US News 2020 rankings

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This ranking has become a joke. It's formula now favors really rich privates that can lavish their endowment funds on "poor" students, over colleges that may try to focus on getting academically well prepared students and not discriminate based on SES.

This change in the ranking methodology will hurt middle class students a lot as colleges try to appease these idiots by now bringing in more Pell grant students at the lower end and fill the rest of the class with rich full pays to make up for the lost revenue. The folks that will suffer are deserving middle class kids that need financial aid but are not poor enough to qualify for Pell grants

I wonder where this money is coming from. The Times World ranking has % of international students for schools like Rochester (31%), Harvard (24%), Yale (26%), Boston University (27%), NYU (33%), Brandeis (27%), Columbia (37%). That is a very high percentage of international students. USNWR reports lower % so how can anyone tell if anything in these rankings is accurate of just schools chasing dollars and trying to boost rankings.

Could it be that one ranking is including university-wide international enrollment and the other is looking at undergraduate international enrollment?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Times World Rankings

https://www.timeshighereducation.com/world-university-rankings/2020/world-ranking#!/page/0/length/25/sort_by/rank/sort_order/asc/cols/stats

This has more to do with graduate research.

And Michigan comes out ahead once again.

As well it should, it spends over a half a billion of your tuition dollars on research every year. Funny they don't put that in brochures.

Are you saying that's a bad thing?

FYI, nearly every school I have ever visited talks about research they do. It's a hallmark of a top institution and that's how you get faculty that are leaders in the field.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Times World Rankings

https://www.timeshighereducation.com/world-university-rankings/2020/world-ranking#!/page/0/length/25/sort_by/rank/sort_order/asc/cols/stats

This has more to do with graduate research.

And Michigan comes out ahead once again.

As well it should, it spends over a half a billion of your tuition dollars on research every year. Funny they don't put that in brochures.

More likely US tax dollars and private sector partnership dollars, not tuition dollars, but if you understood University research, you would know that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Times World Rankings

https://www.timeshighereducation.com/world-university-rankings/2020/world-ranking#!/page/0/length/25/sort_by/rank/sort_order/asc/cols/stats

This has more to do with graduate research.

And Michigan comes out ahead once again.

As well it should, it spends over a half a billion of your tuition dollars on research every year. Funny they don't put that in brochures.

More likely US tax dollars and private sector partnership dollars, not tuition dollars, but if you understood University research, you would know that.

Students payments--tuition,fees, room and board-- do not even fully cover the cost of running a campus and supporting teaching/advising and associated student services (dorms, food, health center etc)! Funded research is part of what allows campuses to backfill gaps. R1 Universities like UofM, UVA do not SPEND on research, they EARN from research.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Times World Rankings

https://www.timeshighereducation.com/world-university-rankings/2020/world-ranking#!/page/0/length/25/sort_by/rank/sort_order/asc/cols/stats

This has more to do with graduate research.

And Michigan comes out ahead once again.

As well it should, it spends over a half a billion of your tuition dollars on research every year. Funny they don't put that in brochures.

Are you saying that's a bad thing?

FYI, nearly every school I have ever visited talks about research they do. It's a hallmark of a top institution and that's how you get faculty that are leaders in the field.

Yes I am. First, they are not up front about it. M Most people assume their tuition goes toward their education. Second, just like anything else, it goes to increase student debt. Third, if you do the math, it means a sizeable (25%+ or so in this case) percentage of your tuition dollars are probably going to pay researchers and research costs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Times World Rankings

https://www.timeshighereducation.com/world-university-rankings/2020/world-ranking#!/page/0/length/25/sort_by/rank/sort_order/asc/cols/stats

This has more to do with graduate research.

And Michigan comes out ahead once again.

As well it should, it spends over a half a billion of your tuition dollars on research every year. Funny they don't put that in brochures.

More likely US tax dollars and private sector partnership dollars, not tuition dollars, but if you understood University research, you would know that.

Students payments--tuition,fees, room and board-- do not even fully cover the cost of running a campus and supporting teaching/advising and associated student services (dorms, food, health center etc)! Funded research is part of what allows campuses to backfill gaps. R1 Universities like UofM, UVA do not SPEND on research, they EARN from research.

