<p>Newsweek and Daily Beast compiled data from 2010 for the party school ranking:</p>
<p>“The rankings were compiled, in part, by looking at the number of on-campus arrests and per-student disciplinary actions for drugs and alcohol that occurred in 2010, according to the U.S. Department of Education.”</p>
<p>Penn state is 7th according to last year’s Princeton Review list.</p>
<p>I find it amazing how students at PSU can juggle academics and social life so effectively; it’s the best of both worlds.</p>
<p>Just was wondering if you wanted to also post what research method was used generate this ranking? Size of population, reliability, respondents, etc.</p>
<p>The research methodology is spelled out in the article, but this is the excerpt on the how they calculated the Least Rigorous:</p>
<p>"To assess the rigor of the curriculum at some of the nation’s top colleges, we first whittled an initial list of nearly 2,000 accredited 4-year colleges and found the top 200 most selective according to the percentage of applicants admitted and the median SAT/ACT score for accepted students. The most selective schools were then ranked using data from College ******* on student assessment of workload manageability (out of 10 points) and the student-to-faculty ratio according to the National Center for Education Statistics. (Smaller class size and greater professor oversight are proxies for tougher classes). For the final ranking, the degree of selectivity, workload score, and faculty ratio were each weighted a third.</p>
<p>In other words, these are the colleges where accepted students find the workload easiest when normalized by the aptitude of the student body."</p>
<p>Isn’t this a ranking for which schools have a workload that suits the kids that were accepted? As in, the kids accepted have the capability to do well in this school in comparison to other schools where the kids accepted may have problems trying to meet the expectations of the teachers.</p>
<p>Out of 2000 universities, they took the top 200 selective schools based on SAT scores and acceptance rates. This is what they mean by “normalizing” the student body. Theoretically the students at these 200 schools all rate about the same as far as aptitude and ability.</p>
<p>Then they took students reviews of workload manageability, faculty ratio, etc.</p>
<p>Out of that, they found the top 25 “Least Rigorous” of the 200 schools. </p>
<p>So students at schools with comparable entrance requirements are challenged at different levels once they are IN school, some being more rigorous and some being less. </p>
<p>According to this study, Penn State students have a less rigourous workload compared to other comparable schools.</p>
<p>If one scrolls down this breaking newsflash that Bridget8 linked, there are some insightful, indeed enlightening, comments regarding methodology. </p>
<p>Regardless of the methodology used no school wants to be on these lists and the timing is bad. This should be more of a concern then the football issues. PSU’s administration, faculty, and student body need to come up with a plan to get off these lists. Employers, and grad schools aren’t looking for students from easy party schools. Parents aren’t crazy about spending their life savings sending their kids to schools on these lists.</p>
<p>So PSU is #45 in national universities, but is 22ed in least rigorous? Well, someone has to be wrong for one of those to be correct. OR - it just shows that to teach effectively, you don’t need to commit academic suicide in college.</p>
<p>I’ll have to let me son know that all those all-nighters he pulled to make it through his classes weren’t necessary. I guess his professors didn’t get the memo!</p>
<p>OP, thanks for your post! If I didn’t click the link I might have missed the enjoyable article on “Famous Roommates” on that site.</p>
<p>Penn State has been on that party school list for a long time now. As for the other list, since Penn State was considered more rigorous than Wisconsin, Ohio State and Texas A & M, I wouldn’t object too much :)</p>
<p>I am surprised PSU is in the top 200 schools for admission test scores. The attempt to normalize the result doesn’t work, though. PSU SAT scores are going to be closer to the 400th most selective than the truly selective schools like Harvard, Stanford, ect. That means it is one of the easiest workloads for some of the least talented students among top 200 selective colleges based on test scores. </p>
<p>None of this is a surprise to me. Any college that gives academic credit for archery class is not a rigorous institution.</p>
<p>Archery is probably a P.E. class. We might all do a little eye-rolling if we had a complete list of P.E. classes, but they are required at many colleges, particularly those that offer P.E. as a major; those teachers have to be trained to teach lots of different units and to keep the classes full they need to make P.E. required.</p>
<p>I really hate all the lists. So many people get lathered up about them.</p>
<p>Archery is a P.E. class. I took it myself when PE was required, and loved it. I also took fencing, golf, racquetball and handball. A roommate of mine took fly-fishing. It was taught by someone famous in the field, his name escapes me now.</p>
<p>FWIW, D’s school is on the Newsweek lists of being most rigorous, most stressful and happiest (not as rare a combination as you might think). She is a hardcore science major but absolutely loved the African Dance course she took – and the course was indeed very rigorous and stressful. I think she spent as much effort on it as Orgo 2. College is not four years of Latin and Calculus, nor should it be.</p>