Peer reputation scores US news

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Rearranged the rankings based on reputation scores, you're welcome:

4.9 Harvard MIT Stanford
4.8 Princeton Yale
4.7 Columbia JHU Berkeley
4.6 UChicago Penn Caltech Cornell
4.5 Duke Michigan
4.4 Northwestern Brown Dartmouth UCLA
4.3 Vanderbilt Carnegie Mellon UVA(!)
4.2 Wash U Emory Notre Dame Georgetown
4.1 Rice

The peer reviews are correct. In terms of academics prestige, which is basically what peer review measures, the above is the correct order. Academics don’t care about selectivity, they are looking at schools that have the best faculty, facilities, and prowess. That is why public schools like Berkeley and Michigan are held in such high esteem.

I agree but selectivity matters , at least a little, in terms of overall prestige. There's a reason Rice is ranked so high in the real ranking.

It really doesn’t matter to be honest. Most of the universities listed above are highly selective because they are small at the undergraduate level. That does not equate to academic prestige with these people. That’s why Wash U, Emory, ND, Rice, Vanderbilt, etc are not viewed as favorably as the those listed above them. Too many of you are conflated selectivity with academic strength.

All of these schools are academically strong. You trying to make a point but UCLA's 4.4 is realistically no different than Vandys 4.3 or even Georgetown's 4.2. The difference is small however the selectivity difference between these schools is very big. These factors balance each other out in the rankings. Lastly academic prestige is not over all prestige, it's only one factor of it.

These are peer review listings. Sorry if your preferred school is not rated higher. The point is UCLA is rated higher than Vandy and a Georgetown in this reputation score. You don’t have to accept it, but according to academe UCLA is a stronger school in this area.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This topic is about peer reputation scores at US News

“ This is a measure of how a school is regarded by administrators at peer institutions on a peer assessment survey. A school's peer assessment score is determined by surveying presidents, provosts and deans of admissions, or officials in equivalent positions, at institutions in the school's ranking category.

Each individual was asked to rate peer schools' undergraduate academic programs on a scale from 1 (marginal) to 5 (distinguished).”

It is about academic programs, not student selectivity!

You're preaching to the quire. Some posters like myself decided to make our own prestige list using the peer reputation ranking as a guide. In my and other posters reasoning, selectivity should be included in our own prestige ranking. Again overall prestige and academic prestige are not the same thing.

*Choir...lol.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:** I forgot Michigan
1.Harvard, Stanford
3.MIT, Princeton,
5. Yale, Columbia
7. U Chicago, Caltech, John's Hopkins, Upenn
11. Duke, Northwestern, Brown
14. Dartmouth,*UCB
16. Cornell, *UCLA, Vanderbilt
19. Rice, Carnegie Mellon, WashU, Emory, Notre Dame, Georgetown
25. Gatech, UNC, UVA, Michigan
29. UT Austin, Wisconsin-Madison

Johns Hopkins should not be that high... I'd put it alongside Dartmouth/UCB/Cornell/UCLA. Vanderbilt should also be one tier down.

JHU is easily a top 10 institution. It is hard as hell, and you don't get watered down garbage courses/grades like you do at other 'top' institutions that will not be named. I went to a top 50 undergrad institution, then did my PhD at JHU where I had to teach undergrads. The undergrads at JHU are just on a whole different level of intelligence. JHU gets bad marks for 'undergrad life' simply because it is so hard and all the kids do is study their tails off. Almost every single undergrad and grad student I know from my entire time there went on to med school, wall street, top 3 consulting firms, or top 5-10 grad schools. JHU has extraordinary placement in med schools - 100% of the kids who worked in our lab for undergrad research ended up going to med school at places like UCSF, Stanford, Harvard, and Einstein.

Also, JHU is ranked high because of its grad programs - this is a peer reputation ranking. JHU gets the most funding from the NIH out of any university, and has a top 3 med school. JHU is always near the top in terms of publications relative to impact factor (and given its size), plus always punches above its weight for patents generated.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Rearranged the rankings based on reputation scores, you're welcome:

4.9 Harvard MIT Stanford
4.8 Princeton Yale
4.7 Columbia JHU Berkeley
4.6 UChicago Penn Caltech Cornell
4.5 Duke Michigan
4.4 Northwestern Brown Dartmouth UCLA
4.3 Vanderbilt Carnegie Mellon UVA(!)
4.2 Wash U Emory Notre Dame Georgetown
4.1 Rice

The peer reviews are correct. In terms of academics prestige, which is basically what peer review measures, the above is the correct order. Academics don’t care about selectivity, they are looking at schools that have the best faculty, facilities, and prowess. That is why public schools like Berkeley and Michigan are held in such high esteem.