No. They get research contracts that are not fully funded by external sources. They have to fund in significant part from internal sources. At schools like MIT, that percentage is often low, but at others it is quite large. The internal funds are typically either going to come from tuition or state appropriations if it is a public school. So the overall funding of the university goes up through research that is externally funded, but the burden of getting those research contracts falls on undergraduates.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Times World Rankings

https://www.timeshighereducation.com/world-university-rankings/2020/world-ranking#!/page/0/length/25/sort_by/rank/sort_order/asc/cols/stats

This has more to do with graduate research.

And Michigan comes out ahead once again.

As well it should, it spends over a half a billion of your tuition dollars on research every year. Funny they don't put that in brochures.

More likely US tax dollars and private sector partnership dollars, not tuition dollars, but if you understood University research, you would know that.

No, you don't understand research. Those are separate sources. The major sources are externally funded federal, private externally funded, and internal. Internal usually depends heavily on tuition or state appropriations. The reason internal is needed is that external does not cover full costs.

You can read this from a former provost: https://www.changinghighereducation.com/2016/08/the-high-cost-of-funded-research.html

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Times World Rankings

https://www.timeshighereducation.com/world-university-rankings/2020/world-ranking#!/page/0/length/25/sort_by/rank/sort_order/asc/cols/stats

This has more to do with graduate research.

And Michigan comes out ahead once again.

As well it should, it spends over a half a billion of your tuition dollars on research every year. Funny they don't put that in brochures.

Are you saying that's a bad thing?

FYI, nearly every school I have ever visited talks about research they do. It's a hallmark of a top institution and that's how you get faculty that are leaders in the field.

Yes I am. First, they are not up front about it. M Most people assume their tuition goes toward their education. Second, just like anything else, it goes to increase student debt. Third, if you do the math, it means a sizeable (25%+ or so in this case) percentage of your tuition dollars are probably going to pay researchers and research costs.

What people "assume" is meaningless.

Research is a critical part of every substantive university and a tremendous asset to the students and faculty. It's shocking to me to hear someone complain about research.

Also, most research is funded by grants.

I don't know where you are coming from.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This ain’t the dumber than dumb Florida of old, it seems!

Florida may still be dumb, overall. But it’s such a huge state now that the top publics in the state are competitive.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Times World Rankings

https://www.timeshighereducation.com/world-university-rankings/2020/world-ranking#!/page/0/length/25/sort_by/rank/sort_order/asc/cols/stats

This has more to do with graduate research.

And Michigan comes out ahead once again.

As well it should, it spends over a half a billion of your tuition dollars on research every year. Funny they don't put that in brochures.

Are you saying that's a bad thing?

FYI, nearly every school I have ever visited talks about research they do. It's a hallmark of a top institution and that's how you get faculty that are leaders in the field.

Yes I am. First, they are not up front about it. M Most people assume their tuition goes toward their education. Second, just like anything else, it goes to increase student debt. Third, if you do the math, it means a sizeable (25%+ or so in this case) percentage of your tuition dollars are probably going to pay researchers and research costs.

What people "assume" is meaningless.

Research is a critical part of every substantive university and a tremendous asset to the students and faculty. It's shocking to me to hear someone complain about research.

Also, most research is funded by grants.

I don't know where you are coming from.

The grants don't cover about 30% of total cost. That falls disproportionately to undergrads. In the case of Michigan, institutional contribution is over 1/3rd of tuition revenue. So you are saying no one should be concerned when US higher ed is the most expensive in the world and student loan debt is $1.6B, more than any consumer debt other than mortgage, you should know where I am coming from.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Times World Rankings

https://www.timeshighereducation.com/world-university-rankings/2020/world-ranking#!/page/0/length/25/sort_by/rank/sort_order/asc/cols/stats

This has more to do with graduate research.

And Michigan comes out ahead once again.

As well it should, it spends over a half a billion of your tuition dollars on research every year. Funny they don't put that in brochures.

Are you saying that's a bad thing?

FYI, nearly every school I have ever visited talks about research they do. It's a hallmark of a top institution and that's how you get faculty that are leaders in the field.

Yes I am. First, they are not up front about it. M Most people assume their tuition goes toward their education. Second, just like anything else, it goes to increase student debt. Third, if you do the math, it means a sizeable (25%+ or so in this case) percentage of your tuition dollars are probably going to pay researchers and research costs.

What people "assume" is meaningless.

Research is a critical part of every substantive university and a tremendous asset to the students and faculty. It's shocking to me to hear someone complain about research.

