US News Peer Assessment Rating Controversy At Clemson Part III

College Search & Selection
21

<p>HarvardGator wrote: "I have maintained that any ranking system that has UC Santa Barbara, Irvine and Davis in the top 50 ranked over UT, UF, Penn State (flagship unis.), … as does USNWR, is a joke. </p>

<h2>By any reasonable standard these [SAT] numbers are atrocious for purported top 50 schools. Ridiculous. "</h2>

<p>Are you saying that the SAT scores for Florida, Texas and Penn State makes their Top 50 ranking RIDICULOUS?</p>

<p>Or are you saying that the SAT scores for UCs Santa Barbara (#44), Davis (#42), and Irvine (#44) could not possibly place them above Florida (#49), Texas (#44) and Penn State (#48)? Let’s have a look at that –</p>

<p>Average 25/75 SAT Math + Verbal (from 2006 Common Data Set)</p>

<p>Texas: 1225
Florida: 1250
Penn St.: 1180
UCSB: 1190
UCI: 1210
UCD: 1155</p>

<p>Those don’t look that different to me. Why would you assume those SAT scores alone would mean the UCs ought to be listed as inferior to TX, FL, and Penn St? </p>

<p>The size of these publics means their SAT scores at the middle are going to be less selective than at privates … these are HUGE universities. However, their top 25% (1300+ scores) are going to be on par with all the students at Top 20 privates, and these top 25% are precisely the students who set the curves in class, who get the most interaction with professors, and take part in the available research and internships. The top 25% sets the standard and the other 75% must struggle to keep up.</p>

22

<p>Dunnin, I dont think that’s what harvard gator was talking about</p>

<p>he was saying that the SAT scores and class rank stats for the UC schools (NOT Texas, Florida, or Penn State) such as Santa Barbara, Davis, and Irvine are ridiculous. Bad SAT scores but high class rank stats…</p>

23

<p>DunninLA:</p>

<p>The 2008 (you’re using 2006) numbers have the UC schools as I listed previously: </p>

<p>Davis: average SAT1160/ACT24; Irvine: SAT1170/ACT24 (corrected); SB: SAT1185/ACT25. </p>

<p>2008 numbers for: UF: 1260/27; UT: 1225/27; PSU: 1195/26. To me, there’s a difference.</p>

<p>However, 1) my main point is the gaming going on with these UC schools claiming/estimating that their top 10 percent of class numbers are in the 95/96 percent range. UF lists 76 percent; UT 69; and Penn State 45. This discrepancy is implausible….and ridiculous. </p>

<p>2) Further, when applying the “Hawkette” method to ranking schools, the lower UC schools score miserably. See my previous post/thread below.</p>

<p>So, yes, these schools “ought to be listed as inferior to TX, FL, and Penn St” and many other schools. </p>

<p>Top 100 rankings using Hawkette method and 2008 data:</p>

<p>Using the very wise Hawkette’s method of examining the most consistent hard data available, SAT and ACT scores, I thought it would be interesting to see how the current USNWR top 100 list would shake out using 2008 (the latest) SAT and ACT admissions data. Hawkette describes her/his method as thus:</p>

<p>“One way that I have measured this is to compare the achievement levels of each school’s student body on the SAT and the ACT exams. I looked at absolute barriers (700 on the CR and Math SAT and 30 on the ACT) and asked what percentage of the student body achieved at these levels. As the data attests, the usual suspects top the list and IMO, the order is a reasonable listing of student body quality at these colleges. </p>

<p>Rank , Total Score , School , Critical Reading SAT (25% weight) , Math SAT (25% weight) , ACT (50% weight)” </p>

<p>(Back to me) A few observations:</p>

<p>1 , Eight schools rose into the top 50 : Tulane climbing the highest to 27, along with Miami of Fl to 38, Worchester Poly to 42, Tulsa to 43, American U to 45, Colorado Sch. of Mines to 46, Pepperdine to 48, and Pitt to 50. Of the schools cracking the top 50, Tulsa had the largest leap, rising 40 places from 83.</p>

<p>2 , The California public UC schools did not fare well under this system. One has to wonder what it is about the USNWR criteria that is protecting those currently tied for 44th – S. Barbara, Davis, Irvine – with their top 50 status. SB fell to 70, Davis to 84, and Irvine to 96. And Berkeley, UCLA, and San Diego, while certainly remaining in the top 50, all had significant drops.</p>

<p>3 , Another mystery is the low showing (92) of Penn State, a current USNWR top 50 school. When measured against other schools’ SAT and ACT achievement, PSU did not perform well.</p>

<p>4 , BYU had the largest overall leap in rankings, from 113 to 55.</p>

<ol>
<li>Harvard does not list admissions data on Peterson’s, so it did not make my list. </li>
</ol>

<p>6 , Thoughts…???</p>

<ul>
<li>(USNWR current rank)</li>
</ul>

<p>Rank; Total; School; SATR 25%; SATM25%; ACT50%
1 , 93.5% , Caltech , 76, 100 ,99 *(6)
2 , 81.5% , Wash U 64,77,92 (12)
3 , 80% , Princeton 73,77,85 (2)
4 , 77.8% , MIT 58,85,84 (14)
5 , 76.5% , Yale 77,77,76 (3)
6 , 70% , Notre Dame 50,64,83 (18)
7 , 69.8% , Northwestern 61,66,76 (12)
8 , 69.5% , Dartmouth 65,67,73 (11)
9 , 69.3% , Stanford 57,66,77 (4)
10 , 69% , Columbia 64,66,73 (8)
10 , 69% , Vanderbilt 47,66,82 (18)
12, 68% , Duke 60,68,72 (8)
12 , 68% , U Penn 52,70,75 (6)
14 , 64.8% , Rice 53,64,71 (17)
15 , 64.5% , U Chicago 62,60,68 (8)
16 , 64% , Emory 45,61,75 (18)
17 , 63.5% , Tufts 62,62,65 (28)
18 , 63% , Brown 57,63,66 (16)
19 , 60.8% , Cornell 41,64,69 (14)
20 , 59.3% , Carnegie Mellon 37,66,67 (22)
21 , 57.8% , Johns Hopkins 42,59,65 (15)
22 , 55% , Georgetown 54,56,55 (23)
23 , 52.3% , USC 35,50,63 (27)
24 , 50.8% , Brandeis 38,43,61 (31)
25 , 48.8% , Boston Coll 29,42,62 (34)
26 , 48% , W&M 41,35,58, (32)
27 , 43.8% , Tulane 43,24,54 (51)
28 , 40.3% , Case Western 24,41,48 (41)
29 , 40% , UC Berkeley 29,51,40 (21)
30 , 39.8% , NYU 32,37,45 (33)
31 , 39.0% , U Michigan 22,46,44 (26)
32 , 37.3% , U Rochester 22,41,43 (35)
33 , 36% , U Virginia 32,40,36 (23)
34 , 35.5% , Georgia Tech 19,47,38 (35)
34 , 35.5% , Wake Forest (28)
36 , 34.5% UCLA 20,40,39 (25)
37 , 33.8% , U Illinois 16,47,36 (40)
38 , 32.8% , U North Carolina 25,30,38 (30)
38 , 32.8 , U of Miami (FL) 20,27,42 (51)
40 , 31.5% , U Wisconsin 14,40,35 (35)
41 , 30.3% , Rensselaer 23,52,23 (41)
42 , 30% Worchester Poly 13,37,35 (71)
43 , 29% U Tulsa 27,23,33 (83)
44 , 28.8% , Lehigh 17,40,29 (35)
45 , 27% American University 25,17,33 (83)
46 , 26% Colorado School of Mines 12,28,32 (80)
47 , 25.5% , U Florida 17,25,30 (49)
48. 25.3 ; Pepperdine 16,19,33 (56)
49 , 24.5% , UCSD 11,29,29 (35)
50 , 24.3% U of Pittsburgh 20,21,28 (58)
51 , 24% Northeastern 12,24,30 (96)
52 , 23.8% , U Texas 16,25,27 (47)
53 , 23.5% U Maryland 17,30, 23.5 (53)
53 , 23.5% Illinois Inst. Tech 9,27,29 (102)
55 , 23% BYU 16,18,29 (113)
56 , 22.8% Boston U 17,22,26 (60)
57 , 22.5% George Washington 19,21,25 (53)
58 , 22% UMinn Twin Cities 28,18,21 (61)
58 , 22% SMU 13,19,28 (66)
60 , 21% SUNY Binghamton 12,24,24 (77)
61 , 20.5% Stevens Inst. Tech 16,31,20.5 (83)
62 , 20% Clemson 9,17,27 (61)
62 , 20% U Oklahoma 12,12,28 (108)
63 , 19% , Ohio State 11,19,23 (56)
64 , 18% St. Louis University 10,12,25 (80)
65 , 17.5% , U Washington 12,16,21 (41)
66 , 16.8% U Nebraska 15,18,17 (89)
67 , 16.3% U Georgia 11,14,20 (58)
68 , 16% Texas A&M 9,15,20 (64)
69 , 15.8% Fordham 14,11,19 (61)
70 , 15% U Denver 8,12,20 (89)
70 , 15.% , UC Santa Barbara 11,13,18 (44)
72 , 14.8% U Iowa 14,19,13 (66)
72 , 14.8% Purdue 5,14,20 (66)
72 , 14.8 Iowa State 14,21,12 (89)
75 , 14.5% Auburn 7,11,20 (96)
75 , 14.5 Clark 15,9,17 (80)
75 , 14.5% Marquette 9,9,20 (77)
78 , 14.3% Miami of Ohio 8,11,19 (66)
79 , 14% U Delaware 11,13,16 (71)
80 , 13.8% Mizzou 13,10,15 (96)
81 , 13.3% Baylor 12,15, 13 (76)
81 , 13.3% U Tennessee 7,8,19 (108)
83 , 12.75 U Colorado 7,10,17 (77)
84 , 12.5% , UC Davis 8,16,13 (44)
84 , 12.5% U South Carolina 7,9,17 (108)
84 , 12.5% Indiana U 7,9,17 (71)
87 , 12.3% U Dayton 7,10,16 (108)
88 , 12% U Pacific 6,18,12 (102)
89 , 11.5% U Conn 7,13,13 (66)
89 , 11.5% U Vermont 9,7,15
91 , 11.3% Michigan State 8,13,12 (71)
92 , 11% , Penn State 15,7,11 (47)
93 , 10.5% VA Tech 7,14,10.5 (71)
93 , 10.5% U Alabama 7,7,14 (83)
95 , 9.8% NC State 5,12,11 (83)
96 , 9.5% , UC Irvine 8,18,6 (44)
97 , 8.5% SUNY Stony Brook 4,13,8.5 (96)
97 , 8.5% FL State 7,7,10 (102)
99 , 8.3% UC Santa Cruz 7,8,9 ( 96)
100 , 7.5% UMASS 6,8,8</p>

24

<p>Cambridgereptile:</p>

<p>It’s all about selection criteria. The University of California has concluded from studies it has conducted that high school grades are much better predictors of college performance than the SAT, which you may recall was invented to test INNATE intelligence among historically non-feeder schools to Harvard in the early 1950s.</p>

<p>Evidently the UC thinks DEMONSTRATED classroom performance is a better selection criterion for its incoming classes than SAT scores…</p>

<p>Kinds sucks for really smart lazy people.</p>