<p>What? Yale is my actual name. Like John or something. Don't worry, I bleed Hoya blue not New Haven blue.</p>
<p>classwarrior - bop over to AU and see</p>
<p>April 18</p>
<p>Former President Jimmy Carter and former Secretary of State James A. Baker, III, co-chaired the first hearing of the Commission on Federal Election Reform Monday, April 18, 2005, at American University. The privately funded panel, which includes former Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle (D-SD) and former House Minority Leader Bob Michel (R-IL), as well as nonpartisan leaders, examined the state of Americas federal elections and recommend improvements</p>
<p>May 10 </p>
<p>Former Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge gave opening remarks and a conversation with former senior Department of Homeland Security officials followed, as the panelists addressed members of IBMs Global Leadership Institute and American Universitys Institute for the Study of Public Policy Implementation. Participants shared their insights and lessons learned from creating the nations first Department of Homeland Security</p>
<p>You can go to Catholic, GW, Howard, Maryland, and George Mason and see the same parade of high power politicos. They hit these schools because they are convenient locations not because there is something academically unique about them. Wake up. There is nothing academically that puts Georgetown in the same league with serious research universities like CMU or Northwestern or Chicago or Johns Hopkins and that is why its peer rating is low.</p>
<p>I don't think anyone would want to bleed New Haven blue, anyways... ewww. I would rather live in Anacostia than there.</p>
<p>To Yale - is that your last name or your first name? I know of a girl here whose last name is Yale... is that you? We might have some mutual friends. :)</p>
<p>Finally, UCLAri, I am not arguing that undergrads and grad students learn at the same level. No argument there - that's definitely not the case. My issue is with your belief that the study of politics and the study of political science are two different disciplines. They are not - political science encompasses the study of politics and political climates, so in essence, they're one and the same.</p>
<p>Good lord, patuxent... are you a GW or AU grad? Ditch the inferiority complex, it's unattractive. Also, the point that we're trying to make about "celebrity professors" is not about where they choose to make a single speech - it's about the faculty. Paul Begala may be taping Crossfire over at GW, but guess where he's adjunct faculty? Georgetown.</p>
<p>lol yeah, he's actually a GWU grad. How unexpected! :rolleyes:</p>
<p>
[quote]
Finally, UCLAri, I am not arguing that undergrads and grad students learn at the same level. No argument there - that's definitely not the case. My issue is with your belief that the study of politics and the study of political science are two different disciplines. They are not - political science encompasses the study of politics and political climates, so in essence, they're one and the same.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>And I'm saying that what undergrads and grads learn is fundamentally different. Undergrads learn how this or that government works, or why this or that leader made choice x or y. Grads learn analysis and model building. Political science, at least at the top 10 schools, is mostly about rational choice and mathematics.</p>
<p>Oh it's my first name. Dad named me after his alma mater. Cute I know.</p>
<p>UCLAri-</p>
<p>"I would argue that the biggest thing holding back GTown is not the quality of its undergraduate education, but the fact that its PhD programs are simply not at the level of its professional programs. Remember that peer assessment is largely based on PhD programs, because academics love academics."</p>
<p>I understand what you are saying and it may be true but it does not make sense to me. These are supposed to be undergraduate rankings. USNews has separate issues and rankings for graduate programs. Further the point made about Princeton is probably the best because their primary focus is undergraduate education and it does not seem to impact their peer assessment.</p>
<p>RegisNYC -</p>
<p>I don't know for sure but perhaps patuxent's may have hit the nail on the head, the catholic schools are not viewed as strong in as research instititutions. I interpret that as math, science and applied math and science which is engineering. All the Ivy league schools saw the light and started engineering programs while Georgetown and BC have not and ND's engineering program is not as stong as its other departments. </p>
<p>Perhaps this shows a catholic school bias toward philosophy and theology instead of the sciences. More of a focus on a broad liberal education that is more in line with the LACs instead of the National Research institutions but they get the National University label because of the undergrad and graduate professional schools. They actually seem to be in a middle category between the two.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I understand what you are saying and it may be true but it does not make sense to me. These are supposed to be undergraduate rankings. USNews has separate issues and rankings for graduate programs. Further the point made about Princeton is probably the best because their primary focus is undergraduate education and it does not seem to impact their peer assessment.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Hm, good point. But then again, we've definitely noticed that the top 25 performers all tend to have at least fairly strong graduate programs. Even though Princeton focuses on undergrads, many of its grad programs are also top-notch.</p>
<p>PhD programs matter, because they bring in the best professors and in turn the best TAs. Or at least at the beastly large research institutions. I do believe that Georgetown is a fantastic university, and probably should be ranked higher.</p>
<p>UCLAri-</p>
<p>Perhaps it is their peer 'research' institutions that get them marked down. Though there is research in the social sciences the majority is in the hard sciences and engineering. Perhaps if we could see how many research dollars each of the top undergraduate programs received from corporate or government sponsors it may shed some light on this.</p>
<p>Regardless, it gets down to what program you are interested in. If you are a math/science type CMU may be better, if you are a pre-professional business school or liberal arts type then Georgetown would be better.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Would I get my PhD in political science there if I wanted to go into academics? No, because the placements from GTown are not as good as they should be for a tenure-track position. Would I get my PhD there to do further work in civil service? In a heartbeat.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>ULCAri:</p>
<p>Hello, I'm interested in your thoughts on Georgetown's graduate program in polisci (I am considering applying to it). I have heard people say before that it's not very good if one is considering an academic career. May I ask in particular why you think this so aside from the placement record?</p>