a whole host of people, although it might not to you.</p>

<p>

@bclintonk

I have long maintained that the undergraduate education in philosophy I received at Michigan could have been matched at perhaps 3 or 4 U.S. colleges or universities. Duke was not among them then, nor do I think it is now.

I’m not sure how you can claim that with such certainty. Princeton is the only surefire bet to an incredible undergraduate philosophy experience due to having the complete package-faculty, students, undergraduate focus, class sizes, resources, etc. Michigan, Rutgers, and NYU certainly carry the heavy-hitting faculty but they don’t have the same caliber students and financial resources for undergraduates that a Chicago or a Rice have for instance.</p>

<p>For kicks, lets examine the undergraduate background of Princeton’s current cohort of Philosophy graduate students:</p>

<p>[Graduate</a> Students](<a href=“http://philosophy.princeton.edu/component/option,com_student/Itemid,185/]Graduate”>http://philosophy.princeton.edu/component/option,com_student/Itemid,185/)</p>

<p>You"ll see a couple of Stanfords, a couple of Yales, a couple of Princetons a couple of Browns, a couple of Cornells, a couple of Amhersts, a couple of Southern Californias (small gasp!) and a couple of UC-Boulders (a bigger gasp!!). Every Ivy League school is represented with the exception of Columbia (unless I missed it) and you"ll find Duke, Rice, Hopkins, Vanderbilt, UCLA, and UVA representatives as well in addition to a whole smattering of LACs beyond the WASP schools.</p>

<p>Interestingly enough, I didn’t spot a Berkeley, Michigan, or an NYU. I did see one Rutgers though. Just based on this list, there seems to be little correlation between the strength of the graduate philosophy program at a university and the placement of undergraduates in that university at elite PhD programs.</p>

<p>I would echo Leiter’s advice: go to the most reputable undergraduate school you are admitted to and choose based on fit if the schools carry the same reputation.</p>

<p>

@Alexandre

And is there any reason you left Harvard out goldenboy? He clearly mentioned Harvard along with Michigan and Texas-Austin.

I apologize for that omission; Duke isn’t the only private elite that Leiter is not particularly fond of it seems. Still bitter about a past Harvard rejection perhaps?;)</p>

<p>

@beyphy

Leiter also says:

Does Leiter also know that Duke has more financial resources, a better graduate school placement record, superior professional schools, much stronger students, smaller class sizes, more student to faculty ratio, and stronger departments across a wider array of subjects than UCLA? He clearly didn’t think this one through.</p>