Also, most research is funded by grants.

I don't know where you are coming from.

The grants don't cover about 30% of total cost. That falls disproportionately to undergrads. In the case of Michigan, institutional contribution is over 1/3rd of tuition revenue. So you are saying no one should be concerned when US higher ed is the most expensive in the world and student loan debt is $1.6B, more than any consumer debt other than mortgage, you should know where I am coming from.

No, I really don't.

The research Michigan does has no effect on what a student chooses to borrow.

The student debt problem (which is real) isn't even tangentially related to that.

[Anonymous]

Michigan is not a top 25 school lol. At TJ it's regarded as worse than Nova cc

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This ain’t the dumber than dumb Florida of old, it seems!

Florida may still be dumb, overall. But it’s such a huge state now that the top publics in the state are competitive.

Their schools are so inexpensive and the scholarships are given out like candy. Plenty of kids choose Florida for undergrad because it's completely free to them. Then they can use that savings to go to fancier grad schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Times World Rankings

https://www.timeshighereducation.com/world-university-rankings/2020/world-ranking#!/page/0/length/25/sort_by/rank/sort_order/asc/cols/stats

This has more to do with graduate research.

And Michigan comes out ahead once again.

As well it should, it spends over a half a billion of your tuition dollars on research every year. Funny they don't put that in brochures.

More likely US tax dollars and private sector partnership dollars, not tuition dollars, but if you understood University research, you would know that.

No, you don't understand research. Those are separate sources. The major sources are externally funded federal, private externally funded, and internal. Internal usually depends heavily on tuition or state appropriations. The reason internal is needed is that external does not cover full costs.

You can read this from a former provost: https://www.changinghighereducation.com/2016/08/the-high-cost-of-funded-research.html

He claims that for every 1000 external funds there is a $300 internal expense--and his accounting is quite tilted to his conception--counting for instance overhead expenses that are multi-use, not considering faculty lines in typical ways etc. But research grants still then provides 70% more revenue than it costs. A good portion of this goes directly to the university. Professors don't get to keep any of their grant money (save for summer salary if they use the money for that) so the revenue goes to paying graduate stipends and tuition and undergraduate work-study students, purchasing equipment that lives on in the university, paying overhead costs (which are also used for many purposes) travel for presenting on research and buying out time that the university would otherwise be paying them as a full-time employees.

And ultimately his claim seems to be not that he has evidence that tuition is used to pay the portion of the internal costs of research but that it might be. And all that is not considering that professors participation in research is what makes them knowledgeable and current and capable of teaching, and that student participation in research is important to their education.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Times World Rankings

https://www.timeshighereducation.com/world-university-rankings/2020/world-ranking#!/page/0/length/25/sort_by/rank/sort_order/asc/cols/stats

This has more to do with graduate research.

And Michigan comes out ahead once again.

As well it should, it spends over a half a billion of your tuition dollars on research every year. Funny they don't put that in brochures.

More likely US tax dollars and private sector partnership dollars, not tuition dollars, but if you understood University research, you would know that.

No, you don't understand research. Those are separate sources. The major sources are externally funded federal, private externally funded, and internal. Internal usually depends heavily on tuition or state appropriations. The reason internal is needed is that external does not cover full costs.

You can read this from a former provost: https://www.changinghighereducation.com/2016/08/the-high-cost-of-funded-research.html

He claims that for every 1000 external funds there is a $300 internal expense--and his accounting is quite tilted to his conception--counting for instance overhead expenses that are multi-use, not considering faculty lines in typical ways etc. But research grants still then provides 70% more revenue than it costs. A good portion of this goes directly to the university. Professors don't get to keep any of their grant money (save for summer salary if they use the money for that) so the revenue goes to paying graduate stipends and tuition and undergraduate work-study students, purchasing equipment that lives on in the university, paying overhead costs (which are also used for many purposes) travel for presenting on research and buying out time that the university would otherwise be paying them as a full-time employees.

And ultimately his claim seems to be not that he has evidence that tuition is used to pay the portion of the internal costs of research but that it might be. And all that is not considering that professors participation in research is what makes them knowledgeable and current and capable of teaching, and that student participation in research is important to their education.

No, the grant typically covers 70% of the total cost. He was a provost at two top 25 schools. Perhaps he knows what he is talking about.