I agree but selectivity matters , at least a little, in terms of overall prestige. There's a reason Rice is ranked so high in the real ranking.

It really doesn’t matter to be honest. Most of the universities listed above are highly selective because they are small at the undergraduate level. That does not equate to academic prestige with these people. That’s why Wash U, Emory, ND, Rice, Vanderbilt, etc are not viewed as favorably as the those listed above them. Too many of you are conflated selectivity with academic strength.

All of these schools are academically strong. You trying to make a point but UCLA's 4.4 is realistically no different than Vandys 4.3 or even Georgetown's 4.2. The difference is small however the selectivity difference between these schools is very big. These factors balance each other out in the rankings. Lastly academic prestige is not over all prestige, it's only one factor of it.

These are peer review listings. Sorry if your preferred school is not rated higher. The point is UCLA is rated higher than Vandy and a Georgetown in this reputation score. You don’t have to accept it, but according to academe UCLA is a stronger school in this area.

Funny when we point out Vandys test scores are almost 200 points higher than UCLAs, y'all say test scores don't matter but when we point out that UCLAs reputation score is only 0.1 higher than Vandys, we should somehow just accept that and relegate Vandy as a "lesser" school. It's silly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This topic is about peer reputation scores at US News

“ This is a measure of how a school is regarded by administrators at peer institutions on a peer assessment survey. A school's peer assessment score is determined by surveying presidents, provosts and deans of admissions, or officials in equivalent positions, at institutions in the school's ranking category.

Each individual was asked to rate peer schools' undergraduate academic programs on a scale from 1 (marginal) to 5 (distinguished).”

It is about academic programs, not student selectivity!

You're preaching to the quire. Some posters like myself decided to make our own prestige list using the peer reputation ranking as a guide. In my and other posters reasoning, selectivity should be included in our own prestige ranking. Again overall prestige and academic prestige are not the same thing.

Again this topic is about peer reputation scores. That’s it. Your prestige list is not germane to this discussion. As stated before, academics know who the heqvy hitters are. They aren’t much influenced by such minor items like student selectivity when considering academic strength.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This topic is about peer reputation scores at US News

“ This is a measure of how a school is regarded by administrators at peer institutions on a peer assessment survey. A school's peer assessment score is determined by surveying presidents, provosts and deans of admissions, or officials in equivalent positions, at institutions in the school's ranking category.

Each individual was asked to rate peer schools' undergraduate academic programs on a scale from 1 (marginal) to 5 (distinguished).”

It is about academic programs, not student selectivity!

You're preaching to the quire. Some posters like myself decided to make our own prestige list using the peer reputation ranking as a guide. In my and other posters reasoning, selectivity should be included in our own prestige ranking. Again overall prestige and academic prestige are not the same thing.

Again this topic is about peer reputation scores. That’s it. Your prestige list is not germane to this discussion. As stated before, academics know who the heqvy hitters are. They aren’t much influenced by such minor items like student selectivity when considering academic strength.

It isn't minor when you consider were discussing undergrad and not phd programs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Rearranged the rankings based on reputation scores, you're welcome:

4.9 Harvard MIT Stanford
4.8 Princeton Yale
4.7 Columbia JHU Berkeley
4.6 UChicago Penn Caltech Cornell
4.5 Duke Michigan
4.4 Northwestern Brown Dartmouth UCLA
4.3 Vanderbilt Carnegie Mellon UVA(!)
4.2 Wash U Emory Notre Dame Georgetown
4.1 Rice

The peer reviews are correct. In terms of academics prestige, which is basically what peer review measures, the above is the correct order. Academics don’t care about selectivity, they are looking at schools that have the best faculty, facilities, and prowess. That is why public schools like Berkeley and Michigan are held in such high esteem.

I agree but selectivity matters , at least a little, in terms of overall prestige. There's a reason Rice is ranked so high in the real ranking.

