Us news rankings 2011

[xiggi]

<p>

PS. Ok, now I see Xiggi updated the ranking, and even added my beloved Buckeye!! lol

</p>

<p>Haha - I anticipated this question, and added a few schools from memory. I probably forgot more than a few. But I made sure to include Tulane. :)</p>

[fallenchemist]

<p>LOL, thanks xiggi. Except Tulane is not public. FYI. Also, a question. CalTech is quasi-research? Explain please. I’ll pick up your answer later, I’m off to watch the PawSoz.</p>

[RML]

<p>

RML, like nearly everyone else in the other 49 states, I wouldn’t know Davis, Merced or SB if I tripped over them. Those schools are nothing more than names on a computer screen to me and most other people outside the state of California. It’s bad enough that you think everyone in the country reveres Berkeley; it’s worse that you actually think someone outside California would have any knowledge or opinions on those other schools. Enough with the California-centric point of view.

</p>

<p>Pizza Girl, I think you’re completely out of topic. I was merely explaining to you how complicated large schools are, and therefore, not entirely a good thing to pit them against small schools. </p>

<p>Berkeley is not the university, but the University of Califonia. Berkeley is just one of the many campuses of the University of California. From that point alone, you need to understand its complexities and how absurd it sound to compare a single campus of the university to a small university. </p>

<p>Let’s try to break down UC.</p>

<p>university: UC
Campuses: Berkeley, LA, SD, SB, Davis, Irvine, SC, Merced</p>

<p>Now, what I was saying is, even these campuses can still be disected given its nature and size, thus you’ll have colleges - Engineering, Haas, Boalt, Chemistry, L&S and so on. </p>

<p>The size of a single college at Berkeley is already the size of an LAC or another research-led university. For example, Haas is bigger than Amherst or Williams. L&S is bigger than Harvard or Yale. For you to be able to compare Berkeley with would require several schools. Example, Berkeley vs Harvard+Yale+Princeton+Rice+Williams+Amherst+Pomona+Caltech+Mudd+Bowdoin. </p>

<p>

As to why it’s a bad thing? As someone who went to a university with an engineering school, the engineers weren’t “separate.” We all lived together, played together, took classes together in the same buildings. There was no segregation, real or implied. I think it would be dreary to just-hang-around-engineers or just-hang-around-journalists or just-hang-around-history-majors. That defeats the broadening purpose of going to a school, IMO.

</p>

<p>So, the engineering students are NU share the same facilities with economics or English majors, for instance? No offense, but I find that strange and complicated. Engineering students must be in separate facilities where they will have their own labs, lib and faculty. Their facilities must be there to support their specific major. After all, they’re studying a different field of expertise. Then again, perhaps I find NU’s set-up strange because of my different orientation and point of view. </p>

<p>Again, you have to understand that Berkeley is a huge school - way bigger than NU. It isnt anything like yoru alma mater school or Chicago or Duke or Brown. It has a different set-up because it is huge. Maybe at your alma mater the atmosphere and set-up is close-knit, which is also a good thing. But that’s because NU is small. Now to make Berkeley small for their students, or to organize such a huge school, is to house them in separate colleges giving them a sense of belongingness and providing them with things that rightly correspond to their needs as engineering students.</p>

<p>I’m not saying NU’s set-up is a bad set-up or that Berkeley’s is better. All I’m saying is standards are set according to their size and set-up and no one is better than the other.</p>

[xiggi]

<p>FC, sorry for the Tulane. I added it to the wrong list. This shows how much I pay attention to such lists and defuses the notion that I spend my life discrediting public schools. </p>

<p>As far as the quasi research, there I plead innocence. I am with in that i do not understand what it means or is supposed to mean, except that it is meant to create a separate group.</p>

[smartalic34]

<p>If this is a preview of anything, the rankings this year (both National U and LAC) will be almost a carbon copy of last year’s… virtually no change among the top 11 LACs…</p>

<p>[Best</a> Colleges Preview: Top 11 National Liberal Arts Colleges - US News and World Report](<a href=“http://www.usnews.com/articles/education/best-colleges/2010/08/10/best-colleges-preview-top-11-national-liberal-arts-colleges.html]Best”>http://www.usnews.com/articles/education/best-colleges/2010/08/10/best-colleges-preview-top-11-national-liberal-arts-colleges.html)</p>

[xiggi]

<p>

Berkeley is not the university, but the University of Califonia. Berkeley is just one of the many campuses of the University of California. From that point alone, you need to understand its complexities and how absurd it sound to compare a single campus of the university to a small university. </p>

<p>Let’s try to break down UC.</p>

<p>university: UC
Campuses: Berkeley, LA, SD, SB, Davis, Irvine, SC, Merced

</p>

<p>Great, RML! Now, let’s use the admission rates for the entire UC system. As you know that such number is not the average of the rates as the number of unique applicants is a fraction of the sum of all non-unique applicants. </p>

<p>And, shouldn’t a UC fan know that there are TEN campuses in the UC system? Poor Riverside
and San Francisco! No love from Manila!</p>

<p>

Example, Berkeley vs Harvard+Yale+Princeton+Rice+Williams+Amherst+Pomon a+Caltech+Mudd+Bowdoin.

