<p>Utterly irrelevant. Too many schools dont rank for this to be meaningful. There are too many ways to rank. And there are too many variations in quality among those schools who do. Basically who cares. Even USNWR is having second thoughts about this one.</p>
<p>It kind of raises the question of why we'd devote a separate thread to this measure.</p>
<p>hoedown,
It frequently seems that those who have the most to lose or feel threatened by the data are the ones who object most strongly to these comparisons. </p>
<p>IMO, more discussion and more evaluation of such factors is helpful to students and others and enhances our understanding of how colleges compare. Anyone would agree that not every factor deserves the same weight and we will all assign different emphasis to various factors. But I don't think that limiting discussion is in the student's best interests. It might be good for those who wish to maintain a certain status quo, but my experience is that the more informed a student (buyer) is, the more confident he/she can be in choosing a college (making a purchase). </p>
<p>If you think that there are factors that should be discussed and which are not getting enough attention on CC, then I hope you will start your own thread(s).</p>
<p>Where is Ohio State on this list... or any list?</p>
<p>
[quote]
hoedown,
It frequently seems that those who have the most to lose or feel threatened by the data are the ones who object most strongly to these comparisons.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>You know, it's as if you're trying to take a swipe at me here. Except as far as U-M goes, its top-ten rank percentage is comparatively fine. Even advantageous. </p>
<p>So explain why I am so supposedly personally "threatened" by top-ten rank that I don't want comparisons on it? Shouldn't my status-quo-loving persona be trumpeting that this is one of THE MOST IMPORTANT factors in choosing a college? And yet I've argued in this thread (and elsewhere) that certain factors --GASP, factors which U-M compares favorably on--aren't that meaningful in differentiating between top schools. See my contribution to your retention thread.</p>
<p>In short, I don't think I fit so neatly into the box you're trying to stuff me into.</p>
<p>keefer, according to USNews, the 2007 freshman class at OSU had 52% from the top 10%</p>
<p>"It frequently seems that those who have the most to lose or feel threatened by the data are the ones who object most strongly to these comparisons."</p>
<p>An ad hominem circumstantial argument is a poor one. By an analogous reasoning "those who have the gain by the data are the ones who ignore its problems" your side looses.</p>