USNWR Rankings: 2007 vs 1997

College Search & Selection
61

<p>it's not just that chicago schemes with the editors of magazines to improve their ranking - well, it is but: it's that they do stuff like that and then try and pretend like they follow some esteemed course and are above things like rankings and the common app.</p>

<p><a href="http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/showpost.php?p=4239559&postcount=18%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/showpost.php?p=4239559&postcount=18&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>chicago, through its policy, has proven to be little more than a hypocritical sycophant that will say anything to maintain an image but actuality demonstrates little interest in adhering to any of the noble causes they verbally pledge themselves to.</p>

<p>they are, in fact, one of the more shameless institutions of our times.</p>

62

<p>"This CLEARLY implies that Chicago’s previous ranking did not “place Chicago as a world class university”. Either you didn’t mean what you wrote, or you didn’t understand what you were writing. Either way, I didn’t twist anything. Those are YOUR words"</p>

<p>KK, I think what's CLEAR is that I was answering in my post your and the other Northwestern fan's accusation that Chicago only achieved it's status through trickery and deceit. And frankly, your assertion that Chicago doesn't belong where it is because you merely say so(and emotionally at that) is no way to frame an argument. You can't cast spurious accusations and then sit back and claim that someone else needs to prove them.(Well, I guess you can but you aren't going to get anyone to respect you)</p>

<p>Chicago meeting with USnews to make sure they're reporting the same as everyone else and you're being high hat over that? You KK, are terribly, terribly transparent.</p>

63

<p>elsijfdl, did you stamp your feet when you typed that?</p>

64

<p>me and kk: your school sucks, citing evidence A, B, and C</p>

<p>ramses: YOU guys suck, citing: my opinion</p>

65

<p>Now THAT'S funny......</p>

66

<p>Ramses: I'm sorry, I fell asleep when the thread became yet another NU against the world drivel, can you point me to evidence A, B and C?</p>

<p>You and KK: a stupid thread where we prove that Chicago is a university that runs in the same exact manner as any other university! How dare they want to be held to the same standards as everyone else. They's eeevil!!!111</p>

67

<p>

[quote]

10.59</p>

<p>Which is still 11-15, is it not?

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Which is quite a bit closer to #9 than #15, is it not? That's my point.</p>

<p>
[quote]
You can speculate about which schools have been reporting what until the cows come home, but unless you have any fact, it doesn’t make it so.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>But in the same sense, you are speculating that Chicago is one of the only top schools that does this. You argue that Chicago is the only one (or one of the few) top schools that "manipulates" data. That rests on the premise that other universities are completely honest about their self-reported data and that they don't also try to portray themselves in the best light. Now which do you think is more likely: that the majority of the top 20 schools don't care how they look and simply report their data, or that the majority tries to portray themselves in the best light? We're both speculating here, but at least my speculation seems logical. </p>

<p>I'm still thinking you're merely hung up on Chicago and singling it out because it is Northwestern's primary rival. Until you have proof that Northwestern does nothing similar to Chicago (which is going to be very unlikely), you have no argument. You can say that I need proof, but then again I'm not really making a claim. You're the one stating that Chicago is unique in that it manipulates data to make itself look better. I'm just calling you out on what seems like a faulty claim.</p>

68

<p>For fun, KK and E where exactly would you place Chicago? Let's remember this duplicitous institution gave birth to literary movements, economic theory, huge theories in law....fairly significant stuff. Not to mention whole divisions of scholarly thought being born there(sociology, etc) and many, many of this countries profs and educational leaders. So do we think number 15? 20? Hey, they don't have a great football team so maybe it should be lower? I mean look at the yield, no one thinks it's a good school, do they?</p>

<p>Honestly, this thread is about rankings and where we think schools will move up or down, so where do you see Chicago's rankings next? If Chicago shouldn't be number 9, who should?</p>

<p>NU?</p>

69

<p>“But in the same sense, you are speculating that Chicago is one of the only top schools that does this.”</p>

<p>-No I’m not. In fact I said both that it’s wrong when ANY school does it, and that I won’t speculate as to how other schools fill out their surveys. </p>

<p>“You argue that Chicago is the only one (or one of the few) top schools that "manipulates" data.”</p>

<ul>
<li>I do no such thing, but if it comes off as that, then that is not the point. The point is that any school has crossed a line when it manipulates data to change its ranking. </li>
</ul>

<p>“I'm still thinking you're merely hung up on Chicago and singling it out because it is Northwestern's primary rival.”</p>

<p>Primary rival???? Are you serious? Rival at what???? Chicago and Northwestern are far from being primary rivals. Just because they are close to each other doesn’t make them primary rivals…. </p>

<p>“Until you have proof that Northwestern does nothing similar to Chicago (which is going to be very unlikely), you have no argument.”</p>

<p>-Clearly I DO have an argument. If I did not, you wouldn’t be taking time out of your day to rebut. You may not agree with what I’m saying but I’m not going to allow you to </p>

<p>“You can say that I need proof, but then again I'm not really making a claim.”</p>

<p>-Of course you are. You’re stating that my views are not correct, and are giving an opposing view: that is a “claim”. </p>

<p>“You're the one stating that Chicago is unique in that it manipulates data to make itself look better. I'm just calling you out on what seems like a faulty claim.”</p>

<p>-Yet again… I am doing no such thing. I don’t claim to know how many schools do this or not. What I do say, however, is that I KNOW that Chicago has done this, and that it is wrong.</p>

70

<p>
[quote]
What I do say, however, is that I KNOW that Chicago has done this, and that it is wrong.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>How can it be wrong to report seminars as classes and library expenses as education expenditures if </p>

<p>
[quote]
From UChi: We’ve paid attention to how U.S. News & World Report defines things versus how we do...In previous years the University also underreported its per-student spending by filing library expenditures in a category other than educational expenses

