<p>It’s probably the most important criterion used in USNews. Do you know how subjective and flawed this thread’s assessment of the top 15 most presitigous universities is?</p>
<p>We are just 19 yr. old college students with nothing better to do with our lives :D</p>
<p>I mean, our opinion is just as flawed as the opinion of Presidents, Provosts, Deans of universities as far as I’m concerned…</p>
<p>I’d trust PA from US News because it’s an opinion poll of ppl who occupy the upper echelon of higher education…ever more so than the opinions of ppl here on CC forums…who probably hasn’t even graduated from HS yet lol. :D</p>
<p>This is precisely why I disagree with PA being used as a such a high weighting % of the rankings. How does a dean at UNebraska know any more about whether Dartmouth or Brown is a better school than I do? He has likely never been to NH or RI or known anyone who has attended either school. And somehow I’m supposed to treat the aggregation of uninformed opinions like his as gospel? I don’t think so. </p>
<p>I would say on a poll from people on CC would be more accurate as people on here would be generally more informed and more interested in this kind of thing.</p>
<p>The President at the University of Nebraska went to law school at NYU, and the Dean of their College of Arts and Sciences got his PhD in Math from Yale. They may have met somebody in the course of their lives that was familiar with Dartmouth or Brown ::rolls eyes::. </p>
<p>You do realize that academic people keep up with colleagues at places around the country, right?</p>
I’m not a big fan of either university, but I’m even less of a fan of people pulling things out of their rears in an attempt to denigrate another university.</p>
<p>Berkeley grads are not paid “way more” than Duke grads. The median starting pay at Berkeley is $59900 and the mid-career salary is $112k. The median starting salary at Duke is $58900, and the mid-career salary is $106k. The difference is virtually negligible.</p>
<p>I also take issue with Berkeley’s supposed lead in popularity. Berkeley’s yield for in-state applicants was 43.6%, but its OOS yield was a mere 22.6%. Compare that to Duke’s RD yield of 34.8%. Furthermore, the applicant-to-undergraduate ratio at Berkeley (1.80:1) is lower than Duke’s (3.22:1).</p>
<p>I agree with gellino 100% on this point about the PA being completely unreliable. It doesn’t matter if the Dean of Univ. Nebraska went to Nebraska or Yale or a community college – the fact is, that person will have, at best, intimate knowledge of a handful of schools, and more importantly, at best, direct knowledge of an even smaller number of schools – and yet he’s supposed to know the relative academic strengths of a UC Irvine vs. Rice vs. Dartmouth. Even if someone spent the entire year researching the relative strengths and weaknesses of every university that person would not be immune to “bias” – I mean, let’s take a step back for a moment, let’s say that the Dean of Univ. Neb. actually did dedicate his spare time to review all of these other colleges and universities – it’s not his job to know, so why should we care about Dean or Chancellor XYZ’s opinion on the relative merits of a Dartmouth vs. University of Wisconsin? </p>
<p>Which really brings us to a fundamental question here – is there anyone truly qualified to make such a call? And if there isn’t, isn’t the PA just a big fraud? But let’s just say that such a person did exist – that this person magically studied the ins and outs of every single academic institution in America? (pause for a second and think about how unlikely such a scenario is – think about the sheer number of changes a single university undergoes in a few years time and think about being able to track every single change at every single major university and be able to weigh the pros/cons of those changes – think about how absurd that is for a moment and move on) – so let’s say that such a person exists – essentially even then, there is bias absolutely built into something like a PA ranking: 1) for one, a single individual (or a few individuals) hardly speak for an entire academic institution and 2) no matter how objective, those individuals absolutely will have their own built in biases – be it regional, be it within their conference, etc.</p>
<p>I wrote about this earlier and made the analogy to the “Coach’s Poll” for college football rankings – basically making the case that even though there is hardly anyone else who knows the ins and outs, the Xs and Os of college football than the Coach’s, that hardly makes them qualified to rank every single major program out there… 1) they don’t have time to watch every single major program play – they barely have time to watch tape of their upcoming opponent and 2) they absolutely have their own bias / agenda when ranking the other programs… anyways here is the full text of what I wrote:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>In sum, the PA is a bunch of total horse manure packaged under the guise of “academic expertise”.</p>
<p>The_prestige, this thread is about “prestige”, not about fact or actual quality. In the end, one cannot prove that one university is better than another in the absolute sense. All we can try to do is measure, admitedly with a great deal if inaccuracy, a university’s prestige. And the PA does not pretend to measure actual academic quality, but rather, undergraduate academic reputation. There is a difference between quality and reputation. Whether or not the PA is an accurate reflection of actual quality or not is irrelevant. What matters is that it is a pretty accurate representation of university reputations in academe; a very important opinion for anyone intent on applying to graduate school.</p>
