Academics vs. Athletics

[RangersboysWFBB]

So maybe I was conceding a point I didn't need to concede (and didn't know what I was talking about). For the record, My original position was that being ranked 22 to 44 is all the same damn thing. If for some ridiculous reason getting a better athletic program with all of it's benefits cost us 10 inconsequential slots in the US News, give it to me right now. Duke and Georgetown, and William and Marry are not the same. SMU is fighting like hell right now to get to Wake's national recognition from a sports perspective. Once they do that there looking at Georgetown and Duke. If becoming a national household name affects their rep at all in the US News, then I'd put dollars on the fact that its positive.

 

[scooter84]

And who you worked with in your doctorate and post-doc.

Scooter, that may be how you read it, but that's not what was said. This is what I disagreed with:
"I’d say the only other place the US News rankings actually matter is to people who wish to be professors."

As others have said, a ranking of institutions based on things like freshman SAT scores don't really matter. The job market cares about other things like what was mentioned above. A student with a BA or MA from a lower tier school will do well getting into grad schools if they do good work. And a highly ranked institution in US News may not have great grad programs or highly regarded grad programs may be at lower tier schools.

Of course the devil is in the details... But, the point is, it most certainly matters where you went to school and how that school is ranked. All other things being equal, a kid from a school ranked in the top 25 is going to have an advantage over a kid from a school ranked #50. Again - all other things being equal. Sure, a kid with awesome grades and other accomplishments and great interview skills is going to do well no matter where he or she went to school.

And, in academia, people are more aware of programs and departments within certain schools that may rank higher or lower than the school itself - moreso than in the general public.

 

[wakephan09]

Of course the devil is in the details... But, the point is, it most certainly matters where you went to school and how that school is ranked. All other things being equal, a kid from a school ranked in the top 25 is going to have an advantage over a kid from a school ranked #50. Again - all other things being equal. Sure, a kid with awesome grades and other accomplishments and great interview skills is going to do well no matter where he or she went to school.

And, in academia, people are more aware of programs and departments within certain schools that may rank higher or lower than the school itself - moreso than in the general public.

Oh, absolutely. And PhDeac would surely agree on this point.

There are, in fact, graduate school rankings through USNW, but they are taken far less seriously than the undergraduate rankings. In my general field in the humanities, at least, there are twenty schools in the top tier. In that top tier, as PhDeac suggested, the quality of your supervisors, available funding and resources, and to lesser point, general prestige, are more important than any one ranking.

I think, for the most part, we are all in agreement, though ManhassatDeac (and BKF) make an important distinction about the flawed nature of the (OGBoards) poll.


In other news, (one of my) my alma mater(s) has slipped into the top twenty in the world, according to the (in my opinion) reliable and consistent QS world rankings:

1 MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY (MIT)
2 HARVARD UNIVERSITY
3 UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE
4 UCL (UNIVERSITY COLLEGE LONDON)
5 IMPERIAL COLLEGE LONDON
6 UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD
7 STANFORD UNIVERSITY
8 YALE UNIVERSITY
9 UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO
10= CALIFORNIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY (CALTECH)
10= PRINCETON UNIVERSITY
12 ETH ZURICH (SWISS FEDERAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY)
13 UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA
14 COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY
15 CORNELL UNIVERSITY
16 JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY
17= UNIVERSITY OF EDINBURGH
17= UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO
19= ECOLE POLYTECHNIQUE FÉDÉRALE DE LAUSANNE (EPFL)
19= KING'S COLLEGE LONDON (KCL)
21 MCGILL UNIVERSITY

 

[TheReff]

We are also #7 in a very key poll.

 

[w84it]

Yeah, the Duke Biomedical Engineering student from Malaysia who was better at math and geography at 10 years old than most American college grads knew more about Christian Laettner than Duke's academic reputation.

I know it's hard to wrap one's brain around, but a lot of people don't care about college sports, but they do care about the academic reputations of elite schools.

Which is why there are tons of television channels devoted to Biomedical Engineering and not sports. Come on back to the real world, please.

 

[myDeaconmyhand]

Which is why there are tons of television channels devoted to Biomedical Engineering and not sports. Come on back to the real world, please.

#analysis

 

[PhDeac]

When I was a kid, barely an adult who grew up in NC addicted to college hoops, it blew my mind when I went to Duke and met many people who knew nothing about college hoops and went there because of the rep or a department or faculty member. In the real world outside of a sports fan bubble, college sports don't matter to a lot of people. You think Duke and Harvard are THAT much different yet both have high prestige?

 

[Caturdayredux]

You people are fucking idiots if you pick the second option.

 

[Caturdayredux]

Oh, absolutely. And PhDeac would surely agree on this point.

There are, in fact, graduate school rankings through USNW, but they are taken far less seriously than the undergraduate rankings. In my general field in the humanities, at least, there are twenty schools in the top tier. In that top tier, as PhDeac suggested, the quality of your supervisors, available funding and resources, and to lesser point, general prestige, are more important than any one ranking.

I think, for the most part, we are all in agreement, though ManhassatDeac (and BKF) make an important distinction about the flawed nature of the (OGBoards) poll.


In other news, (one of my) my alma mater(s) has slipped into the top twenty in the world, according to the (in my opinion) reliable and consistent QS world rankings:

1 MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY (MIT)
2 HARVARD UNIVERSITY
3 UNIVERSITY OF CAMBRIDGE
4 UCL (UNIVERSITY COLLEGE LONDON)
5 IMPERIAL COLLEGE LONDON
6 UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD
7 STANFORD UNIVERSITY
8 YALE UNIVERSITY
9 UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO
10= CALIFORNIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY (CALTECH)
10= PRINCETON UNIVERSITY
12 ETH ZURICH (SWISS FEDERAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY)
13 UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA
14 COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY
15 CORNELL UNIVERSITY
16 JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY
17= UNIVERSITY OF EDINBURGH
17= UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO
19= ECOLE POLYTECHNIQUE FÉDÉRALE DE LAUSANNE (EPFL)
19= KING'S COLLEGE LONDON (KCL)
21 MCGILL UNIVERSITY

Lol if you think those ranking matter

 

[wakephan09]

You think Duke and Harvard are THAT much different yet both have high prestige?

Whoa, dude, no.

Lol if you think those ranking matter

"Matter" is certainly up for debate, but I can tell you for certain that these particular rankings come up in Parliamentarian discussions about educational funding. So, I would say that they do matter.