<p>I never said undergraduate quality has nothing to do with it. I just thought it was obvious to infer from the rankings that they are largely based on graduate programs and prestige.</p>
<p>Right. The rankings are peer evaluation world-wide. To the academic community, undergraduate programs are relatively insignificant to graduate ones. For example, if you ask an American professor or research scientist about what he thinks about Oxford or Cambridge, 90% of what he will say will be about their graduate research and their professors involved in it. This is supported by the fact that UCSF is ranked so high, and yet it doesn't even have an undergraduate program. This is also why medical/science/engineering tilted universities are ranked higher than hummanities tilted universities.</p>
<p>Its great that you have your own opinion about what the academic community thinks, but I'd still prefer that if you're going to make claims about what rankings are what, you'd at least quote the rankings.</p>
<p>GentlemanandScholar,</p>
<p>if you look at the methodology of both the shanghai and london rankings, research plays a big role in both (much more for the shanghai ranking than the london one though). </p>
<p>where is research done? in research-oriented universities, specifically in their graduate programs and by the school's professors. undergraduates don't produce nobel prizes or have citations in articles in Nature or Science. </p>
<p>as for peer assessment, the most visible professors are those churning out top-notch research and have the most name recognition through this. </p>
<p>the point is, both rankings place much more emphasis on graduate programs (as well as faculty) than undergraduate quality. again, that is why you see UCSF in both rankings... or university of texas southwestern medical center in the shanghai one. </p>
<p>"Yeah, UCLA is a regular LAC compared to Cal."</p>
<p>... and i don't know what kinda insult that's supposed to be. calling UCLA a LAC is the most ironic thing i've ever heard. -_-</p>
<p>i don't know how accurate those world rankings are. In it UCSD is ranked better than UCLA.</p>
<p>kfc4u, S-A-R-C-A-S-M!!!!</p>
<p>okay GentlemanandScholar. </p>
<p>student4u,
i dont think most of us agree with the accuracy of the rankings... nor the methodology. we were simply trying to figure out the methodology that lead to the rankings in the first place, cuz everyone always looks at the rankings and not the methodology and then bashes the rankings.</p>
<p>but nevertheless, you're never going to have a perfect ranking because everyone has different values, and if people could create their own rankings, everyone would have different rankings.</p>
<p>I know of only one set of rankings that uses undergraduate experience only, leaves out prestige entirely, and ranks LACs alongside research universities for the quality of undergraduate education, and that's the Princeton Review.</p>
<p>Carleton is number one. None of the Ivies nor Berkeley break the top 5 (and, other than Dartmouth and Princeton, none break the top 10.)</p>
<p>"other than Dartmouth and Princeton, none break the top 10."</p>
<p>GO BIG GREEN!</p>
<p>
[quote]
"UC Berkeley has more departments ranked in the top 10 in their respective fields than any other university in the country."</p>
<p>Except Stanford
[/quote]
</p>
<p>No, I think audioslave may be right. </p>
<p>Last I checked (which was more recent than the 2002-2003 rankings you linked to), U-M, Harvard, and Stanford were neck and neck, with Berkeley edging them out slightly. Berkeley had more grad programs ranked in the Top 10 by U.S. News, but that was just looking at the 36 or so field and specialities they ranked, and didn't get down to the sub-specialties which boosts the categories to 70-plus. I'm actually working on that right now, incidentally.</p>
<p>When Universities are this close, with dozens of top-ten programs, the distinction between first and second is pretty minimal, of course.</p>
<p>I've seen similar rankings for many years, and they are frequently peer reviews of graduate programs. My recollection of some of these rankings are that the raters are professors from domestic universities, and Berkeley consistently finishes number 1 or 2 in the overall rankings of graduate programs. They do not consider undergraduate programs because they are comparing universities, i.e. institutions that grant masters and doctoral degrees, and not colleges that are more geared to granting undergraduate degrees. In this case, the peer review is probably conducted by foreign faculty, and their evaluations, not suprisingly are very consistent with the opinions of faculty at U.S. universities -- Berkeley is the best all around "university" in the world. I would like to see the website that have the rankings.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I would like to see the website that have the rankings.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Ask and ye shall receive. Here's one (although UCB isn't #1 here)</p>
<p>surprising. i figured oxford would be more globally prestigious. however placing berkeley that high really destroys the credibility of those rankings. (surprised Princeton is up at 7, considering it doesnt really care about grad programs)</p>
<p>An0nym0us - explain why Berkeley doesn't deserve that high of a ranking? This is ranking universities, and Berkeley certainly has TONS of programs in the top 10, as previous posters have said. Until the day that U.S. News graduate rankings and Gourman doesnt have Berkeley highly ranked in all of its graduate departments (talking about 1-5), Berkeley deserves its place on the top of research universities.</p>
<p>oh okay, "research" universities. shoulda said that. it sucks for undergrad, though.</p>
<p>
[quote]
it sucks for undergrad, though.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Where did you get that idea?</p>
<p>An0nym0u5, I assume you hold a degree from Cal considering how well you know it. No? Oh, so you're just baseing your opinions off of trolls who, like you, have probably never stepped foot on campus, let alone taken a single class at Cal. Please stop being a bone-head.</p>
<p>nope i heard it from a cousin who lives in cali, near berkeley, and is choosing to go to UCLA because berkeley is overcrowded.</p>
<p>Oh, your cousin lives in Cali, sweet. Sorry I questioned your knowledge on the subject, I didn't know that you had a cousin that lives in the stat of california. My bad.</p>
<p>Overcrowding at the undergraduate level isn't really going to mean a university's research stature (or international stature) is downgraded in the near term.</p>
<p>UC-Berkeley in one of the United States' great research universities. Even in years where the campus has some crowding problems, that will be true.</p>
<p>I'm surprised you think Princeton doesn't care about graduate programs. That certainly isn't what people in academe believe. It does appear that they don't have a lot of professional schools, but their grad programs are top-notch.</p>