</p>

<p>JOATMON?</p>

[RML]

<p>

Ah. But what’s a “better” brand name? Gucci or Ferragamo? Louis Vuitton or Fendi? Prada or Loro Piana? Bottega Veneta or Coach? Don’t some of you get that sometimes there is more prestige in the thing that only the cognoscenti get?

</p>

<p>Good point. You can’t really differentiate the prestige of Yale to Princeton or Stanford to MIT or Northwestern to Chicago. But you can differentiate the prestige of Harvard to Pepperdine University. </p>

<p>I dont really believe in ranking these universities. Putting them in tiers is much acceptable for me even if USNews can quantify prestige which is subjective (if they really want to) and be able to assign them wth numbers.</p>

[RML]

<p>

RML, if you did not have hundreds of posts tipping your hand and if you were not that predictable, we might not KNOW what this is all about. </p>

<p>Twist and churn all you want, it can be summarized in a few words:</p>

<p>Give me a ranking where Cal shows on the top === meaning a ranking for public schools only</p>

<p>or even better </p>

<p>Give me a ranking that eliminates “small” schools such as Brown, Caltech, Dartmouth, Emory,
Georgetown University, Rice, University of Notre Dame, Vanderbilt University. </p>

<p>The result? Finally, finally, there is way for Cal to jump those pesky schools such as Rice, Emory, Notre Dame that have precluded Cal to get its “prestige” and “recognition” just desserts.</p>

<p>The only mystery for me is … WHY IS THIS SO DARN IMPORTANT?

</p>

<p>You’re completely wrong about my participation in the discussion, xiggi. I dont really care if Berkeley would rank number 30 or out of the top 50 as long as the criteria used to rank the schools are rightful and practical to all the schools - large or small. </p>

<p>Like I said, how can you compare Dartmouth to Berkeley when their nature is quite different?</p>

[RML]

<p>

Now, let’s use the admission rates for the entire UC system. As you know that such number is not the average of the rates as the number of unique applicants is a fraction of the sum of all non-unique applicants.

</p>

<p>and use it to compare with Dartmouth’s? Are you Serious?</p>

<p>as for failing to mention Riverside and other UC cmapuses, I think you grasped it that naming a few UC campuses would already suffice my point. I don’t need to be very detailed when I’m merely talking of a bigger picture.</p>

[xiggi]

<p>

You’re completely wrong about my participation in the discussion, xiggi. I dont really care if Berkeley would rank number 30 or out of the top 50 as long as the criteria used to rank the schools are rightful and practical to all the schools - large or small.

</p>

<p>RML, well if my recollection of your posts about Rice, Emory, Notre Dame being ranked above Cal was wrong, there is an easy way to settle this. </p>

<p>All you need to write is that you do agree that those schools DESERVE to be ranked above Cal, and this based on the current methodology of USNews. </p>

<p>As with Alexandre and the “same league” test, I KNOW you CANNOT bring yourself to write such an admission. And, by the way, please understand that you are totally entitled to believe that the rankings are wrong, but do not pretend you think otherwise.</p>

[xiggi]

<p>

Like I said, how can you compare Dartmouth to Berkeley when their nature is quite different?

</p>

<p>The only thing that matters to me is how well Cal and Dartmouth educate their students during the four (or more) years of undergraduate studies. For instance, I do not see the direct relevance of the location, prestige, and size of Tuck and Haas.</p>

<p>And, by the way, if you turly believe that it is not possible to compare Cal and Berkeley, why are worried about the comparisons? Or, perhaps, we should only use the criteria that are comparable? Perhaps, the PA. :)</p>

[RML]

<p>xiggi, </p>

<p>Emory, Rice and ND are ranked above Cal using USNews’ methodology. My stand since day one is that the methodology of USNews obviously favors small schools and / or private schools, so my criticism is thrown to the methodology not those schools. I think USNews has to understand first the nature of large schools before they even try to compare them with small schools. They’ve done a great job in separating LACs from research-led. But that’s obviously not enough. I think they should do more by separating medium-sized from HUGE schools. That just make perfect sense. </p>

<p>

And, by the way, please understand that you are totally entitled to believe that the rankings are wrong, but do not pretend you think otherwise.

what exactly do you mean? </p>

<p>Though I think USNews is the most credible ranking game available today, I think it can still be improved. I never claimed it is perfect. I think it has a lot of biases. But it is more credible than all other ranking league out there.</p>

