Reply to Top universities are “top” essentially because of professional schools?

Forum Index » College and University Discussion

Reply to "Top universities are “top” essentially because of professional schools?"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]So I’ve noticed this thing with college rankings and it appears that the universities we consider to be “top” are top because of specifically business and law school rankings ( medical school is a different). With the exception of a handful of privates like Johns Hopkins or Rice, along with the ivies of Princeton and Brown, most universities derive their reputations primarily from just these two subjects.[b] Take UVA for example. Historically, it is not well known in either stem or humanities quite frankly. Just compare their department rankings in economics or history to the more historically prestigious Michigan and Wisconsin. [/b]But, UVA is seen as comparable and even better than those two, based purely on business and law schools. Furthermore, undergraduate selectivity seems to be primarily generated through competitive pre law/pre-mba finance bros. [/quote]

Say what? Michigan and UVA undergrad are neck-and-neck at 21 and 24. Wisconsin is far below at 39.  When you look at the rankings of our nation's top publics, again, you have Michigan and UVA neck-and-neck at 3 and 4 and Wisconsin way down the list. That's evaluated for undergrad performance. https://www.usnews.com/best-colleges/rankings/national-universities/top-public[/quote]

“Just compare their department rankings in economics or history to the more historically prestigious Michigan and Wisconsin.”

History

https://www.usnews.com/best-graduate-schools/top-humanities-schools/history-rankings

Michigan #2
Wisconsin #11
UVA #18….down there with Duke

Economics

https://www.usnews.com/best-graduate-schools/top-humanities-schools/history-rankings

Michigan #12
Wisconsin #14
UVA #30….tied with UNC.

In discipline after discipline, both at the undergraduate and graduate levels, I see Michigan and Wisconsin ranked higher than UVA.  Sure there are a few outliers, but

[/quote]

I'd like to see the Michigan and Wisconsin graduates in these disciplines sit for knowledge tests vs say Swarthmore.  I wonder if the superior department rankings of Michigan and Wisconsin would produce better educated graduates than Swarthmore.  I actually think I know the answer to that one. . .[/quote]

You’re comparing a small SLAC to a giant state university.  The top students at Michigan would easily compare wirh the top students at any SLAC.  [/quote]

I'm comparing the quality of education for the average student.  [/quote]

…and what makes you an expert on the subject matter?  Furthermore, this is a discussion about top universities with professional schools. Why was Swarthmore even entered into this discussion?

[/quote]

I understand how these schools work.  Swarthmore has a student-to-faculty ratio of 8:1.  It is 15:1 at Michigan and 18:1 at Wisconsin.  If you then look at how the faculty spend their time, there will be significant differences.  In general, tenured faculty at research universities spend roughly 50% time for teaching, 50% time for research during the year.  The teaching time is typically evenly split between undergraduates and graduates.  This means 25% of time on undergraduate education, 25% on graduate education, and 50% on research.  Faculty performance assessments are based much more on research.  For a school like Swarthmore, the equation is different.  There are no graduate students and the expectations for research are lower, so a typical ratio would be 60% teaching and 40% other.  The time dedicated to teaching is entirely focused on undergraduates.  Faculty performance assessment are based much more on teaching.  This means, from the perspective of an undergraduate, faculty time and focus is much higher at a school like Swarthmore than Michigan or Wisconsin, significantly higher even than the student-to-faculty ratios indicate.  For this reason, schools like Swarthmore typically have higher student survey ratings for faculty commitment, availability, etc.

One more thing.  At a research university, the university must come up with institutional funds to get research grants (typically about 30% of the total).  A likely source of this is undergraduate tuition.  This is much less likely to be the case at a school like Swarthmore.[/quote]

Yeah, so?[/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