<p>
</p>
<p>I believe US News does have a separate ranking for publics</p>
<p>sorry i just read the title and wanted to slap the op for saying that…duke kicks ass!</p>
<p>I think that k&s means that the USNews should not be ranking public universities and private universities together. I tend to agree because they have very different approaches to admissions and very conflicting data-reporting styles.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Cornell has a student body 2x larger than any other Ivy.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Wouldn’t this practice further perpetuate the assumption that publics are inferior? They don’t separate public and private for graduate school rankings, why should USNews use a different method for undergrad?</p>
<p>i would prefer if USNews use groupings, instead of pure numerical rankings. For example, in ranks of selectivity/peer assessment/alumni giving rate, provide a score based on similar school type. For example, large schools usually have low alumni giving rate, maybe they can do some sort of weighted ranking based on school size, and instead of having ranks of 1-100+ for individual categories for each school, they can have a 1-10 rating system instead. </p>
<p>This way, it reduces some of the bias towards small sized schools. (i think)</p>
<p>keefer,
How about this? </p>
<p>Get rid of the alumni giving ranks. </p>
<p>And separate the subjective PA score from the objective data.</p>
<p>I have always thought Alumni giving rate should not be part of the rankings, it’s a measure of alumni’s financial ability, and how good the school is at reaching out to all alumni for money, which should not factor into the undergraduate rankings. So I’d love for them to just get rid of it.</p>
<p>I’m not really sure how you would separate PA scores from the rest, it’s going to be a ranking system. I don’t think it’s right to rank the schools based on “objective data”(as you would call it) and have a separate ranking based on PA scores.</p>
<p>just a note- the USnews engineering are done purely on PA scores</p>
<p>UCBChem, ideally, I would not like to see separate rankings for public and private universities. Unfortunately, the way public universities and private universities report statistics and the existance of the alumni donation rate really hurts public universities. Furthermore, I agree with keefer. It would be a lot more convincing to group universities rather than rank them. </p>
<p>In the absense of a reasonable ranking, I would rather see separate rankings.</p>
<p>The SAT’s test a certain kind of intelligence, that’s it. </p>
<p>You (generally speaking) can’t be stupid and get a high score on the SAT’s
But you can be incredibly smart and not get a high score on the SAT’s</p>
<p>My thoughts:</p>
<p>-This thread has been, is, and will continue to be ridiculously worthless.
-Some of my classmates are insecure about Duke and feel the need to defend it against baseless assertions, which I think is a waste of everyone’s time.
-To insult Chicago/Cornell/etc. as intellectually inferior to any school is very arrogant and frankly embarrassing.
-People should let this ridiculous debate end.
-Depending on your values and prejudices, you may find Duke over or under-rated. I doubt this thread is going to change anyone’s mind.</p>
<p>It IS, however, going to continue raising ad revenue for our CC overlords ;)</p>
<p>Oh,MOWC…
And you ask other people to chill out? Goodness…</p>
<p>This thread just proves the rule - that it is better to be hated (on) than ignored. 19ish pages on CC are proof alone, right?</p>