Us news rankings 2011

[kwu]

<p>^ Why can’t both Emory and Berkeley be horrible places to go for a good undergrad education?</p>

[RML]

<p>^ what exactly were you asking?</p>

<p>Both Berkeley and emory can be horrible places to go for a good undergrad education. Even Harvard or Princeton can be a horrible place for undergrad.</p>

[House_of_London]

<p>“I’m sorry that I have to use Emory as example. It’s just that it’s the best school I can cite to better illustrate my point. I have nothing against Emory. I think it’s a great school for those bright students in the South. I just don’t think that in reality, it is superior to Berkeley especially when it comes to academic quality.”</p>

<p>Incorrect RML. I’m sorry to say but small schools like Emory just have an easier time maintaining an excellent student:faculty ratio (which is one of the factors in USNWR) and you can’t hate on that. Berkeley made that decision to take in so many undergrads and now that have to deal with the consequences by working hard to maintain an even better student:faculty ratio than Emory, Rice, Vandy et al. PA is one of a few thing keeping Berkeley alive in the top 30.</p>

[xiggi]

<p>

I have a feeling that Pizzagirl lacks reading comprehension.

</p>

<p>The references about reading comprehension are absolutely baffling, especially since they come from a group of people who have exhibited the lethal combination of having the greatest difficulty in articulating a cogent argument and understanding the simplest of concepts.</p>

<p>So here you go</p>

<p>

Of course, those problems were thrown to xiggi when he said this: </p>

<p>Quote:
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>What does that mean, RML? Perhaps you should write it in English next time. Where the relation between Pizzagirl, the morons with the pasta comments, and … my post about Cal and Dartmouth? </p>

<p>

@RML

@xiggi

Are you joining that small group of people who pretend to know what I think or believe better than I do, and feel compelled to make up stories? Where do you get the idea that I believe the USNews to be “infallible - a bible truth?” Are you really that oblivious of what I write about the USNews and the annual dog and pony show of Bob Morse? </p>

<p>By the way, your friends should choose the schools that has the best qualities for them, and this regardless of the USNews rankings, and regardless of what other people think about their choices. Why do you need to know what I think about attending Emory or Cal, let alone what I think might be best for them?

</p>

<p>So, in short, you’re saying that some of those schools that were ranked higher than Berkeley don’t really offer academic training better than Berkeley does. In such case, USNews fails its aim in ranking schools acccording to academic quality. Thus while USNews says Emory, for example, is superior to Berkeley, in actual reality, it really isn’t. But because the USNews’ methodology is biased towards small schools and /or small private schools, they made it look like Emory, for example, is superior to Berkeley

</p>

<p>Is there any relation between your reply and my post? In case, it is hard to understand, let me spell it out for you. That is NOT what I am saying, neither in short or in details. Again, that is not what I am saying. What I am saying is written in the post you quoted. Nothing more, nothing less. And it surely does not leave room for the type of non-sensical interpretations of yours. Also it does not require any explanations nor further clarifications. </p>

<p>As far as this thread goes, I do not plan to answer to more of your BS. I have stated my opinion that this not different from the multiple attempts you have made in the past to “elevate” Cal to a higher ranking. I still do not understand why you keep on doing it, but that is your choice. Just know you are not fooling anyone! </p>

<p>So, enjoy your day and enjoy tomorrow’s release of the 2011 data. After that you will have another full year of agonizing about the latest results.</p>

[RML]

<p>House of London, </p>

<p>But i don’t think there is any difference in student quality between Berkeley and Emory. If anything, I think the Berkeley students are a little smarter - higher HS GPAs, top 10, etc. </p>

<p>There is also very little to differentiate between Berkeley and Emory for faculty caliber. If anything, Berkeley faculty are more respected. </p>

<p>The student:faculty ratio is a misnomer. The higher division subjects at Cal register a very low student:faculty ratio. And that has not been reflected on USNews. </p>

<p>Emory has larger endowment. But Emory has a medical school whilst Berkeley has not. We all know that schools with medical schools received bigger endowment funds as a good chunk of the fund goes to the medical school. That has not been taken into account on USnews ranking too. On top of that, Berkeley gets funding from the government - in a good sum amount annually. That aside from the many private institutions donate to Cal from time to time for research purposes. Berkeley has patents, properties for lease, aside from student tuition. Emory relies only from tuition and endowment fund earnings.</p>

[xiggi]

<p>

Why is that Xiggi? Did you forget the Quasi Research ranking? Brown, Dartmouth, Emory, Georgetown, Notre Dame, Rice, Vanderbilt and Wake Forest would be part of that ranking, not part of the major national private research universities ranking page. And Caltech has fewer than 4,000 students, so it would also belong to a separate ranking as well.