<p>Also, we should keep in mind that the PA survey is conducted by peer institutions. By that, I mean that only presidents and deans at similar universities will be asked to rate their peer institutions. Furthermore, one of the six options given to the rater is “don’t know”. If a president or dean does not know enough about a peer institution, they are supposed to fill in that box. Finally, outliers are left out of the final average weighted score. None of that changes the fact that the PA is merely an opinion. But given the importance of this group, it is an opinion some of us value greatly.</p>
<p>In short, we can argue about the accuracy of the PA all we want. However, it is pointless to argue its validity because it measures something very real; the collective opinion of academe. Whether that matters or not is also open to debate.</p>
<p>1) Universities are only allowed to voice their opinions about the PAs of peer universities only. University of Nebraska Provosts are not allowed to survey Brown or Dartmouth. They have the option of checking off “no, I don’t know enough about this university to comment on the quality of the program” if they are not comfortable commenting on the programs they are given. If you don’t know that US News sends out surveys and ask universities to survey peer counterparts… I don’t know why you are complaining.</p>
<p>2) University Presidents were elected by the Board of Trustees and Presidential selection committee of their respective schools simply because they are the best in higher education and because they are the best at what they do.</p>
<p>PA scores are valuable to a certain extent but to dismiss the PA scores entirely and suggest that the average CC forum member is “generally more informed” about quality and academics than Presidents is not ignorant but very funny. :D</p>
<p>University Presidents are in charge and spend 50% of their time eliciting massive donations in the form of gifts from wealthy donors. They HAVE to boast about their top ranked programs in order to attract and assure wealthy donors that their money will be put to productive use and it will not be totally wasted. Board of Trustees keep track of the President annually and keep track of their status in the US News rank… Example: USC forced Marshall School of Business Dean Dr. Gupta to resign after Marshall’s ranking on the US News report dropped from 25 to 42…</p>
<p>Do you think a random 19 yr old with 1000+ post on this forum has more knowledge of the Ivy league than Dr. Drew Faust of Harvard, Dr. Brodhead of Duke, Dr. Brody of Hopkins, or Dr. Levin of Yale?</p>
<p>1) People should have absolutely no confidence in any one person’s ability to accurately rank every single college out there – and based on so-called “academic reputation”</p>
<p>2) Even if someone spent their entire time dedicated to such a pursuit – there is inherent bias built in such a system</p>
<p>3) Let’s talk about bias for a second Alex. Honestly, if UofM had a crappy PA, would you be such an ardent supporter of it? Does the fact that UofM has a decent PA score factor in at all your staunch support of it?</p>
<p>And, finally, if it is such an “accepted” and credible ranking within academe, then why is there a growing uproar within academe about just how flawed and irresponsible the PA is, for one example:</p>
<p>Wow. Talk about buying into the USNWR PA propaganda – hook, line and sinker. I mean this “pie in the sky” version of how the PA survey works is certainly what USNWR would love everyone to believe.</p>
<p>1) First of all, it’s very curious – how do you know all of these “facts” exactly? Have you ever seen this controversial survey? Have you spoken directly to anyone who has taken it? You know for a fact that those who fill out the survey are: a) “only allowed” to voice their opinions about the PA of “peer universities” – certain schools are “not allowed” to be commented upon by certain people?; and b) who decides which schools are “peers” anyway? Is there a formal list, or does one just make his/her own rules up on the fly? Seems to me this is a very detailed breakdown of how the PA survey works when 99.99% of the CC community hasn’t a clue about the ins and outs of the survey (hence the outcry due to lack of transparency).</p>
<p>2) Let’s just assume for a moment that this is the way it works. Let’s consider this methodology for a moment – the person taking the survey gets to decide which schools he/she is going to rank? So basically, doesn’t this end up being a very narrow “circle jerk” of the same institutions ranking one another in one’s own respective “circle” (as it were) – i.e. just a fragmented patchwork of surveys with no clear national benchmark to judge one region vs. another? How do you end up with such a neat, uniform overall national PA ranking from top to bottom at the end of the day? Is this the “USNWR” version of “secret sauce” PA magic?</p>
<p>3) This still leaves the issue of bias out there on the table. It doesn’t matter if a person has 10 PHDs from HYPSM or a community college degree – no one is immune or above bias. I keep bringing this back to the Coach’s poll survey – each and every coach participating has an agenda. </p>
<p>4) Finally, if the PA survey (and its methodology) was so solid, credible and 100% “up and up” then how does one explain:</p>
<p>a) The growing uproar within academe basically lambasting the PA survey including a growing number of schools which now refuse to participate (including open letters from Stanford University to Reed College basically calling USNWR on their methodology)</p>
<p>b) If it’s so legitimate, why don’t they release the survey details? Who ranked whom and what they gave one another? Why the secrecy? Why the lack of transparency, particularly given the relatively large percentage (25%) of the overall USNWR ranking? What do they have to fear in the face of such growing criticism? Could it be - is it just possible - that the whole PA methodology is complete crap – OR is it more likely that the PA survey is this dreamy and perfect ranking system as described in quotes above? Which one is more likely?</p>
Survey respondents are not asked to “rank every single college out there”.</p>
