<p>
Now that I’m actually looking at those numbers, they strike me as decidedly off. It seems they’re trying to combine both research and undergraduate focus, resulting in a bastardized mix that reflects neither.</p>
<p>Berkeley scores higher than any of the other publics, and while it has a slight lead in selectivity, this is clearly a testament to its strong graduate programs. One could reasonably conclude that the measurement is therefore measuring pure academic heft, something supported by HYMPS also being at the top and Michigan’s reasonable rank as high but a few slots below Berkeley. So far, so good.</p>
<p>But! Things get odd when you start to look at the other publics. UCLA and Michigan are virtually interchangeable in selectivity, and with the notable exception of engineering, the two are neck and neck in most fields. The difference between the two in PA is a not inconsiderable 0.3 points, however (i.e. 0.9 points on the overall ranking). Similarly, you have UVA receiving the highest peer assessment in the South, despite both UNC Chapel Hill and UT Austin having noticeably stronger faculties. Some of the private universities also seem displaced relative to their academic heft – Hopkins receiving a higher PA score than Penn is one example, and Caltech’s score seems quite low. The high selectivity of Dartmouth trumps its lack of top-flight graduate programs for PA, yet the same does not hold true for WUStL. So many inconsistencies!</p>
<p>On an unrelated note, I don’t believe anyone has posted the undergraduate teaching ranking yet.</p>
<ol>
<li>Dartmouth / Princeton</li>
<li>Miami U</li>
<li>U Maryland - BC / Yale</li>
<li>Brown</li>
<li>Stanford</li>
<li>Berkeley / Notre Dame / William & Mary</li>
<li>Chicago / Clemson</li>
</ol>
<p>Analysis
UMD-BC +9
Yale +6
Stanford +3
Clemson +1
Princeton +1
Brown ±0
Dartmouth ±0
Miami U -1
Berkeley -2
W&M -3
Notre Dame -4</p>
<p>Added: Chicago
Dropped: Michigan, Purdue, UVA, UVM, Wake Forest</p>