Columbia U. Won’t Submit Data to ‘U.S. News’ Rankings After Professor Alleged False Information

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They haven't made their Common Data Set public for years, maybe ever? Makes one wonder what others--like the University of Chicago and Johns Hopkins--who won't make their data public are hiding.

The CDS is an useless piece of aggregated nonsense. What you really need is the govt to compel universities to submit disaggregated data on applicants, admitted, scores, ratings etc by interest group: legacy, athletes, by race, by gender, by geography and by citizenship.
Without Govt compulsion the universities will never reveal this because it will show the kind of shenanigans going on in admissions at almost every school

Why do you refer to “shenanigans”? Most of these schools are private institutions that can put classes together in any way they want.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

US News, for better or worse, moves markets. The Jim Cramer of college rankings. Meaning often wrong, but still has market power.

This is funny, but unfortunately, also true.

USNews moves the market. Columbia debunks myths and urban legends everyone accepts as Truth.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They haven't made their Common Data Set public for years, maybe ever? Makes one wonder what others--like the University of Chicago and Johns Hopkins--who won't make their data public are hiding.

The CDS is an useless piece of aggregated nonsense. What you really need is the govt to compel universities to submit disaggregated data on applicants, admitted, scores, ratings etc by interest group: legacy, athletes, by race, by gender, by geography and by citizenship.
Without Govt compulsion the universities will never reveal this because it will show the kind of shenanigans going on in admissions at almost every school

Why do you refer to “shenanigans”? Most of these schools are private institutions that can put classes together in any way they want.

They might be private but they also get a lot of federal money and huge tax breaks. They are mega landowners who pay no real estate taxes. I’m fine with them doing what they want as long as they pay their fair share of taxes

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:They shouldn't have cheated. Their true ranking is probably closer to 15 like it is on WSJ.

WSJ ranking fluctuate a lot. Going back 1-2 years, Columbia was at 2 or 3.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They shouldn't have cheated. Their true ranking is probably closer to 15 like it is on WSJ.

WSJ ranking fluctuate a lot. Going back 1-2 years, Columbia was at 2 or 3.

You're confusing WSJ with Forbes, Columbia has been 15 for the last 3 years on WSJ/Times ranking.
https://www.timeshighereducation.com/rankings/united-states/2022#!/page/0/length/25/sort_by/rank/sort_order/asc/cols/stats

[Anonymous]

I read the Columbia professor's website and had the feeling about the reports that he posted were like college students' reports, not like a mathematician's research reports. I suspect the professor for some reason has hatred toward the college that supports his life, maybe he is not happy Columbia shares rank with his dear alma mater.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They shouldn't have cheated. Their true ranking is probably closer to 15 like it is on WSJ.

WSJ ranking fluctuate a lot. Going back 1-2 years, Columbia was at 2 or 3.

You're confusing WSJ with Forbes, Columbia has been 15 for the last 3 years on WSJ/Times ranking.
https://www.timeshighereducation.com/rankings/united-states/2022#!/page/0/length/25/sort_by/rank/sort_order/asc/cols/stats

I did not confuse.

If you scroll down and look at past years' rankings, Columbia dropped to 15 in the year 2020, but was top 5 before that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I read the Columbia professor's website and had the feeling about the reports that he posted were like college students' reports, not like a mathematician's research reports. I suspect the professor for some reason has hatred toward the college that supports his life, maybe he is not happy Columbia shares rank with his dear alma mater.

Why would you need a mathematician's research paper to point out data discrepancies? Anyone can do it if they had access to the data, or is in the environment like he is and can see that Columbia was clearly lying about its faculty student ratio, their terminal degrees, resources invested in the school, etc, etc.

[Anonymous]

I’ve been saying that Columbia was scamming the USNWR rankings way before this scandal hit. Just looking at how they manipulate student to faculty ratios sent out a red flag for me.

[Anonymous]

All the data you need about any college or university can be found at: https://nces.ed.gov/ipeds/use-the-data.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:They shouldn't have cheated. Their true ranking is probably closer to 15 like it is on WSJ.

There is no “true” ranking. USNWR/WSJ etc rankings give a patina of objectivity and scientific method, but they are pseudoscience and create a lot more problems than they solve.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:They cheated, and now suddenly don't want to play to the game.

Right?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They haven't made their Common Data Set public for years, maybe ever? Makes one wonder what others--like the University of Chicago and Johns Hopkins--who won't make their data public are hiding.

The CDS is an useless piece of aggregated nonsense. What you really need is the govt to compel universities to submit disaggregated data on applicants, admitted, scores, ratings etc by interest group: legacy, athletes, by race, by gender, by geography and by citizenship.
Without Govt compulsion the universities will never reveal this because it will show the kind of shenanigans going on in admissions at almost every school

Why do you refer to “shenanigans”? Most of these schools are private institutions that can put classes together in any way they want.

IF they didn’t receive federal funding…..
Why are you playing obtuse?

[Anonymous]

Cause I can't play the oboe.

[Anonymous]

Ok, folks. Enough of this "everyone cheats, so what" argument. No one buys that. Only some colleges are prone to cheating. The "ranking climbers at any cost", schools with not much stuff inside and want to hide that fact, etc.

Columbia and NEU fall into all these buckets. Columbia is basically a large university that is understaffed (large classes, fewer faculty), under financed (the administration is always out to make a buck), and in a relatively unsafe location relative to its Ivy peers.

I can't imagine the student-centered Ivies like Princeton, Brown, and Dartmouth that don't care much about rankings cheat. Harvard and Yale wouldn't cheat either because their reputations are not made by US News.