right arrow
Examples: Monday, today, last week, Mar 26, 3/26/04
Upcoming changes to the way we log in on College Confidential. Read more here.

ARWU Ranking 2013

13»

Replies to: ARWU Ranking 2013

  • Blah2009Blah2009 1318 replies19 threads Senior Member
    Not sure why you're questioning JHU's performance over Duke internationally, golden? International prestige is heavily driven by grad school quality (especially that of STEM fields). JHU physics, bio, chem, and engineering fields are stronger than Duke's. This also explains (already stated earlier in the thread) why a primarily science and grad school focused school like UCSF is highly ranked.

    Also Sam, a correction, JHU has recently begun offering a full time MBA. But there's still no undergrad business major on its main campus, so it hasn't become more pre-professional in that regard. http://carey.jhu.edu/academics/ugprogram/bs_business/index.html
    That Bachelor of Science in Business degree is not pursued by any full time Johns Hopkins undergrads admitted to the main campus. It's more akin to a Columbia general studies degree for community college transfers. Separate campus (the only difference from Columbia GS), separate admissions standards, and separate reputation.

    JHU is also heavily grad school focused. It's bad because it's a heavy deterrent to top tier consulting firms like McKinsey or BCG coming to campus and recruiting. McKinsey used to recruit at JHU, but stopped because of the lack of applicants and eventual number of business analysts. And as a soon to be engagement manager, I don't have much sway yet..=). See Caltech for a similar story (We exclusively interview grad students there), although BCG has finally returned to campus there to recruit undergrads.

    Also last I checked, less than 350 applicants applied to med schools from JHU (but this figure includes alums) out of a class of 1300 or so. It might be less pre-professional than you think.
    · Reply · Share
  • bclintonkbclintonk 7681 replies31 threads Senior Member
    The ARWU ranking is deeply flawed. It gives bigger universities an undue advantage over their smaller peers. This explains why schools like Cornell and UCLA are ranked in the top 15. It also explains why schools like Brown, Dartmouth and even Duke are very underrated. A ranking that focuses on the quality of research being produced at a university would be preferable to this one.

    I think you’re mistaken on the size question. Some small universities like Caltech (2,261 students grad + undergrad, #6 ARWU) and Princeton (7,641 students total, #7 ARWU ) are ranked very highly, while many mega-universities like Arizona State (72,254 students) and Ohio State (56,867) are nowhere near the top of the rankings.

    And why do you assume that schools like Brown, Dartmouth and Duke produce higher quality research than schools like Cornell and UCLA? The fact is, schools like Brown and Dartmouth are relatively minor players in the research world. Duke is a bigger player and top-notch in some fields, but it's got major gaps in its research profile in really fundamental areas like chemistry, physics, and earth science.

    Generally speaking, the best grad students flock to the programs where the best research in their field is being done, and the grad school rankings reflect that. Here are the current US News grad school rankings in core STEM fields (I’ll leave Dartmouth out of it because they don’t have a full array of grad programs):

    Chemistry: Cornell #10, UCLA #16, Duke #45, Brown #53
    Physics: Cornell #7, UCLA #19, Brown #30, Duke #40
    Biology: Cornell #11, Duke #13, UCLA #24, Brown #34
    Earth sciences: Cornell #13, UCLA #17, Brown #17, Duke #45
    Math: UCLA #8, Cornell #13, Brown #14, Duke #24
    Computer science: Cornell #5, UCLA #14, Brown #20, Duke #27
    Engineering: Cornell #13, UCLA #16, Duke #28, Brown #48
    Medicine (research): Duke #8, UCLA #13, Cornell #16, Brown #31

    Mean ranking (8 disciplines): Cornell 11, UCLA 15.9, Duke 28.8, Brown 30.9
    Median ranking (8 disciplines): Cornell 12, UCLA 16, Duke 27.5, Brown 30.5

    Fact is, Cornell and UCLA are just stronger research institutions than Duke and Brown across the array of STEM disciplines. That’s reflected in their STEM grad school rankings, in the quantity and quality of the STEM research they generate, in the degree to which their STEM faculty are cited, and in their international reputations.
    · Reply · Share
  • rjkofnovirjkofnovi 10440 replies109 threads Senior Member
    "It also explains why schools like Brown, Dartmouth and even Duke are very underrated."

    Did you ever consider that all or some of these schools are very overrated by USNWR in comparison?
    · Reply · Share
  • goldenboy8784goldenboy8784 1663 replies35 threads Senior Member
    bclintonk, your post is littered with factual errors and generalizations. I'm going to slog through them and make some important corrections because I want to defend my alma mater's reputation and give Duke the fair treatment that it deserves.
    bclintonk wrote:
    Here are the current US News graduate program rankings.
    Why did you ignore the field of Statistics which USNWR includes as a core field in its Graduate School Rankings?
    Best Statistics Programs | Top Statistics Schools | US News Best Graduate Schools

    Statistics
    Duke: #10
    Wisconsin: #12
    Minnesota: #17
    UCSD: N/R
    bclintonk wrote:
    Physics: UCSD #14, Wisconsin #17, Minnesota #26, Duke #40
    Duke's ranking is #30 in Physics, not #40.
    bclintonk wrote:
    Public Policy: Wisconsin #12, Minnesota #16, Duke #16, UCSD N/A
    Huh, is this the overall "Public Affairs" ranking? Duke only has a Public Policy school and thus only offers a Public Policy bachelors degree to undergraduates and a M.P.P. to graduate students.

