Top 10 public "ranking"?
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
The test blind issue is just a reflex from people who are obsessed with notions of merit and quality. The UCs are going to do what they do and they don't need anyone to tell them that their programs are declining. Their own professors are doing that. Their reputation will carry them for a while and Cal's proximity to silicon valley plus it's legit top end faculty and graduate programs will keep it a target school for top employers but the non-STEM cal graduates are not what they used to be. |
Anonymous
And we are seeing inconsistent quality from these schools as well. Schools like Georgia Tech and Purdue are seeing better results than schools like Virginia Tech and UVA. |
Anonymous
So you intentionally mix in chaff with the wheat? |
Anonymous
It's not just math. it's any objective measure of merit. |
Anonymous
|
The harsh truth is that your kid is who they are. Most likely, the issues being debated here won’t change that one way or another.
What will determine their outcome is your SES, connections, and random chance. Whether one parent’s cardiovascular surgeon colleague will afford the kid an internship / shadowing opportunity one summer, and a junior RA opportunity in a lab, with publication experience, during the school year; whether the other parent’s biotech firm will afford the kid a paid internship another summer; etc. $$$ still runs this place. Pretending that jousting over undergraduate rankings will change anything seems silly. |
Anonymous
With the same logic, perhaps only Berkeley, Michigan, and Texas are strong enough across STEM/Business/Social Sciences/Humanities to be Tier 1. But wait, students only attend one part of a university at a time and perhaps Virginia, UNC, Georgia Tech, Purdue, etc. is better in that part than Berkeley/Michigan/Texas and has more of what they value. What does this tiering even mean to those students? Pretty much nothing. |
Anonymous
In what? |
Anonymous
The Florida schools are all way too high. |
Anonymous
Based on Niche, it appears FIU has progressed further in 50 years than W&M in 350. |
Anonymous
You’re hilarious. The UCLA hate is pathological up in here, that’s for sure. UCLA is literally ranked higher in the U.S. and globally than Texas in almost every single area you mentioned, and yet you found a way to suggest otherwise. STEM, whether bio / chem, engineering, applied math, engineering Business (for UCLA, it’s just Business Economics - but also internship opportunities for the students who want to get after it at UCLA’s Top 15 business and law schools) Social Sciences Humanities Tell us where you have found evidence that Texas is better than UCLA, such that you “accidentally” forgot to include what has been the Top Public for 80% of the past decade. Looking forward to it! |
Anonymous
First, I was making a different point if you read what I wrote. Second, UCLA fell from my example Tiering (which I went on to disparage) simply because it doesn't have undergraduate business school. |
Anonymous
I read what you wrote. Nevertheless, any listing of the most complete universities in the public sphere that doesn’t include the one university that has topped the ranking of public universities for most of the past decade, and been ranked in the Top 25 overall for at least the past 40 years, seems at least a little intentional. |
Anonymous
DP UCLA and Cal used to be great. Now they are test blind. |
Anonymous
| All of the UC schools have become a joke because of their admissions practices. Not just test blind but how they admit under performing students and limit the number of students from high performing high schools. The UC schools are a joke. |
Anonymous
| Test blind was such a horrible idea. I'm guessing in 2 or 3 years that will be reversed. But hey, it's California so who knows. |