Ranking Rigging at USC? - Page 4

arbiter213 · 06-11-2009, 10:33 AM

And yet all of your posts, acollegehopeful, are just posting over and over again asking a question for which the article supplies the answer- in fact, a misleading question, since you aparently failed to adequately comprehend the quoted passage of the article. Sam Lee is a graduate student, and if I recall at a school in California, but it definitely isn't USC.

acollegehopeful · 06-11-2009, 10:45 AM

Believe me, I adequately comprehend the passage. I also understand the strategy, keep the university affiliation vague and when asked, put whatever "spin" best works.

Sam Lee · 06-11-2009, 11:29 AM

^Did you create a new account just to attack me and divert attention? I didn't write the article. I find it ironic that you want me to give more personal info than necessary while concealing everything about yourself with a new account.

lovetocamp · 06-11-2009, 01:04 PM

Am I the only one who finds it troubling "how" this thread (about the article) was started ? There are rules in CC that I have agreed to, and will continue to abide by. Yet, this thread is definitely a criticism of USC, that was posted on USC's folder. I challenge others to at least 'consider' how this thread was started, and if that is appropriate in CC. Food for thought.

acollegehopeful · 06-11-2009, 01:12 PM

actually, the account was created because I'm evaluation universities for my child. I was told this was an unbiased forum for feedback and USC is one of many universities we are considering. You are very vocal against USC and other top universities I'm trying to understand whether there is any validity to your comments or if the comments are personally motivated. I think your reaction has answered that question for me.

jbusc · 06-11-2009, 04:18 PM

I don't think Sam is unfairly trashing USC, at least not in the article (I'm not going to hunt down every post he's made). He merely pointed out that the data used by US news may be incorrect.

However, I do think there's some unfair bashing USC (in general - not singling anyone out). It's fine to joke about comparing this to the NCAA allegations or to make factual criticism. But let's keep it to that.

lovetocamp · 06-11-2009, 04:31 PM

I will restate my comments and complaints from above. Why is no one else questioning how this thread even got started in the USC folder. Look at the very first post. I am outraged.

mia305 · 06-11-2009, 05:28 PM

collegehopeful and lovecamp: Nice try, but ad hominem attacks on SamLee dont mask your obvious inability to refute his point. And, not that he needs my defense but his comments about NU, which you characterize as boosterism, to me, for the most part provide potential applicants with helpful facts and informed opinions about various science and engineering programs at NU, with which he appears to be familiar [much like several alums do in the mit forum.] Isnt that what CC is supposedly about? And, so what if he thinks NU has good programs. I do too. By what twisted illogic does that change any of the facts at issue?

So, USC boosters, if you want to defend the way USC does things on the merits, I'd be happy to read what you post. But, it's put up or shut up. Ad hominem attacks dont cut it.

BTW, it's not only USC that games the usnwr rankings. Penn and WashU were always notorious for doing it. And Stanford and MIT have done it too. I remember MIT actually corrected its class size counts and exclusion of SAT verbal scores for non-english speaking internationals in a very public way, when the new dean of admissions came aboard. Maybe USC will do the same.

lovetocamp · 06-11-2009, 05:53 PM

you have COMPLETELY missed MY point. Let me say it more clearly, so maybe you can understand. SamLee did NOT start this thread. I will say it one more time. SamLee did not start this thread. I am outraged at who did start this thread. I have nothing against SamLee, or the article that is being referenced in this thread. I am not upset that the discussion is occurring. I am not even defending USC. I am troubled by who choose to start this thread, and if that is appropriate behavior. Obviously, the person who started the thread will say that he can wear two hats, and alternate between them. Yet, i find it troubling. CC Discussion threads are NOT intended for arguments and disagrements. This website (CC), and the threads therein, are intended to help people make choices about colleges. The main intent is for people to ask reasonal questions and get reasonable answers. And, unfortunately, on occasion, debates and disagreements can occur. And, sometimes those debates can get ugly. Therefore, CC has people whose "role" is to stop the ugliness. These people have the authority to remove posts, and to take away logon access for us regular users - for when the posts cross the line and get ugly. So my point is that whoever started this thread KNEW it was going to stir up some emotions. And that the emotions could get strong and even ugly. I will challege you all to look at the first post, on the very first page of this thread. And then tell me if you get my point, or not. You may or may not agree with my complaint, but i at least want you to undertand what my complaint is. I can not be any more direct, or else I will lose my logon ability. Again, my compaint is NOT about SamLee.

jbusc · 06-11-2009, 06:39 PM

Well considering that the person who started the thread is Roger_Dooley (an administrator) I'm not sure any of us are in any position to question what he can and can't do on these boards.

menloparkmom · 06-11-2009, 07:35 PM

what I have a problem with is not so much that a thread was started, but that a CC Administrator chose to bump it to the top of the
CC Home page. This action smacks of prejudice against and possible contempt for USC by those running CC, especially as there are many other instances of "gaming" USNW rankings by other colleges as well.

ILikeMyScreenNam · 06-11-2009, 07:42 PM

Possibilities: USC reject, UCLA alumni, etc..

IBclass06 · 06-11-2009, 09:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lovetocamp

So my point is that whoever started this thread KNEW it was going to stir up some emotions. And that the emotions could get strong and even ugly.

The only "emotions" stirred up have been blustering and pointing of fingers by USC affiliates.

"Clemson does it too" is hardly an adequate response to the article. I don't know enough about USC to assess the validity of the claim, and quite honestly I don't particularly care. I would be interested in seeing logical arguments either supporting or debunking the claims made, and that has not been the case.

Quote:

Originally Posted by menloparkmom

what I have a problem with is not so much that a thread was started, but that a CC Administrator chose to bump it to the top of the CC Home page.

If it hadn't involved CC in such a major way, I doubt the article would have been featured. Mention of a CC poster (and CC in general) in a leading education publication is of general interest to the CC community.

fortify · 06-11-2009, 09:26 PM

There's such thing as a UCLA alumni who is a USC reject?

Sam Lee · 06-11-2009, 10:43 PM

acollegehopeful,

The *only* thing I had "against USC" is the very issue in this thread. I was never vocal against its athletics, scholarships policy, or students. To be honest, it's difficult for me to believe you just signed up for a CC account and all of a sudden concluded that I've been "very vocal against USC". My threads just somehow magicially lighted up in front of your screen when you registered few days ago? A while back, I did try to contact USC about this but somehow my email just got bounced back even I used two different email accounts. I doubt they would do anything about it anyway even if my email did reached their the mailbox of the dean. HigherEd is the only channel that would change it. Perspective students rely on rankings (often way too much) but to the extent of using those rankings, they are entitled to get the truthful data. The %NAE is exaggerated by at least 2 times in this case, according to my estimation.