<p>[Top</a> universities by reputation 2013](<a href=“http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/world-university-rankings/2013/reputation-ranking]Top”>World Reputation Rankings 2013 | Times Higher Education (THE))</p>
<p>And general ranking for all core missions:
[World</a> University Rankings 2012-2013](<a href=“http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/world-university-rankings/2012-13/world-ranking]World”>World University Rankings 2013-14 | Times Higher Education (THE))</p>
<p>Interesting. Thanks for sharing.</p>
<p>… sharing a league table that is based on nothing more than the subjective judgement … of senior, published academics. As correctly stated in the description of the tables! Kudos for the Brits to stop short of pretending that it is a scientific exercise in a nice departure from their ARWU poor cousins. </p>
<p>Without mentioning how well that works for the USNews Report, which has started to realize that his Peer Assessment is in dire need of reduction and “integrity control.” could it there be any real surprise in the collective opinion of a bunch of navel-gazing ivory towers residents? </p>
<p>Let them talk about the state of the world for research publishing but let’s not pretend their opinion is really about educating students, and especially not undergraduate students.</p>
<p>Why on earth would Michigan State be ranked higher than Brown?</p>
<p>Calculating the scores
The reputation table ranks institutions according to an overall measure of their esteem that combines data on their reputation for research and for teaching.</p>
<p>The two scores are combined at a ratio of 2:1, giving more weight to research because feedback from our expert advisers suggests that there is greater confidence in respondents’ ability to make accurate judgements about research quality.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Probably because it is a big huge public flagship…there are programs at Michigan State that are not available at Michigan and some programs that are arguably stronger than Michigan …lots of alums working and roaming the earth. Brown has under 10,000 students I think and State is over 45,000 these days, Michigan is right around 40,000 I think.</p>
<p>That or the simple fact that the “experts” are absolutely unable to distinguish Michigan from Michigan State, and that to many of the “experts” the “state” qualifier must represent an additional label of quality. </p>
<p>Not too dissimilar from the reported high ranking for Boston University when it is confused with its more known counterparts around Cambridge.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I would think that large state schools that admit significant numbers of international students (including graduate students) are better known outside of the United States. These rankings are based on subjective reputation. I’m sure more people in other countries have heard of Michigan State than have heard of Brown. I didn’t see a lot of small liberal arts colleges on that list. I would imagine more international students come for STEM studies than liberal arts.</p>
<p>^^And especially engineering…if you look at the list you’ll see all the big Midwestern engineering unis represented. Michigan State has an excellent physics department, some in the field will say ‘better’ than Michigan. And I don’t disagree with Xiggi that since the two schools have very few duplicated programs it’s possible there is simply name confusion and with 80,000 students between the two schools thatsa lotta students.</p>
<p>I think people aren’t giving Michigan State its due. Look, I’m no big fan of the place, but it is a major research university, with some pretty darned good faculties. Its ranking here roughly reflects its place in the academic research world: well below the likes of Michigan and UC Berkeley, and even behind places like Minnesota, Ohio State, and Penn State, but on par with a Pittsburgh.</p>
<p>Fact, is, Brown may be a great undergraduate institution, but it’s small potatoes in the scholarship/research world, with some terrific scholars in certain specialized fields but relatively few top 10 or even top 25 faculties and a relatively modest research output. Brown is in a way a LAC on steroids, a little overgrown for its class and with the added cachet (domestically) that comes from being in a certain storied athletic conference, but none of that counts for much in international prestige </p>
<p>Don’t get me wrong, I actually like Brown quite a lot, and it was the only Ivy my D1 was at all attracted to, though far from her #1 choice in a college. But it’s one of the schools that benefits enormously from US News’ heavy weighting of student stats, which don’t count for much in the global reputational competition.</p>
<p>Brown has the whole no curriculum, no requirements, no grades type thing going on. It makes it hard to compare objectively and subjectively, IMO.</p>
<p>Brown does indeed have grades, though a student can take some classes pass/fail, as students can do at many schools, including Harvard. At Brown, there are rigorous requirements for majors. There are no distribution requirements, yes, but the intense advising that is part of that system also results in strong recommendations toward breadth as well as depth.</p>
<p>All worldwide rankings are weighted heavily towards research output with little or no regard for the size of the school.</p>
<p>This is a silly list.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>By definition, since it is a ranking of Universities. :)</p>
<p>I feel this is another opportunity to tout my own, clearly superior, rating system:</p>
<p><a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/college-search-selection/978040-ranking-colleges-prestigiosity.html?highlight=prestigiosity[/url]”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/college-search-selection/978040-ranking-colleges-prestigiosity.html?highlight=prestigiosity</a></p>
<p>Hunt’s system is clearly THE best. Everyone says so, and that’s how you determine the best. For example, if I ask 16 year old girls who is better, Justin Bieber or the Beatles, they will say Bieber. Therefore, ergo and in conclusion, Bieber is better. QED.</p>
<p>Pizzagirl, you’re right–and the list the OP linked to and mine are both generated this way, by asking a bunch of people which ones they think are best. Only their list asks a bunch of out-of-touch academics, while mine focuses on people who are desperatedly trying to get into these schools. Advantage: me. Obviously.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Ipso facto! </p>
<p>And Brown did not come out too badly, as they had the presence of mind of naming themselves Brown University eons ago. Poor Dartmouth, on the other hand, did not get too many votes in this Grammy or Oscar-like type of popularity contest. The price one pays for naming thyself a way too pedestrian Dartmouth College. </p>
<p>An injustice that will be corrected via the mighty HIP – Hunt’s Index of Prestigiosity. THE can have the reputation, but we (through HIP that is) have cornered the market on … prestige and prestigiosity. </p>
<p>And we are HIP.</p>