<p>A simple search on ACS with Williams+ College should give you Pubs done by Williams College undergrads in collaboration with professors. There is no way I am reading chemistry research articles though.</p>
<p>[ACS</a> Publications - Cookie absent](<a href=“http://pubs.acs.org/action/doSearch?action=search&searchText=williams%2Bcollege&qsSearchArea=searchText]ACS”>http://pubs.acs.org/action/doSearch?action=search&searchText=williams%2Bcollege&qsSearchArea=searchText)</p>
<p>sefago - Thanks, I should have thought of that. Some good ones in there, just from skimming the abstracts.</p>
<p>I can’t believe you don’t want to read them yourself! Why in heavens name not? LOL.</p>
<p>"I don’t have a problem with lists of schools that show in order various particular data. Which gets to the heart of the matter.
I am not “attacking an imperfect data source”, I am attacking a magazine which has tried to put that data together, along with a garbage opinion poll, to make a claim they can tell us all which colleges are “best”, down to a level of precision that differentiates #22 from #34. I am attacking the fact that USNWR has chosen to label this as the “best” colleges, and thus has, intentionally or not, created a phenomenon that has been quite detrimental to the search process for many students, as I cited in an earlier post. Yes, one can just say that is their problem, too bad they and/or their parents are all hooked on prestige. TheSaiyan is right, one could just laugh it off and go with the flow and all. Unfortunately, I have seen too many cases of this phenomenon causing great strife within families and resulting in expensive, poor decisions. I know I won’t change closed minds, but it doesn’t mean I won’t continue to point out all the flaws. "</p>
<ol>
<li>That USNWR weights the data is a convenience and does not bother me</li>
<li>I am not convinced the Peer assesment poll is garbage. Imperfect, to be sure, but garbage?</li>
<li>Yes people looked at lists, made judgements etc before USNWR. They also focused excessively on prestige, had strife withing families, and made expensive poor decisions. Maybe our environment is atypical in that many parents know more than elsewhere, but I can’t think of anyone I know who chose a more expensive school over a cheaper one soley or even primarily because of a USNWR ranking. On the contrary, to the extent USNWR comes into play for anything but very limited preliminary screening, its quite the opposite - USNWR justifies a cheaper choice by showing a cheaper school (instate or high FA/merit aid) is equivalent to or close in USNWR ranking than a school with more naive, lay, prestige.</li>
</ol>
<p>For example I live in Virginia. I suspect for many here the USNWR ranking serves as one data point validating the selection of UVA over an Ivy. </p>
<p>And again, how do you determine the preliminary list out of thousands? My DD read through the Fiske book to look for schools that excited her. That was a main source of our preliminary list. There are thousands of schools that do not make it into Fiske. What are the criteria for getting into Fiske? What do they weight? Are they legitimate? No one here discusses their methodology for inclusion. </p>
<p>Do some colleges try to manipulate the data (like admit rates, for ex)? Yes, from what I gather here. Suppose there was no USNWR ranking, and people looked at admit rates on their own. Would colleges still manipulate those? I think they would?</p>
<p>at a minimum, USNWR seesm to serve as a rough indicator of selectivity. It worked out, roughly, that way for us (with the notable exception of Tulane - but DD wrote a sloppy essay for them - and WUSTL where she was WLed and should have been rejected- but they WL alot of people and are one school widely accused of being overranked by USNWR) - and thats DESPITE the notion that the admissions process is to individualized for selectivity to be generalizable. </p>
<p>And it was better than using average SAT (complicated by different schools weights for SAT, and RPI’s imbalance between math and verbal) or GPA/class rank (DD’s attendence at TJ made GPA questionable as a measure, and class rank useless). I would say USNWR not only helped to provide an very initial screening "Yay, we dont have to think about Ouchita Baptist or Cleveland State! We can spend less than 30 seconds on Hofstra, Fairleigh Dickinson, etc ) but helped us to confirm the solidity of our reach/match/safety strategy. And yes, it helped to validate RPI for my DW, who knows less about this, and was worried about DD going to a school that was “not prestigious enough” I would say that had USNWR not existed our search would have gone no better, and possibly would have gone worse.</p>
<p>It’d be nicer if USNWR reported more in tiers than in absolutes which suggest that there is meaningful difference between #16 and #18, but whatever … The fact that there are ignorant people who take it that finely isn’t USNWR’s problem.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>In theory, the PA should be extremely important and valuable. In practice, it is entirely different. While the term garbage might be excessive in evaluating the value of the exercise, the PA does deserve all the criticism it receives, and probably deserves a lot more. </p>
<p>The result is not different from polling 2,000 car dealers and asking them “In your opinion, which car has the best reputation in the market.” While the car dealers could be viewed as experts, all they’d know about the other brands would be gleaned from … magazines and reviews by others. And, in this example, it would be easier for one car dealer to know a modicum about the cars sold in his area, as one of his “duties” is to attack the competing brands, or leats beat them at the car game. </p>