It really doesn’t matter to be honest. Most of the universities listed above are highly selective because they are small at the undergraduate level. That does not equate to academic prestige with these people. That’s why Wash U, Emory, ND, Rice, Vanderbilt, etc are not viewed as favorably as the those listed above them. Too many of you are conflated selectivity with academic strength.

All of these schools are academically strong. You trying to make a point but UCLA's 4.4 is realistically no different than Vandys 4.3 or even Georgetown's 4.2. The difference is small however the selectivity difference between these schools is very big. These factors balance each other out in the rankings. Lastly academic prestige is not over all prestige, it's only one factor of it.

These are peer review listings. Sorry if your preferred school is not rated higher. The point is UCLA is rated higher than tVandy and a Georgetown in this reputation score. You don’t have to accept it, but according to academe UCLA is a stronger school in this area.

Funny when we point out Vandys test scores are almost 200 points higher than UCLAs, y'all say test scores don't matter but when we point out that UCLAs reputation score is only 0.1 higher than Vandys, we should somehow just accept that and relegate Vandy as a "lesser" school. It's silly.

The day Vandy’s higher test score taking students teach themselves and issue their own diplomas is when I’ll take your comment seriously. Joking aside, this is a discussion on peer review reputation scores, nothing more. Vanderbilt isn’t as highly respected as UCLA in the world of academe. Just like you would like to brag that Vanderbilt is better than UCLA, because of their overall rating at USNWR.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This topic is about peer reputation scores at US News

“ This is a measure of how a school is regarded by administrators at peer institutions on a peer assessment survey. A school's peer assessment score is determined by surveying presidents, provosts and deans of admissions, or officials in equivalent positions, at institutions in the school's ranking category.

Each individual was asked to rate peer schools' undergraduate academic programs on a scale from 1 (marginal) to 5 (distinguished).”

It is about academic programs, not student selectivity!

You're preaching to the quire. Some posters like myself decided to make our own prestige list using the peer reputation ranking as a guide. In my and other posters reasoning, selectivity should be included in our own prestige ranking. Again overall prestige and academic prestige are not the same thing.

Here’s a shocker for you. PA scores at USNWR are based on undergraduate strengths. I know many on here think administrators are not as smart as they are, but I tend to believe that they know exactly what they are rating.

Again this topic is about peer reputation scores. That’s it. Your prestige list is not germane to this discussion. As stated before, academics know who the heqvy hitters are. They aren’t much influenced by such minor items like student selectivity when considering academic strength.

It isn't minor when you consider were discussing undergrad and not phd programs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Rearranged the rankings based on reputation scores, you're welcome:

4.9 Harvard MIT Stanford
4.8 Princeton Yale
4.7 Columbia JHU Berkeley
4.6 UChicago Penn Caltech Cornell
4.5 Duke Michigan
4.4 Northwestern Brown Dartmouth UCLA
4.3 Vanderbilt Carnegie Mellon UVA(!)
4.2 Wash U Emory Notre Dame Georgetown
4.1 Rice

The peer reviews are correct. In terms of academics prestige, which is basically what peer review measures, the above is the correct order. Academics don’t care about selectivity, they are looking at schools that have the best faculty, facilities, and prowess. That is why public schools like Berkeley and Michigan are held in such high esteem.

I agree but selectivity matters , at least a little, in terms of overall prestige. There's a reason Rice is ranked so high in the real ranking.

It really doesn’t matter to be honest. Most of the universities listed above are highly selective because they are small at the undergraduate level. That does not equate to academic prestige with these people. That’s why Wash U, Emory, ND, Rice, Vanderbilt, etc are not viewed as favorably as the those listed above them. Too many of you are conflated selectivity with academic strength.

All of these schools are academically strong. You trying to make a point but UCLA's 4.4 is realistically no different than Vandys 4.3 or even Georgetown's 4.2. The difference is small however the selectivity difference between these schools is very big. These factors balance each other out in the rankings. Lastly academic prestige is not over all prestige, it's only one factor of it.

These are peer review listings. Sorry if your preferred school is not rated higher. The point is UCLA is rated higher than tVandy and a Georgetown in this reputation score. You don’t have to accept it, but according to academe UCLA is a stronger school in this area.