[xiggi]

<p>All you need to write is that you do agree that those schools DESERVE to be ranked above Cal, and this based on the current methodology of USNews.</p>

<p>As I wrote, you cannot do it! And this means that you do NOT think that Cal should be ranked below the named schools. As you have stated on dozens of posts.</p>

<p>… I cannot think of any subject area that Emory is considered superior to UCLA. From undergrad to grad and postgrad education, UCLA is superior to Emory. And UCLA is way more prestigious than Emory is… </p>

<p>… Oh, come on people. If Emory is more prestigious than UCLA, how come it lags behind in peer assessment scores? I also think that UCLA is more selective than Emory. </p>

<p>… I agree that Berkeley is a better school academically than Emory</p>

<p>… are Vanderbilt, Emory, ND and Georgetown really viewed as more prestigious than Berkeley in the East Coast? I don’t think so. </p>

<p>and dozens more!</p>

[RML]

<p>

The only thing that matters to me is how well Cal and Dartmouth educate their students during the four (or more) years of undergraduate studies. For instance, I do not see the direct relevance of the location, prestige, and size of Tuck and Haas.

</p>

<p>Well, that’s probably what matters to you. I think that matters to me too, but probably not as much as it does to you. However, to some people, and I believe there are a lot of people who think this way, attending college is also making connections, becoming more marketable, learning a specific field of expertise and so on. </p>

<p>You mentioned how Dartmouth can well educate their students and perhaps trying to suggest how berkeley can’t serve that well enough as much Dartmouth can. I also emphasized the departmental nature of Berkeley which I supposed you got what it means by now. Let’s say i want to major in engineering particularly EECS. Which school do you think would offer engineering better between Berkeley and Dartmouth?</p>

[Schmaltz]

<p>"Ah. But what’s a “better” brand name? Gucci or Ferragamo? Louis Vuitton or Fendi? Prada or Loro Piana? Bottega Veneta or Coach? Don’t some of you get that sometimes there is more prestige in the thing that only the cognoscenti get? "</p>

<p>Anybody with the name Pizzagirl should know those are not brand names. They are types of pasta. And as we all know, there is pasta and there is pasta.</p>

[RML]

<p>

All you need to write is that you do agree that those schools DESERVE to be ranked above Cal, and this based on the current methodology of USNews.</p>

<p>As I wrote, you cannot do it! And this means that you do NOT think that Cal should be ranked below the named schools. As you have stated on dozens of posts.

</p>

<p>Using USNews methodology, yes, ND, Emory, Vanderbilt and Rice are superior to Berkeley. Using USNews methodology, there are 20 schools that are superior to Berkeley. I dont think that’s hard to understand and accept. What I cannot accept is when someone tries to make me believe that the USNews methodology is infallible. It is far from it and USNews or you need to understand that too.</p>

<p>USNews doesn’t have to make Berkeley to be like ND, Rice, Emory or Vanderbilt, or to try to make Berkeley anything like one of those schools. Berkeley is not like Rice or ND. It is different. It is huge. And it has a different missions, objectives and set-up. For USNews to make Berkeley or to try it to make it look like any of those small schools is just a wrong move, in my personal opinion.</p>

[xiggi]

<p>

"Ah. But what’s a “better” brand name? Gucci or Ferragamo? Louis Vuitton or Fendi? Prada or Loro Piana? Bottega Veneta or Coach? Don’t some of you get that sometimes there is more prestige in the thing that only the cognoscenti get? "</p>

<p>Anybody with the name Pizzagirl should know those are not brand names. They are types of pasta. And as we all know, there is pasta and there is pasta.

</p>

<p>Is Saturday 8/14 the day when people compete to post the dumbest and most clueless posts, under the feeble veil of sarcasm? </p>

<p>I think that Pizzagirl will laugh at this reply and realize that the term"cognoscenti" requires a minimum of intelligence.</p>

[RML]

<p>xiggi, I want to major in engineering. I love numbers and I want to design computer chips or programs. I’m thinking of EECS or or CS or anything quite related to such area. Where do you think can I get a better education between Berkeley and Dartmouth?</p>

[RML]

<p>xiggi, my friend wants to major in economics or business and she wants to get into IB after college. Where do you think can she get a better education between Haas and Emory?</p>

[RML]

<p>xiggi, my other friend has been thinking of going to law school and is particularly crazy about going to Harvard Law. But he wants to major in polical science as his prelaw. He got into Berkeley and Rice. Where can he get a better education between Berkeley polsci and Rice and which school would better prepare him to get into Harvard Law?</p>

<p>where is xiggi?</p>

<p>I wonder how and what can USNews say about my case, and of my friends’ using their methodology, which, btw, xiggi believes it to be infallible - a bible truth.</p>