Reply to New College Simply ranking

Forum Index » College and University Discussion

Reply to "New College Simply ranking"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Unless we know who College Simply is, who funds it, what is their mission, etc… this is meaningless.

The criteria are clearly skewed to severely hamper large student body schools. I prefer balanced criteria

It’s a rando website. Do you seriously get excited about a list because it is on the internet? You realize that’s about the lowest bar on earth. If only each of us was as selective about information as we are about college reputations… then again, we certainly wouldn’t be on dcum if we were 😜[/quote]
Do we not think forbes over inflates public schools? Berkeley is ranked 5 there, that's insane too. [/quote]

It's US News that went completely overboard with the publics last year. Some of them moved up dozens of spaces in a single year because of the way US News changed their algorithm - getting rid of class size, discounting the qualifications of professors, years to graduate, putting a strong emphasis on number of Pell Grant students while ignoring those on school financial aid, and so on. It was a ridiculous list that was more reflective of an ideological bias as opposed to measuring the quality of the undergrad experience.

So it's good there is push back from all the other publications doing college rankings. But it's also absolutely true that any random organization can publish a list, so take them all with a giant shovel of salt. [/quote]
+100, every public school on US News is 10 spots too high. UCSD at 28 but Tufts at 40 is crazy. UNC ahead of Emory, WashU, CMU is crazy. [/quote]

On what basis are you making this determination? I was an undergrad at Harvard, got my PhD at UC Berkeley (where I TAed quite a few classes), and taught at a private T100.

Your peers do determine a good chunk of your learning experience. The A and B students at Berkeley could have easily held their own at Harvard. The private T100 students were very different: less prepared, less motivated, and very entitled. They were also pretty wealthy compared to the Berkeley students. The faculty responded to this by offering less challenging assignments and inflating grades. The tuition dependence of the T100 private, which lacked Harvard's endowment or Berkeley's state subsidy, made them treat the students like customers. Grad schools understood this when evaluating GPAs.

The faculty at the T100 were also less well published than those at Harvard or Berkeley and far more focused on budgets than on the big issues of the day. The fact that a university is private doesn't make it good, and a public with strong students and faculty is much more similar to an Ivy than a private also-ran.[/quote]

This is completely useless you identify the private.[/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