</p>

<p>Obviously, I did not forget about the “Quasi Research” and I addressed that (im)possibility in my post. </p>

<p>

@Xiggi

</p>

<p>Alexandre, please note that I only quoted the segregation between private and public, as I do not think you’ll ever see the division by size. Fwiw, I remember reading a quote by Bob Morse that dividing the schools between private and public schools would not be a positive outcome for the public universities. Again only in terms of rankings and public perception. </p>

<p>This said, I understand that your proposal is based on the adage of “Divide and conquer.” And, works in contradication to the other adage “if you cannot beat them, join them.” In this case, it is “If cannot beat them, create your own league or join another.” Why does Nebraska and the Big 10 comes to mind.

</p>

<p>In short, it ain’t gonna happen!</p>

[bluebayou]

<p>

We all know that schools with medical schools received bigger endowment funds as a good chunk of the fund goes to the medical school.

</p>

<p>wrt Emory, a “good chunk” also goes to the undergrad college. Indeed, compare Calc 1 for example. Cal has a lecture hall of what, 100-300+ kids in front a Calc Professor? Emory has 20 students in a small classroom with a calc professor. No discussion section required.</p>

[RML]

<p>

I have stated my opinion that this not different from the multiple attempts you have made in the past to “elevate” Cal to a higher ranking.

</p>

<p>If I have done that in the past, it’s because Cal doesn’t deserved its low ranking. So I guess the methodology has got to be reviewed more carefully to make it alligned with the actual value of the schools they try to rank. As you’ve admitted it on this thread, USNews isn’t perfect.</p>

[Alexandre]

<p>I did not say it was going to happen xiggi, I said that it makes sense that it should happen. I don’t think a there can be a one-size-fit-all formula. For example, the USWNR formula suits Caltech, Duke, Penn and WUSTL better than it suits Brown, Cal and Cornell. Does that mean that the former four are better than the latter three? That is just my opinion and like you, I am fairly positive it will not happen</p>

[RML]

<p>bluebayou, in that regard, Emory is better than Cal. But in my opinion, most GE subjects are just extentions to HS. There are big lecture halls at HYPSM. That doesn’t make Emory superior to HYPSM.</p>

[xiggi]

<p>

If I have done that in the past, it’s because Cal doesn’t deserved its low ranking. So I guess the methodology has got to be reviewed more carefully to make it alligned with the actual value of the schools they try to rank. As you’ve admitted it on this thread, USNews isn’t perfect.

</p>

<p>RML, I hope you realize that with every word you add on the subject, the clearer it becomes that I was right about your intentions. As I said, not only is it all over your hundreds of posts on the issue, but you CANNOT stop. Just admit that you CANNOT stand that it annoys tremendously that “inferior” schools such as Emory, Rice, Georgetown, and Notre Dame have been and are ranked by USNews above your beloved Cal. </p>

<p>And, by the way, do not do it for me. I could not care less if Cal were ranked 3d, 13th, 33d or 43d! And that is because I could not care less about the USNews rankings of any school!</p>

[sentimentGX4]

<p>

@RML

I think Cal would fall to # 23 or # 24 given the revised methodology. UCLA would rank # 25 at best.

UCLA will be rank 25 at worst. They already gave us a preview of the top 25 schools in no particular order. -.-</p>

[sentimentGX4]

<p>Meh. UCLA is historically rank 25 or 26. Last year was a fluke. Or maybe the university got better? Well Michigan did drop out of the top 25 seemingly for good…</p>

<p>I think UCLA is better than Wake Forest, though, so I’d think it would be at least #24. Of course, that’s what the guys at Michigan were railing about as well.</p>

[light10491]

<p>Guessing that since the magazine is being released at newspaper stands on Tuesday morning, the rankings will be out tomorrow evening at the latest? Very likely someone will be able to snag a copy from somewhere as the magazines are probably arriving all over at stores by tomorrow evening.</p>

[PABank]

<p>Wow I just cant believe that MIT is #1 in 2011!</p>

[CornellPerson]

<p>I know, I was so surprised when I saw that Cornell is now #6. Weird.</p>

[sentimentGX4]

<p>Where’s the list?</p>

[TheSaiyans666]

<p>Dumb ■■■■■■. I hate you PABank! I can’t believe I wasted 10 min going on looking for the non-existent 2011 list! Wow…</p>

[GoBlue81]

<p>Gotcha … you’re better off spending the time checking out magazine stands at Barnes and Noble … and hope they’ve made a mistake and placed the magazine out early over the weekend like they did a couple years ago.</p>

[light10491]

<p>Anytime todayyyyyyyyyy.</p>