<p>For the PA, we would be lucky if the people who fill the survey to know their own schools AND respond objectively; asking them to do the same for their “peers” is simply ridiculous. People who correctly see this exercise as futile and manipulative do NOT have to rely on speculation. Plenty of officials have admitted not knowing enough about their peers to fill the survey or use the survey to punish their foes and helping their friends. </p>
<p>At the end, to repeat something I have written over and over, the PA could and should be a valuable element. Actually I think it should stand on his own. However, for this to work, the survey should be revamped entirely by expanding the categories of the survey, and most imprtantly should be both AUDITED and MADE public. School officials who could not accept to be scrutinized and append THEIR NAME on the survey are NOT WORTHY to be in their positions and to INFLUENCE a gullible public. </p>
<p>It does not get simpler than that. Just a simple as pointing out that the only people who support the PA do it because it makes their favorite school look better than it should!</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Actually, that sentence would have made more sense if you’ll replace “most” with “right”, as in: It’s of utmost importance that you attend the school that impresses the right people. But then again, if your use of “most” implies that it also includes the “right people” in the context of your statement, then it’s fine with me. </p>
<p>
Is there something wrong with that? </p>
<p>At least, I know the dry cleaners would not mess up my sweatshirt as they understand the value of it. </p>
<p>
Maybe for you. But are you a foreigner studying in America?</p>
<p>Brooklyn - I agree, if all people were as well informed as you about what it all means, this would be moot. That is not the case. To get to PizzaGirl’s last comment, I think it is USNWR’s problem, at least in part. As the originator of the phenomenon, they have a responsibility to justify what they put out there. In that there is no basis for the factors or weightings they use, no support for the implicit assumption that the people that are surveyed have sufficient knowledge to render meaningful opinions, and no demonstration that they can justify using the term “best”, I think they fail in this regard. They basically just “make it up”.</p>
<p>If this had no real consequences, other than some relatively benign ones, it would just be so much academic bickering. But despite what you said:
There have been various stories on here and reports on NPR and in the papers about parents and kids that went into enormous debt because they felt they had to go to the most prestigious school possible. Is that mainly their fault? Absolutely yes. Does that mean USNWR should be free of blame for what they have helped create? Absolutely not. Did some of this happen before USNWR? Absolutely yes. Was it the huge international phenomenon it is now? No way.</p>
<p>We have become a culture where everything needs to be measured and validated, even those things that are so complex or so subjective they cannot be. I just read in the NYT Sunday Magazine that apparently Newsweek did a ranking of the top 50 rabbis in the USA!! I give up. It really is hopeless.</p>
<p>“It’d be nicer if USNWR reported more in tiers than in absolutes which suggest that there is meaningful difference between #16 and #18, but whatever … The fact that there are ignorant people who take it that finely isn’t USNWR’s problem.”</p>
<p>then the issue of arbitrariness for colleges falling on the edge of a tier would be even worse. </p>
<p>One thing USNWR does do is tell you the number of points - you can see if two schools seperated by one place in ranking are close in points (usually) or very different (rarely? never?) To me that someone who has just spent several years with a high school student could think that the difference between 75 and 76 is not arbitrary, is a problem too big for USNWR to deal with.</p>
<p>BTW, isnt it interesting that so many folks have little trouble ranking our children by close differences on arbitrary tests?</p>
<p>xiggi, then perhaps it would make more sense if US news would come up with two different rankings - one for university prestige and the other one for subjective measures relating to undergraduate experience, the one that hawkette often pushes on this message board.</p>
<p>“There have been various stories on here and reports on NPR and in the papers about parents and kids that went into enormous debt because they felt they had to go to the most prestigious school possible”</p>
<p>but MY point is, that that kind of choice, and that kind of decision existed before USNWR, and would exist in the absence of USNWR. </p>
<p>Maybe you are younger than me. I graduated high school in 1977. People then were making decisions (though costs of course were lower) about which schools to attend and prestige played a role, and I am sure some people went into debt purely for prestige. That was without USNWR. </p>
<p>I believe in the absence of USNWR folks who are very concerned about prestige would STILL be concerned about prestige, but would simply discern it through other means. And I suspect that would lead to MORE focus on the Ivies (and less on Ivy equivalents) and, below that, to less recognition of the publics (except for berkely, UM, UW, UVA). And in general to even more arbitrariness.</p>
