WSJ 2022 College Ranking
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
Absurd absence of quality public schools - U Cs and U Mich, among other top public schools, are meritocracies and do not give preference to legacies … many public schools in lists of most cited US universities … They are often at the cutting edge of STEM research … |
Anonymous
Also complete absence of US military academies, theee of which rank in top 5 in terms of STEM innovation and job generation. https://www.bachelorsdegreecenter.org/best-schools-stem-majors/ |
Anonymous
schools that give preferences to in-state students are not meritocracies. It's not a bad thing to prefer students from your state, but let's not make it into something it's not. |
Anonymous
Good point. That connects to chronic underfunding of quality public education - currently at unprecedented lows - forcing many public systems to rely on hefty out of state tuition fees. It also connects to US News rankings as even public schools benefit from being highly ranked on US News lists and state flag ships can set much higher admission criteria for out of state students. Bottom line - public education matters. |
Anonymous
Medical Nobel laureates overwhelmingly from public universities and institutions both in US and around world. Chemistry, physics and economic laureates also draw heavily from public universities around world. https://clarivate.com/webofsciencegroup/solutions/citation-laureates/ The Nobel Prize is five separate prizes that, according to Sir Alfred Nobel's will of 1895, are awarded to ”those who, during the preceding year, have conferred the greatest benefit to humankind.” Given how heavily Nobel prize winners in science hail from public universities - in contrast to the WSJ rankings that totally ignores public schools - There is a big chasm between private prestige and public goods. |
Anonymous
Schools that give enormous preferences based on non-merit factors are not meritocracies. |
Anonymous
no one really takes these little-known, bogus rankings lacking serious methodology as seriously as the WSJ/USNWR/Forbes rankings |
Anonymous
PP is trying to dispel the notion that HYPSM =/= best in everything except undergrad education. Why is it so hard for you prestige defense squad folks to read? Did they not teach you reading comprehension skills at your LACs? |
Anonymous
Their methodology was more convincing to me. Real Life factors - did you even read the article before dismissing the rationale ? |
Anonymous
Public schools are much closer to meritocracies because the main deciding factors are GPA/ test scores or athletic ability and not wealthy parents/ ECs/ legacy points. |
Anonymous
Interesting dichotomy - private prestige versus public goods. |
Anonymous
METHODOLOGY Creating a ranking for the best schools for STEM majors was a challenge. We examined the institutions of higher learning across the nation to find what STEM degrees they offered. STEM degrees were evaluated based on this list from the STEM Designated Degree Program list. The total number of STEM degrees conferred was compared with the total number of the degrees the institution conferred to calculate a percentage. Other pieces of data collected include Student to faculty ratio, annual tuition, graduation rate, and retention rate. These data points were calculated to give each school an overall score which was used to create the following ranking. All data was collected from the National Center for Education Statistics. Considerations given to each of the criteria are as follows: Percentage of Bachelors Degrees Conferred in a STEM Discipline – 40% Student-to-faculty ratio – 20% annual tuition – 20% graduation rate – 10% retention rate – 10% |
Anonymous
On the surface, the UN news rankings look very credible but dig beneath the surface ans it is easy to see where the obvious bias and predictability comes from. For example, they include alumni giving rates and superstore two years together meaning more of the same is certain. Social Mobility data is laughable - Pell grants along to not capture all first generation/ immigrant/ military vets/ otherwise disadvantaged students. The Ranking Factors Forty percent of a school's rank comes from outcomes. Among them, average graduation and retention rates combine to be the most heavily weighted factor in our rankings, at 22%, because degree completion is necessary to receive the full benefits of undergraduate study from employers and graduate schools. Other outcome measures are graduation rate performance (8%), social mobility (5%) and graduate indebtedness (5%). Graduation and retention rates: This has two components. A four-year rolling average of the proportion of each entering class (fall 2011-2014) earning a degree in six years or less (17.6%). A four-year rolling average of the proportion of first-year entering students (fall 2016-fall 2019) who returned the following fall (4.4%). Graduation rate performance: We compared each college's actual six-year graduation rate with what we predicted for its fall 2014 entering class. The predicted rates were modeled from factors including admissions data, the proportion of undergraduates who were awarded Pell Grants, school financial resources, the proportion of federal financial aid recipients who are first-generation college students, and National Universities' math and science orientations. We divided each school's actual graduation rate by its predicted rate and took a two-year average of the quotients for use in the rankings. Social mobility: This indicator measures how well schools graduated students who received federal Pell Grants. Students receiving these grants typically come from households whose family incomes are less than $50,000 annually, with most money going to students with total family incomes below $20,000. For the third consecutive year, U.S. News published a distinct social mobility ranking for all ranked schools. The social mobility ranking was computed by aggregating the two ranking factors assessing graduation rates of Pell-awarded students. Pell Grant graduation rates incorporate six-year graduation rates of Pell Grant students, adjusted to give much more credit to schools with larger Pell student proportions. This is computed as a two-year rolling average. Pell Grant graduation rate performance compares each school's six-year graduation rate among Pell recipients with its six-year graduation rate among non-Pell recipients by dividing the former into the latter, then adjusting to give much more credit to schools with larger Pell student proportions. The higher a school's Pell graduation rate relative to its non-Pell graduation rate up to the rates being equal, the better it scores. This, too, is computed as a two-year rolling average. For the second consecutive year, two graduate indebtedness figures are included in the rankings based on data collected by U.S. News during the spring and summer of 2020 and 2021 on our financial aid survey. The two indicators are: Graduate indebtedness: Affordability of college and the value of that degree after graduation – in terms of being able to earn enough money to make the loan payments – are prime concerns of prospective students and their families. Consequently, we assessed two measures of graduate indebtedness totaling 5% of each school's overall score. The graduate indebtedness total ranking factor (weighted 3%) assesses each school's average accumulated federal loan debt among its 2019 and 2020 bachelor's degree graduating classes by comparing it to the median debt amount among ranked schools. Graduate indebtedness proportion (weighted 2%) is the percentage of graduates from the 2019 and 2020 bachelor's degree graduating classes who borrowed federal loans. This ranking factor credits schools for meeting the full financial need without loans of their undergraduates (who would not be included in the graduate indebtedness total cohort) by comparing the proportions who borrowed to the median proportion among ranked schools. Both the graduate indebtedness total and graduate indebtedness proportion ranking factors incorporate federal loans made to students who borrowed while enrolled at the institutions and co-signed loans. They exclude students who transferred in, money borrowed at other institutions, parent loans and students who did not graduate with a bachelor's degree. New for the 2022 edition, we averaged schools' scores from the 2021 and 2020 rankings to mitigate year-to-year volatility. |
Anonymous
|
Anonymous
Maybe because there are way more public universities out there than HYPSM? |