Funny when we point out Vandys test scores are almost 200 points higher than UCLAs, y'all say test scores don't matter but when we point out that UCLAs reputation score is only 0.1 higher than Vandys, we should somehow just accept that and relegate Vandy as a "lesser" school. It's silly.

The day Vandy’s higher test score taking students teach themselves and issue their own diplomas is when I’ll take your comment seriously. Joking aside, this is a discussion on peer review reputation scores, nothing more. Vanderbilt isn’t as highly respected as UCLA in the world of academe. Just like you would like to brag that Vanderbilt is better than UCLA, because of their overall rating at USNWR.

I wouldn't speak so soon, that Vandy 4.3 might get a bumb next year, you never know.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Rearranged the rankings based on reputation scores, you're welcome:

4.9 Harvard MIT Stanford
4.8 Princeton Yale
4.7 Columbia JHU Berkeley
4.6 UChicago Penn Caltech Cornell
4.5 Duke Michigan
4.4 Northwestern Brown Dartmouth UCLA
4.3 Vanderbilt Carnegie Mellon UVA(!)
4.2 Wash U Emory Notre Dame Georgetown
4.1 Rice

The peer reviews are correct. In terms of academics prestige, which is basically what peer review measures, the above is the correct order. Academics don’t care about selectivity, they are looking at schools that have the best faculty, facilities, and prowess. That is why public schools like Berkeley and Michigan are held in such high esteem.

I agree but selectivity matters , at least a little, in terms of overall prestige. There's a reason Rice is ranked so high in the real ranking.

It really doesn’t matter to be honest. Most of the universities listed above are highly selective because they are small at the undergraduate level. That does not equate to academic prestige with these people. That’s why Wash U, Emory, ND, Rice, Vanderbilt, etc are not viewed as favorably as the those listed above them. Too many of you are conflated selectivity with academic strength.

All of these schools are academically strong. You trying to make a point but UCLA's 4.4 is realistically no different than Vandys 4.3 or even Georgetown's 4.2. The difference is small however the selectivity difference between these schools is very big. These factors balance each other out in the rankings. Lastly academic prestige is not over all prestige, it's only one factor of it.

These are peer review listings. Sorry if your preferred school is not rated higher. The point is UCLA is rated higher than tVandy and a Georgetown in this reputation score. You don’t have to accept it, but according to academe UCLA is a stronger school in this area.

Funny when we point out Vandys test scores are almost 200 points higher than UCLAs, y'all say test scores don't matter but when we point out that UCLAs reputation score is only 0.1 higher than Vandys, we should somehow just accept that and relegate Vandy as a "lesser" school. It's silly.

The day Vandy’s higher test score taking students teach themselves and issue their own diplomas is when I’ll take your comment seriously. Joking aside, this is a discussion on peer review reputation scores, nothing more. Vanderbilt isn’t as highly respected as UCLA in the world of academe. Just like you would like to brag that Vanderbilt is better than UCLA, because of their overall rating at USNWR.

I wouldn't speak so soon, that Vandy 4.3 might get a bumb next year, you never know.

You’re correct. ND is a good example. I believe it wasn’t that long ago ND was always ranked on 3.9 or so year after year. A couple years ago their PA went over 4.0 and now it’s 4.2. So the assessment scores, while very slow to change, do change over time. Up or down.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:1. Princeton 4.8
2. Columbia 4.7
Harvard 4.9
MIT 4.9
5. Yale 4.8
6. Stanford 4.9
U Chicago 4.6
8. UPenn 4.6
Caltech 4.6
9. Duke 4.5
John's Hopkins 4.7
Northwestern 4.4
13. Dartmouth 4.4
14. Brown 4.5
Vanderbilt 4.3
WashU 4.2
17. Cornell 4.6
Rice 4.1
19. Notre Dame 4.2
20. UCLA 4.4
21. Emory 4.2
22. UC Berkeley 4.7
23. Georgetown 4.2
U Michigan 4.5
25. Carnegie Mellon 4.3
UVA 4.3
You're welcome! However a caveat... There are several important factors that should go into the rankings and peer reputation is only one factor. Student selectivity and institutional resources matter for the entire quality of the school. Peer Reputation can also be gamer as well.

