<p>
</p>
<p>I have absolutely no idea what this sentence is supposed to mean. What do scholarly inputs and outputs mean to you?</p>
<p>As I previously stated, I believe that the University of Texas is an excellent school; however, I dont believe most individuals would choose it over Virginia (for undergraduate studies) unless they wanted to pay in-state tuition or wanted to attend school in Texas. One might also choose Texas for a specific program that they offer, but overall, Virginia has a significantly stronger student body, a much better graduation rate, better funding, smaller classes, better student/faculty ratio, etc. Most people consider Virginia among the top three public schools in the country. Most would not include Texas in that category. Texas suffers from an excessively large student body and the state legislatures crazy top 10% law.</p>
<p>Im not suggesting that U.S. News is the authority on college rankings, but I do believe that they are not too far off since the public obviously accepts them. Or, as you say, if the rankings were too out of line, they would have no credibility, and not sell. I just cited them to show how different Leiters rankings are from a somewhat common perception. He offers precious little evidence to support his view and to discredit the common perception. Perhaps this explains why Leiter’s rankings are not widely accepted.</p>
<p>I also disagree with you regarding U.S. News methodology; their rankings are clearly based on qualitative factors such as student faculty ratios, test scores, admission rates, graduation rates, etc. Perhaps you may not feel a particular factor is relevant, a particular factor should be weighted differently, or a different factor better measures quality; however, U.S. News uses a methodology, which is not arbitrary, and which it has not altered in recent years.</p>
<p>I agree that a schools location along with a schools endowment can have a significant impact on a schools reputation and ranking. I believe that UVA benefits more from its proximity to the Washington DC area than the NYC area; however, being somewhat close to NYC cant hurt. But you must also recognize that a lot of great schools compete for students in the New York market including the Ivy League schools, MIT, Duke, a number of top LACs, and even Chicago. On the other hand there are not that many quality schools competing with UT for students in Texas, a state with a larger population than New York. </p>
<p>When I initially posted, I did not intend to get involved in the debate going on in this thread; however, I will say:</p>
<p>I too think Chicago is a great school with excellent faculty and top programs (including economics and physics); however, I didnt seriously consider the school since it didnt seem to offer the right mix of academics and social life for me. In addition, Chicagos reputation for grade deflation concerned me since I intend to apply to medical school upon graduation. Im afraid that my perceptions of Chicago are more prevalent among my peers than many here are willing to acknowledge. </p>
<p>Some of the attitudes expressed in this thread bear an uncanny resemblance to those of General Motors executives over the past decades when they arrogantly ignored their competition and blindly clung to their old, tried and true, ways of conducting business. Obviously, to stay competitive in any industry, a competitor needs to know the market in which he competes, to closely monitor his competition, and to make adjustments.</p>
<p>I will also share a personal experience. I received an invitation to a Chicago presentation last year at an area hotel, which I attended. Instead of showing up with a spiffy Power Point presentation or a nice film, the admissions people showed up with an old-fashion slide projector. The slide projector was not working properly and it took them about twenty minutes to get the slide carrousel to move forward instead of backwards. Frankly, the slide show was worthless. After the slide show, they had a number of alumni introduce themselves and talk about their experiences at Chicago. The problem was these individuals graduated quite a while ago and talked about things that the admissions people thought were no longer relevant. They talked about the crime situation in a manner that made the admissions people cringe. The admissions people then had to state how the area has improved, etc. One got the feeling that the whole presentation was not well thought out or well coordinated. I dont think anyone left the presentation feeling excited about the University of Chicago. I felt sorry for them they really need to wok on these presentations. </p>
<p>On the other hand, I will say that the materials that they mailed to me were very nice and interesting.</p>