    Here is the Public Policy ranking:
    Best Public Policy Analysis Programs | Top Public Affairs Schools | US News Best Graduate Schools

    Duke: #6
    Wisconsin: #10
    Minnesota: #17
    UCSD: N/R

    Also why the omission of important fields of study like Anthropology, Classics, Comparative Literature, French, German, Philosophy, Religion, and Spanish just because UNSWR is too incompetent and lazy to poll academics in those areas bclintonk?

    I'm going to use the NRC rankings in these areas and count only the average of the high points of both the R-Rank and S-Rank for use in the final tabulation.

    http://chronicle.com/article/NRC-Rankings-Overview-/124743/

    Anthropology
    Duke: R-Rank 16, S-Rank 1, Mean 8.5
    Wisconsin: R-Rank 9, S-Rank 15, Mean 12
    UCSD: R-Rank 30, S-Rank 32, Mean 31
    Minnesota: R-Rank 78, S-Rank 74, Mean 76

    Classics
    Duke: R-Rank 2, S-Rank 2, Mean 2
    Wisconsin: R-Rank 13, S-Rank 20, Mean 16.5
    UCSD: R-Rank 15, S-Rank 21, Mean 18
    Minnesota: R-Rank 16, S-Rank 26, Mean 21

    Comparative Literature
    Duke: R-Rank 4, S-Rank 3, Mean 3.5
    UCSD: R-Rank 9, S-Rank 40, Mean 24.5
    Minnesota: R-Rank 29, S-Rank 35, Mean 32
    Wisconsin: R-Rank 34, S-Rank 37, Mean 35.5

    French
    Duke: R-Rank 1, S-Rank 1, Mean 1
    Wisconsin: R-Rank 5, S-Rank 7, Mean 6
    Minnesota: R-Rank 32, S-Rank 40, Mean 36
    UCSD: N/R

    German
    Minnesota: R-Rank 1, S-Rank 2, Mean 1.5
    Duke: R-Rank 8, S-Rank 2, Mean 5
    Wisconsin: R-Rank 2, S-Rank 20, Mean 11
    UCSD: N/R

    Philosophy
    Duke: R-Rank 5, S-Rank 8, Mean 6.5
    UCSD: R-Rank 15, S-Rank 9, Mean 12
    Wisconsin: R-Rank 34, S-Rank 21, Mean 27.5
    Minnesota: R-Rank 31, S-Rank 49, Mean 40

    Spanish
    Duke: R-Rank 16, S-Rank 14, Mean 15
    Minnesota: R-Rank 5, S-Rank 29, Mean 17
    Wisconsin: R-Rank 9, S-Rank 41, Mean 25
    UCSD: N/R

    After you account for some errors made in your initial analysis and count some vitals area of study that the UNSWR neglected to rank but the NRC did, here are the new final results:

    Mean Ranking for all 25 Fields: Duke 15.50, Wisconsin 16.56, UCSD: 22.61, Minnesota 25.82
    bclintonk wrote:
    It is notably weaker than the other three schools in chemistry (#45), physics (#40), and earth science (#45).
    According to the NRC, Duke is indeed weaker than the other three schools in these academic areas but the difference is not as great as those charlatan scholars that USNWR is surveying would have you believe.

    Using the same method I used to calculate the weighted average between the R-Rank and S-Rank for some of the graduate fields that USNWR didn't rank, here's how Duke stacked up to the competition in Chem, Earth Sci, and Phys.

    Chemistry: UCSD #11, Wisconsin #12, Minnesota #17.5, Duke #19.5
    Earth Sciences/Geology: Duke #18, Minnesota #21.5, Wisconsin #23, UCSD N/R
    Physics: Wisconsin #17, UCSD: #17, Duke #22, Minnesota #36.5

    Duke doesn't actually have a specific Earth Sciences/Geology department like the other three schools and instead has professors staffed in the Nicholas School of the Environment who do research in that field. I'm sure not having a full-fledged faculty dedicated to Geology rather than just the study of the Environment hurt Duke immensely in that graduate school ranking.
    bclintonk wrote:
    It's close enough that by the time you added in all the disciplines not represented here--for example, agricultural sciences and natural resources where Wisconsin and Minnesota are globally renowned powerhouses--the relative rankings could change.
    I agree. Alas, I didn't include Duke's #1 Religion department and Divinity School, fantastic Marine Biology program, Dance Program, Theater Program, Medical Specialties, etc. in my calculation.

    Overall, all these schools have very strong faculties but Duke is the clear winner here. Professional programs (Business, Law, Medicine) tend to be the greatest revenue generators and most highly profiled aspects of universities and in that regard, Duke is in a totally different league than Wisconsin, Minnesota, or UCSD.
    · Reply · Share
This discussion has been closed.

Recent Activity