<p>They are asked to rate a university’s undergraduate academic programs on a scale of 1-5. 1 = marginal to 5 = distinguished. If they don’t know enough about a college’s academic offering the respondents are asked not to respond.</p>
<p>Most academics can tell which academic programs are distinguished.</p>
<p>I ask again (as I did in the post just above), let’s consider this methodology for a moment – the person taking the survey gets to decide which schools he/she is going to rank? So basically, doesn’t this end up being a very narrow “circle jerk” of the same institutions ranking one another in one’s own respective “circle” (as it were) – i.e. just a fragmented patchwork of surveys with no clear national benchmark to judge one region vs. another? </p>
<p>More importantly, it begs the simple question as how does one end up with such a neat, uniform overall national PA ranking from top to bottom at the end of the day? Are we to believe those at the “lower end” spectrum who rank themselves are so deferential and humble that they end up giving themselves lower rankings nice and neat as to conform to this overall ranking?</p>
<p>Or is this the end result of “USNWR”'s version of a “secret sauce”-like PA magic?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Really? It’s quite amazing that you can speak so confidently on behalf of “most academics” in America.</p>
<p>^ I haven’t seen the survey, but I imagine the list is pre-populated with all the national universities and the rater circles a 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, or “don’t know”. </p>
<p>1,965 survey results are tabulated and averaged (USNWR says 4,272 surveys were sent out, 46% responded). </p>
<p>
Oh please. You work for a specific industry. You can’t tell what your competition is doing let alone rate what companies are among the most admired? Then you won’t be in business very long. Academics should know enough to mark a 1 thru 5, and if they don’t there is a response for that.</p>
<p>I agree with you that the survey should be more transparent with regard to format and methodology. I would not list the responders if I was USNWR because it could influence future suveys.</p>
<p>“Academics” subscribe to services such as FSP Academic Analytic and The Chronicle of Higher Education that use concrete objective data to fully assess and compile information about how each programs stacks of against other institutions…</p>
<p>Academics knows the standard of quality of their programs because they have internal staff and sometimes contracts these services out to independent companies to benchmark the entire university and individual programs against national standards and make strategic decisions based on reliable and objective data as well as quantitative measures in the program review process.</p>
<p>Then again, this is not like the Board of Trustees at a company trying to determine CEO compensation while the Board of Trustees is filled with CEOs of other major corporations, and it becomes a circle jerk round of “I pay you a lot of money since I’m a CEO of another corporation and I sit on another Board of Trustees made up with the same ppl judging my pay checks…”</p>
<p>You can assume that but there isn’t really any evidence that supports the Ivy league trying to stabilize a weakling university by giving them biase reporting just because it is an Ivy league school or whatever. It’s all assumptions.</p>
<p>Of course I could – and they could. The point isn’t whether they have the capacity to take a list of schools and mark each one 1 through 5 – the question is whether we should care what that outcome is.</p>
<p>In other words, let’s take two surveys:</p>
<p>1) A survey by industry insiders ranking themselves
2) A survey of the industry by those outside of the industry that have a strong level of interaction with that industry – clients for example</p>
<p>In other words, if there is going to be a subjective portion of the ranking, shouldn’t this ranking come from an objective third party observer that has enough interaction with the industry (in point of fact a much more broader interaction with the industry than any single person within the industry has) – say, for example, corporate recruiters? In other words, which ranking do you think potential students would really care about:</p>
<ul>
<li>A reputational ranking by corporate recruiters</li>
<li>A peer reputational ranking by those within academe –> i mean really, who cares?</li>
</ul>
<p>^ You raise a good point. I think USNWR is trying to address that criticism.</p>
<p>Fortune magazine (which has declined in quality, IMO) runs a survey of the most admired companies. It asks people both within the industry category and outside the industry category to give an opinion. Fortune publishes both results - and the results can be different. For example, Toyota was most admired outside the car industry while BMW was most admired within the car industry.</p>
<p>For now, since USNWR doesn’t give full disclosure over its PA survey, all we can do is conjecture and make assumptions. And making assumptions is only going to make an ass out of you and me…;)</p>
In fairness to USNWR, what corporate recruiters do you include? How do you survey a broad section of industries to cover a variety of academic fields? How do you find enough people that would have experience with graduates from a large enough variety of colleges to form a unbiased, non-regional opinion?</li>
</ul>
<p>With regard to “who really cares” about the peer reputational rating within academia, I think you answered the question yourself:
<p>“including open letters from Stanford University to Reed College basically calling USNWR on their methodology”</p>
<p>There was a 1996 op-ed in the Los Angeles Times by a leader of the student government at Stanford University praising Reed for refusing to provide information to U.S. News. The editorial advised prospective students to choose Reed if they “want to go to a school that isn’t interested in selling out its education.”</p>