Reply to Sept. 6 WSJ Rankings

Forum Index » College and University Discussion

Reply to "Sept. 6 WSJ Rankings"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous]Ok, this ranking is absolutely crazy and methodology is absolutely specious, so much so that I am surprised it got by the WSJ editors.  The 70% “outcomes” weighting is largely driven by the calculated “value-added” by the college.  They do this by totally ignoring the input of a high-achieving, top quality student and instead try to determine what “should” that student be making if he had gone to another “comparable” institution, say Penn instead of Brown, vs what that student is actually making.  So, it has the effect of magnifying in geometric terms the 1st year salary differentials between schools in different selectivity tiers and rather bizarrely does not account for mix differentials such as engineering majors vs. engineering majors and classics majors vs. classics majors.  The entire methodology fails data science 101.  Our country is screwed if this passes for analysis/insight.  I am absolutely for outcomes based rankings but to ignore absolute outcomes in favor of an incredibly flawed attempt to determine value-added by the college vs. some “expected value” for the student had he gone somewhere else is insane. In statistical terms, the error term is sky high here.[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics