<p>Wait and see what happens this year after last year's number are adjusted.</p>
<p>2007 ranking is almost out! Aug 17th!
are u ready guys?</p>
<p>scratch that...i meant Aug 18th</p>
<p>I predict 40 or 41. It was 42 when I applied.</p>
<p>Ah....for all those of you obsessed with rankings...Washington Monthly just came out with their latest rankings and UCD is ranked 10th (with UCB, UCLA and UCSD also in the top 10, along with Stanford-California rocks!). As always, ranking are arbitrary and based on the weight that the rankers give to various categories. Independent of rankings, I have always received high marks when anyone looked at my transcripts for the vast array of science classes that I took as an undergrad . This speaks as much to the quarter system as it does to the diverse science offerings at UCD but you guys have SO many options for classes that you can't help but graduate with a broad knowledge unless you sleep through all your classes. If you are happy and do well, you will dictate your future course rather than an arbitrary ranking of your school.</p>
<p>The Washington Monthly Ranking is not much of anything.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2006/0609.national.html%5B/url%5D">http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2006/0609.national.html</a> </p>
<p>UC Riverside > Harvard
UC Davis > Yale
Penn State > Stanford</p>
<p>LOL. <-that's all I can say.</p>
<p>Hence, my point....rankings of schools has about as much merit as ranking the rankings.</p>
<p>I would say that Irvine, Santa Barbara, and Davis are the same level. But it is completely against common sense that Riverside is better than Harvard.</p>
<p>ranking methodology</p>
<p>We settled on two primary goals in our methodology. First, we considered no single category to be more important than any other. Second, the final rankings needed to reflect excellence across the full breadth of our measures, rather than reward an exceptionally high focus on, say, research. All categories were weighted equally when calculating the final score. In order to ensure that each measurement contributed equally to a school's score in any given category, we standardized the data sets so that each had a mean of zero and a standard deviation of one. The data were also adjusted to account for statistical outliers. For the purposes of calculating the final score, no school's performance in any single area was allowed to exceed three standard deviations from the mean of the data set. </p>
<p>Each of our three categories includes several components.We determined the Community Service score by measuring each school's performance in three different areas: the percentage of its students enrolled in the Army and Navy Reserve Officer Training Corps; the percentage of its alumni who are currently serving in the Peace Corps; and the percentage of its federal work-study grants devoted to community service projects. A school's Research score is also based on three measurements: the total amount of an institution's research spending, the number of PhDs awarded by the university in the sciences and engineering, and the percentage of undergraduate alumni who have gone on to receive a PhD in any subject (baccalaureate PhDs). For national universities, we weighted each of these components equally to determine a school's final score in the category.</p>
<p>For liberal arts colleges, which do not grant doctorates, baccalaureate PhDs were given double weight.The baccalaureate PhDs are a new addition to our formula. Last year, research spending made up 100 percent of the liberal arts colleges' research score; this year, it makes up only a third. This rewards liberal arts schools for how well they train students for graduate programs, rather than just for how much they spend on research. We feel this is fairer.</p>
<p>The Social Mobility score is more complicated. We have data that tells us the percentage of a school's students on Pell Grants, which is a good measure of a school's commitment to educating lower-income kids. But, while we'd also like to know how many of these students graduate, schools aren't required to track those figures. Still, because lower-income students at any school are less likely to graduate than wealthier ones, the percentage of Pell Grant recipients is a meaningful indicator in and of itself. If a campus has a large percentage of Pell Grant students—that is to say, if its student body is disproportionately poor—it will tend to diminish the school's overall graduation rate. Last year, using data from all of our schools, we constructed a formula (using a technique called regressional analysis) that predicted a school's likely graduation rate given its percentage of students on Pell. Because this formula disproportionately rewarded more academically exclusive schools (whose students were high achievers and inherently more likely to graduate), however, our formula this year has been altered to predict a school's likely graduation rate given its percentage of Pell students and its average SAT score. (Since most schools only provide the 25th percentile and the 75th percentile of scores, we took the mean of the two.) Schools that outperform their forecasted rate score better than schools that match or, worse, undershoot the mark.In addition, we added a second metric to our Social Mobility score by running a regression that predicted the percentage of students on Pell Grants based on SAT scores. This indicated which selective universities (since selectivity is highly correlated with SAT scores) are making the effort to enroll low-income students. The two formulas were weighted equally.</p>
<p>*cough</p>
<p>thanks to jackindabox</p>
<p>irvine is ranked higher than davis as was expected</p>
<p>The good news is </p>
<p>UCB 20--->21
UCLA 25--->26
UCSD 32--->38
UCI 40--->44
UCD 48--->47
UCSB 45--->47</p>
<p>Out of the top 6, Davis is the only one that's improving!</p>
<p>oh dang irvine is 3 ranks higher. didn't really expect that. oh well, davis was a good choice anyway :]</p>
<p>irvine > davis!</p>
<p>nah ^ just by the usnews ranking :P</p>
<p>how the HECK is irvine higher??? and by 3 points? that's disappointing. i thought they would be the same. all i can say is US news is whack. </p>
<p>o and on another note.. when do we get out dorm info in the mail? i still haven't gotten it. is that bad?</p>
<p>Hello guys, calm down. You can't expect a school to jump by 6 spots and overtake another one just in one year. A reporting error was made last year and we've dropped ranks because of that. Same thing happened to Irvine a couple years ago and they've just started slowly improving again(except for this year :p). It will take a year or two to get back to the place we're supposed to be. Thats the reason why we're the only UC thats improved this year. Next year will be the same, we'll slowly go up until we're where we're supposed to be.</p>
<p>YES! it's all up to us to improve our school's ranking!</p>
<p>Looks like the 3 spot is going to be up for grabs in a couple years. </p>
<p>UCSD dropped 6 spots and UCI dropped 4. UCD is only going to go up. That mistake is going to force whatever dummy who reported it in the first place to get their stuff together. I don't see anything making UCD drop in rankings.</p>