HYPSM comprise the top 5 for peer reputation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:1. Princeton 4.8
2. Columbia 4.7
Harvard 4.9
MIT 4.9
5. Yale 4.8
6. Stanford 4.9
U Chicago 4.6
8. UPenn 4.6
Caltech 4.6
9. Duke 4.5
John's Hopkins 4.7
Northwestern 4.4
13. Dartmouth 4.4
14. Brown 4.5
Vanderbilt 4.3
WashU 4.2
17. Cornell 4.6
Rice 4.1
19. Notre Dame 4.2
20. UCLA 4.4
21. Emory 4.2
22. UC Berkeley 4.7
23. Georgetown 4.2
U Michigan 4.5
25. Carnegie Mellon 4.3
UVA 4.3
You're welcome! However a caveat... There are several important factors that should go into the rankings and peer reputation is only one factor. Student selectivity and institutional resources matter for the entire quality of the school. Peer Reputation can also be gamer as well.

HYPSM comprise the top 5 for peer reputation.

I don’t trust this peer review … how do they decide who matters? Unlike real life these lists barely move… I just don’t believe the same places each year have monopolies on top quality teaching and learning …

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:1. Princeton 4.8
2. Columbia 4.7
Harvard 4.9
MIT 4.9
5. Yale 4.8
6. Stanford 4.9
U Chicago 4.6
8. UPenn 4.6
Caltech 4.6
9. Duke 4.5
John's Hopkins 4.7
Northwestern 4.4
13. Dartmouth 4.4
14. Brown 4.5
Vanderbilt 4.3
WashU 4.2
17. Cornell 4.6
Rice 4.1
19. Notre Dame 4.2
20. UCLA 4.4
21. Emory 4.2
22. UC Berkeley 4.7
23. Georgetown 4.2
U Michigan 4.5
25. Carnegie Mellon 4.3
UVA 4.3
You're welcome! However a caveat... There are several important factors that should go into the rankings and peer reputation is only one factor. Student selectivity and institutional resources matter for the entire quality of the school. Peer Reputation can also be gamer as well.

HYPSM comprise the top 5 for peer reputation.

I don’t trust this peer review … how do they decide who matters? Unlike real life these lists barely move… I just don’t believe the same places each year have monopolies on top quality teaching and learning …

Pay to peer play?
Old fart peer ranking conventions ?
Skulls and bones/ other secret societies ?

It just is not plausible that same institutions that mainly recruit from top 1% and legacies continue to dominate educational excellence in reality (in perception obviously is possible). It is rigged somehow. Maybe we are so desperate for order in our chaotic world that we collectively buy into this mass delusion of static hierarchies …

[Anonymous]

It is difficult to say what they are responding to when they respond to this question. Are they thinking of the university overall? Are they thinking only of the undergraduate program? Are the responses really some mix of the above?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:** I forgot Michigan
1.Harvard, Stanford
3.MIT, Princeton,
5. Yale, Columbia
7. U Chicago, Caltech, John's Hopkins, Upenn
11. Duke, Northwestern, Brown
14. Dartmouth,*UCB
16. Cornell, *UCLA, Vanderbilt
19. Rice, Carnegie Mellon, WashU, Emory, Notre Dame, Georgetown
25. Gatech, UNC, UVA, Michigan
29. UT Austin, Wisconsin-Madison

Johns Hopkins should not be that high... I'd put it alongside Dartmouth/UCB/Cornell/UCLA. Vanderbilt should also be one tier down.

JHU is easily a top 10 institution. It is hard as hell, and you don't get watered down garbage courses/grades like you do at other 'top' institutions that will not be named. I went to a top 50 undergrad institution, then did my PhD at JHU where I had to teach undergrads. The undergrads at JHU are just on a whole different level of intelligence. JHU gets bad marks for 'undergrad life' simply because it is so hard and all the kids do is study their tails off. Almost every single undergrad and grad student I know from my entire time there went on to med school, wall street, top 3 consulting firms, or top 5-10 grad schools. JHU has extraordinary placement in med schools - 100% of the kids who worked in our lab for undergrad research ended up going to med school at places like UCSF, Stanford, Harvard, and Einstein.

Also, JHU is ranked high because of its grad programs - this is a peer reputation ranking. JHU gets the most funding from the NIH out of any university, and has a top 3 med school. JHU is always near the top in terms of publications relative to impact factor (and given its size), plus always punches above its weight for patents generated.

JHU too high. Belongs in 14 with Dartmouth, Berkeley, etc.