<p>Well, I happen to think that a response that has 260 adequate and two distinguished ought to be quite subjective. Not to mention extremely consistent!</p>
<p>I have NO opinion about Wisconsin. All I know about the school is what I see when they play football or when I argue with Barrons about the school ever breaking the fifty percent admission rate. That means I have no objective nor subjective opinion; and that places me within the same group of people who do “measure” the popularity of the school. With the exception of not pretending to be able to rank 200 schools with a modicum of knowledge. </p>
<p>Oops, I should have written the level of distinguished education! I assume that knowing how the school is ranked by the pseudo-scientists who throw that ARWU together would make me an instant expert! </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Did I ask for the PA survey results to follow the CDS numbers? The survey is entirely subjective. What I ask is for the numerical results published by USNews to correspond to the reality.</p>
<p>Again, make the darn thing public and transparent, and hold the responders to a minimum of integrity. Is that so hard?</p>
<p>Xiggi, wouldn’t you be curious though how other raters at Wisconsin rate other peers? I don’t care if you have no opinion on Wisconsin…but I find that hard to believe given your time here.</p>
<p>Correspond to what reality? Average SAT scores? Average class size? To what reality are you talking about PA corresponding?</p>
<p>this whole pa defense and excuse to accept weak instate students by state schoolers is getting old. (like somehow the state schools are forced to accept weak students…right). The undergrad programs at state schools cannot claim to be as good as the top privates simply because they have distinguished grad programs… By the other objective metrics like entering class profile, alumni giving rate, and student faculty ratios, the state schools will always fall short. Try as harder berzerkley</p>
<p>Ucb, you lost me. I have no idea about the other surveys at Wisconsin. I am not sure why you expect me to have an opinion about Wisconsin. I am sure it is a great school that fulfills its public mission. I am also sure they consider filling the USNews survey as an opportunity to game the rankings. At least one official did!</p>
<p>Read what I wrote about the data, and not the PA.</p>
<p>that’s great RML…lets focus on one aspect of Berkeley. How does the average Berkeley student compare to a wharton student? or a HPME Northwestern student? or a JHU BME student? or a Georgetown SFS student? or better yet, how does the average Berkeley student compare to an average student at these schools? not that well.</p>
<p>Xiggi, how can the voting in an entire survey involving thousands of voters from different universities be “strategic” and yet the final product be so accurate. You would think that if there was a concerted effort (read conspiracy) involved, Harvard, MIT, Princeton, Stanford and Yale would not be the top 5. Nor would elite universities such as Brown, Caltech, Chicago, Cornell, Dartmouth, Duke, Johns Hopkins, Northwestern and Penn be next. And schools like Emory, Georgetown, Notre Dame, Rice, Vanderbilt and WUSTL after those. In fact, if there was “strategic voting” involved, then all universities would be ranked roughly around the same with the tiniest of diviation. If all voters gave their own institution and alma matter a high rating and gave the rest of the universities they rated a similar rating, all universities would have PAs in the 2.8-3.2 range. </p>
<p>Clearly that is not happening. Most voters seem to be taking their responsibility seriously, with virtually 100% of voters giving schools like Harvard and Stanford a rating of 5 and the majority of voters assigning ratings of 4 or 5 to elite universities such as Brown and Northwestern. I do not see anything suspicious. Of course, like most surveys, you will have some who will abuse the rules, but those are filtered out. Can they all be filtered out? Obviously not, but few that remain will cancel each other out and the outcome should remain fairly reliable.</p>
<p>Let us be honest xiggi, if the best public universities received PAs of 4.0 or less and the private universities remained the same, few on CC would question it.</p>
<p>Blah, you’re out of tune. On an earlier post you made, you claimed this:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I want you to prove that. Show me proofs that State Us can’t claim to be as good as the top privates. </p>
<p>The way I see it, the top publics can easily head-to-head with the so-called, elite privates, except HYPSMC. Berkeley’s engineering, for example, is easily superior to the elite privates save for Stanford and MIT. Berkeley’s undergrad engineering is superior to Duke’s or any Ivy school, save again for HYPSMC. </p>
<p>
Haas can very well compete with the top privates, save for Wharton. But why will you compare the average Berkeley student to the average business student of a top private business school? I don’t get your agenda.</p>
<p>Everyone is still obsessing I see. LOL. These rankings are like crack to some people. They just can’t get enough. Not just the proponents of them, but the opponents of them too. All the minutiae into methodologies and strategies and blah blah blah. When its all so irrelevant to anything and anyone…except of course to those obsessed with them. Everyone applying theorums and analytical tools and laboratory experiments. LOL. </p>
<p>Whatever people. You just can’t get enough, I suppose.</p>
<p>Who cares? Any university in the top 100 will provide a solid education. As a society we should be more concerned about is the university’s value to the community.</p>
<p>Do they offer a chance for first generation, poorer students to get an education that will impact their communities back home? Does the student body serve as a role model, or are they just living off of Daddy’s trust fund?</p>
<p>Quit jacking off over college rankings, nobody cares if X university dropped 2 spots or moved up 1. There isn’t a big difference from a rank 40 school and one that is 36.</p>
<p>The article referred to by Xiggi was written in 2009 for a survey, which presumably rated schools based on 2008 data. Paul DeLuca was appointed Provost at UW-Madison in June 2009. According to the article he stated: “he is not okay with the survey responses and would take a more hands-on approach in the future. Overall, he says, he approves of the peer survey and its 25 percent weight; he believes that all the responses, averaged together, provide a reasonable gauge of quality.”</p>
<p>Thanks for the free one-year subscription info!</p>
<p>Now, how does one access rankings by individual factors such as PA or faculty resources? I’ve seen such rankings reproduced here on CC, but can’t seem to access them on the US News site (those factors don’t appear as columns in the Rankings Data table).</p>
<p>Yes, but there are firms that effectively limit their hiring to ten or so schools and limit hiring of their best positions to two or three schools. Capital One is a good example. </p>
<p>The schools they hire from aren’t always the top schools on the US News list, but they’re almost never schools outside of the top 20.</p>
<p>Until NYU starts including stats (SAT and GPA) of kids accepted into its LPS program (or whatever they are calling it), they should be considered as non-reporting and dropped from list.</p>
</p>