[/quote]
</p>

<p>If U.S. News clearly states that "this is how we want you to account for things" and Chicago has not been doing that, now that they've changed to fit the formula correctly, how are they cheating? If anything, now they are playing by the rules and accounting for things correctly. What's more, if USNews considered Chicago's reporting incorrect, don't you think they would have rebuked them? If Chicago considered its actions to be immoral, why on Earth do you think the school would publicly report it?</p>

71

<p>“For fun, KK and E where exactly would you place Chicago? Let's remember this duplicitous institution gave birth to literary movements, economic theory, huge theories in law....fairly significant stuff. Not to mention whole divisions of scholarly thought being born there(sociology, etc) and many, many of this countries profs and educational leaders.”</p>

<p>-If you’re quite through patting yourself on the back and touting the accomplishments of the university…..</p>

<p>Sure, I can go and name off a bunch of bs that other schools have done to try to make my belief sound more relevant, but what’s the point…. All top schools have done similar things THIS IS WHY THEY ARE TOP SCHOOLS.</p>

<p>“So do we think number 15? 20? Hey, they don't have a great football team so maybe it should be lower? I mean look at the yield, no one thinks it's a good school, do they?”</p>

<p>-I don’t care where it’s ranked, as long as it doesn’t manipulate data to get there. </p>

<p>“Honestly, this thread is about rankings and where we think schools will move up or down, so where do you see Chicago's rankings next? If Chicago shouldn't be number 9, who should?”</p>

<p>-Whoever counts more classes as seminars and library books as academic expenses this year….. How about Berkeley or Michigan? God forbid a university with more than 20,000 students become “top”…..</p>

72

<p>I didn't like Northwestern. What a completely blah area.</p>

73

<p>“If you aren't taking that position, you have a habit of singling Chicago out. Is there a motive?”</p>

<p>-Because it is a FACT that Chicago has done this. Like I said, you show me proof that other schools have, and I’ll think their actions repugnant too. </p>

<p>“If U.S. News clearly states that "this is how we want you to account for things" and Chicago has not been doing that, now that they've changed to fit the formula correctly, how are they cheating? If anything, now they are playing by the rules and accounting for things correctly.”</p>

<ul>
<li>What kind of sense does that make? Are you saying that Chicago was intentionally reporting incorrect data and driving down its ranking? Come on.....If the system had clarity in the first place, then Chicago wouldn’t have had to MEET with USNEWS to ‘discover’ what it was doing wrong. I don’t see how it’s so difficult to understand. </li>
</ul>

<p>If I tell you I count only apples, oranges, and pears as fruits, but you only report to me that you have apples and oranges, then do you really need to meet with me to find out what’s left????</p>

<p>Why do you ask the teacher how to answer questions on a test? Because the teacher created the test and knows which answers will be acceptable- that’s why.</p>

74

<p>Chicago was the only school to Meet with US News, rather than just fill out the survey.</p>

75

<p>All of that is irrelevant. The only thing that matters is legality. Is it technically correct for Chicago to report things as it is doing now? If it is, other universities should follow the instructions of the USNews organization when filling out those sheets if they want to represent their institution in the best way possible.</p>

<p>And again, if Chicago is reporting things incorrectly now, why would USNews not say anything? If Chicago knowingly reports things incorrectly, why would they make a public statement about it? "Hey, look at us. We're lying!"</p>

76

<p>"If it is, other universities should follow the instructions of the USNews organization when filling out those sheets if they want to represent their institution in the best way possible."</p>

<p>-Why? If it is now possible to meet with the organization to find out what counts for what, then all schools should do that; it's only in their best interest. </p>

<p>"why would they make a public statement about it?"</p>

<p>-Because a 6-spot jump is bound to get attention. It's best to put a spin on a story, if you want to gain the high ground in the situation. People were bound to ask questions. If you just chalk it up to (years of) errors, then it doesn't seem as ridiculous.</p>

77

<p>
[quote]
Why? If it is now possible to meet with the organization to find out what counts for what, then all schools should do that; it's only in their best interest.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Well, whatever floats your boat. Meet with the organization, get a letter detailing the metrics, whatever. Either way, you should play the game to the best of your ability.</p>

<p>
[quote]
People were bound to ask questions. If you just chalk it up to (years of) errors, then it doesn't seem as ridiculous.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>So you think there's something more that they're hiding? If it wasn't years of error, you're implying that they've intentionally been hurting themselves for years. That sounds impractical. I think they're telling the truth. You think they're lying?</p>

<p>If what they are doing is legal, what is your problem with it? If you want Northwestern or whatever ranked higher, you should encourage the administration to make sure it's reporting things accurately, or you should tell them to spend more on the library. ;) IMO, until you can get US News stating that Chicago is cheating the system, you have no real case.</p>

78

<p>Northwestern went from #23 to #14 in 1991/92 and from #13 to #9 in 1996/97. Did they issue a public statement? Do you suspect foul play?</p>

79

<p>
[quote]
But in the same sense, you are speculating that Chicago is one of the only top schools that does this.

[/quote]

wrong. uchicago is the only top school with documented evidence of it doing so.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Until you have proof that Northwestern does nothing similar to Chicago (which is going to be very unlikely), you have no argument.

[/quote]

unless i'm mistaken, we live in the united states of america, and in this country we adhere to the prima facie position of innocent until proven guilty.</p>

<p>posted by loslobos71:

[quote]
I didn't like Northwestern. What a completely blah area.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>you had a 3.3 and a 1700 SAT score. not to worry.</p>

80

<p>"Chicago was the only school to Meet with US News, rather than just fill out the survey."</p>

<p>I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest that just maybe US News felt that a face to face might be necessary as well.</p>