<p>BTW, my rabbi is on the Newsweek list. We did not join our shul for that reason (and we may drop out for a few years to help pay for RPI 
) He deserves it. Its interesting to see a list like that. Do you expect to peruse a list of every rabbi in the country to determine whom you would like to read more about? </p>
<p>Lists have been around for ages (back when some monk decided to list which the “liberal arts” were, for example) and serve as ways to reduce the cost of gathering information.</p>
<p>I mean this sounds like blaming a Car and Driver list of the biggest cars for the fact that people buy too many big cars.</p>
<p>^Yes but then the “less prestigious” organizations that provide better educations would eventually gain prestige, and so the original list of prestigious universities would essentially disappear and be pointless. The thing is, you can’t say a university has prestige without some solid premise. The only reason some colleges today have that is because the general population is uninformed. US news takes advantage of that to make a believable list for profit.</p>
<p>
OK, I don’t get this at all. Either someone got 84% of the answers right, or 85% of them right. Nothing too hard about that.</p>
<p>I am of roughly the same generation as you. I know there will always be lists. Doesn’t make it right, and you completely miss my point on various counts anyway. No biggie.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I am not sure if Hawkette is pushing for two rankings described as “one for university prestige and the other one for subjective measures” but I have been pushing to segregate the PA from the rankings and establish it as a single measure. The result would indeed be two rankings, but the PA would still be THE subjective one, albeit one with a modicum of required integrity. </p>
<p>However, I hope you realize that the PA would be quite different from what it is today as it will no longer be so vague that responders can make it whatever they want. </p>
<p>For instance, IF the reputation of the graduate schools is SUPPOSED To be included, it should be clearly established. There should be no room for inference or speculation. </p>
<p>Would the result be different? Absolutely as responders would understand that placing a 5 in every category might trigger the scrutiny of thousands of eyes, starting with the ones of their esteemed peers. What would I expect? A lot fewer schools reaching a PA of 4.00 and the end of the gamesmanship and arbitrary high rankings for schools that place more emphasis on research than on teaching.</p>
<p>someone got one more question right, does that make the smarter in that course? Perhaps by chance the questions asked more about what they what happened to not to have studied and less about what they did study (happened to my DD) Perhaps it was hot that day or the AC was noisy. Or the kid got less sleep. Or any of a hundred other things. We rank and evaluate our children constantly in arbitrary ways, that have no real correlation with life (how many fields do people have to do something timed, anyway? With multiple choice answers?)</p>
<p>I find plenty of problems with ranking and evaluating in our society far more serious than USNWR. </p>
<p>yes, I AM missing your point. You, like MANY people on CC, seem to not like that people go into debt for colleges based on prestige. Thats a reasonable position. You seem to think that somehow USNWR is responsible for that - that folks would make better decisions in the absence of the USNWR rankings. I do not see that. I really don’t.</p>
<p>And of course I know from personal experience, how to someone with an ounce of common sense, its quite a useful tool.</p>
<p>
Auto repair shops might be better. In our case, CC might be better. :)</p>
<p>
Biased samplings?</p>
<p>Anyway, the PA tries to measure an imprecise or vague quantity. Only the top 10 or so in the survey might have some meanings. The info for the rest could be buried in the noise, at an exponential rate.</p>
<p>"I know there will always be lists. Doesn’t make it right, "</p>
<p>when something exists for such a long time (as list making in general) it is worth asking how it managed to survive so long, if it is functional or dysfunctional (or used to be functional but is no longer) etc.</p>
<p>I think making and consulting lists is a way to economize information. I think we see more of them today precisely because that has become more important. </p>
<p>A list - whether its a list of Consumer Reports recommended TV’s, best selling novels, up and coming metro areas, New Ivy colleges, most influential rabbis, movies that got a high rating from Ebert, etc are just starting points, tools for gathering information. That some people (even people smart enough to have a child with a shot at a very selective school) use them rigidly is a sign of how odd people are. Caveat Emptor.</p>
<p>"Auto repair shops might be better. In our case, CC might be better. "</p>
<p>see I disagree with that. CC is uneven, often arbitrary, occassionally wrong. And often inclined to go off on tangents. And of course often folks obsessed with justifying their OWN decision.</p>
<p>xiggi, I’m sorry. I meant objecive measures, not subjective. my bad.</p>
<p>One ranking (subjective) would be PA + opinions of employers + high school counselors.</p>
<p>Objective - the one hawkette proposes. </p>
<p>That looks very interesting to me.</p>