But it would still be good to know what happened re: Dartmouth's accreditation. |
No everyone “doesn’t” know this. You think it, and you are wrong. They lost their classification for 2 years, and got it back two years later. That was linked to. Why didn’t you just read it? |
Yeah, it would be good to know what happened. If only it were written about in articles about the event and minutes of Dartmouth board meetings, man if someone only could post those here… or even better, if there were some “magical” engine in which you could type what you are looking for and then it would show up and you could click, read, and learn… but no, we are stuck here in the dark ages curing things with leeches and going outside to poop, and therefore we must say untrue things about Dartmouth. |
| OK so the fact that Dartmouth falls in and out of the R1 group every couple years sort of supports the idea that it's "middling" when it comes to research. |
More false words! In addition to moved goalposts. You’ve been beaten up with facts, face it. Just give up. You don’t know what you are talking about. Why is that? Did they reject you or yours? |
?? What facts are you referring to? You yourself said that it lost its R1 status in 2015, then gained it in 2017. Also, I'm a NP, not whoever you were having an online cat fight with. The fact that Dartmouth falls in and out of a grouping of 140+ universities makes it "middling" by its very definition. It's very new to the group currently, and all other data suggests that it doesn't have the research or financial prowess of many of its "peer" institutions. |
Is this regarding AAU? |
No, R1 accreditation. |
No, it's just that it's more like a LAC than a research university. It only has a handful of grad programs. It's an unusual school--because it has a couple of PhD programs it gets classified as a research university rather than an LAC in the Carnegie system. |
Right. So "middling" seems like an apt descriptor when it comes to grad/research stature. |
Yeah, Those idiots at the Carnegie system. Good thing you know more than them, and all their data and criteria! |
Yeah they are middling, which is why those Carnegie idiots classified them as R1 Unless you meant middling amount the top 5% of all colleges. Which is a pretty stupid definition of middling! |
2017 really is recent. And so few students. I certainly never thought if it as a R1 and still don’t after this idiotic exchange |
| I don’t get the Dartmouth booster. Dartmouth and it’s alums and marketing material all make it a point to emphasize how similar they are to an LAC. |
I am the guy you are referring to as "the Dartmouth booster". I have no affiliation and have visited exactly once. I am not a Dartmouth "booster" in any way. I am a "facts" booster, and an "easily googled defeater of BS" booster. And I don't care what Dartmouth alumns say. Yes I know they still brand themselves Dartmouth College and tout that they are the smallest of the Ivies with 6,300 undergrads. But they also have 2100 grad students, which is only a few hundred fewer than Princeton (2500 PhD, 333 masters). Plus there is that whole Carnegie classification R1 thing, and the $326 million in funding. lol.... These are FACTS. In a forum like this FACTS MATTER, because some families may read things here and may make decisions based on it. As an open forum, your opinions, even grossly uninformed ones, are welcome, but so are the responses wchich demonstrate how they are factually inaccurate. Do you "get it" now? |