Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Lets get real here ...as per USNWR rankings .. USC's business school is ranked #71 nationally... hardly ' very , very good'.
USC's international business program is rated # 1....which is great ..but enrolls @ 22 students per class. For comparison.. Harvards business school program is ranked #1 nationally.. its international program is rated # 2 ... and enrolls @ 650 per class in its program.
Aside from academic competence... one of the qualities of a business school education is the connections one makes ...given the size differences ...and the underlying student body ... 40 % international at Harvard ..the larger program gives the student a much wider source of connectivity.
Intl business enrolls a lot more than 22, that is flat wrong, even per class. The most recent class graduated around 100 in the undergrad program.
But, CYNIC1....let's get real, USNWR is a joke. No one respects their college "rankings". Why, they are subjective (roughly 50%)and the criteria changes annually. It is interesting that people put a lot of value in a magazine ranking which has absolutely no checks and balances. They cite this as a reason for spending >$100k for college tuition.......you have to ask yourself, would you buy $100k in stock based on the same criteria? I would hope not. So, why would anyone place a lot of value in what magazine editors think is the best school?
I agree, there are tier 1 schools like Harvard, Duke, UVA, Chapel Hill etc.......But, they do use the same text books as other schools and in a lot of cases, the professors are not that great (a lot of DMSB professors went to these schools and co-author papers and research.....DMSB just doesn't have the $35b endowment). The hardest part is getting accepted. The alumni networks are terrific. Duke, UVA, Harvard and others are strong feeders into Wall Street. Stanford is of course in the middle of Silicon Valley. That being said, the DMSB at USC is still one of the best business schools in the country, easily tops in SC. Why? Many disciplines at DMSB are respected across the country....intl, accounting, finance, MBA programs, supply chain, risk and others. Job opportunities for undergrads at USC are up 50% in 3 years, the starting salary for undergrads in up 20% in the last 5 years...mid $50's. IMBA is closer to $100k starting salary. DMSB grads hold senior level/BOD positions in many industries from finance, to engineering to medicine to automotive to airlines to trading etc......The majority of graduates live in SC, Charlotte, Raleigh, Atlanta, Northern Va, and Florida.
a majority of the highest ranked schools are also the oldest including 7 or 8 that were founded prior to American revolution. given they had little competition back then, many famous people went to school at them, and the colleges use this fact to market the college, and this coupled with small undergrade student body range that averaged 7,500 students, they can be very selective. the uS New ratings is mostly based on selectivity and academic reputation as voted by people at other universities and those people's perception of other colleges are mostly based on the US News rankings. it is just a feedback loop.
A school like UNC's in state selectivity is the result of NC being a large population state with UNC being the flagshp and flagships tend to be the school most in state students want to go to, along with the land grant uni. But UNC is small compared to most flagships and their selectivity is a function of supply and demand.
a majority of the highest ranked schools are also the oldest including 7 or 8 that were founded prior to American revolution. given they had little competition back then, many famous people went to school at them, and the colleges use this fact to market the college, and this coupled with small undergrade student body range that averaged 7,500 students, they can be very selective. the uS New ratings is mostly based on selectivity and academic reputation as voted by people at other universities and those people's perception of other colleges are mostly based on the US News rankings. it is just a feedback loop.
A school like UNC's in state selectivity is the result of NC being a large population state with UNC being the flagshp and flagships tend to be the school most in state students want to go to, along with the land grant uni. But UNC is small compared to most flagships and their selectivity is a function of supply and demand.
USNWR rankings are definitely not without flaws. However, it is one of those situations where you have to "take the good with the bad." I doubt that any university (or department) will be angry that they are highly ranked on USNWR list.
You make some points that I do not necessarily agree with. USNWR has multiple school rankings. So, it is important to know which particular ranking that you are referring to when you critique them. One of their more popular rankings is the ranking of Top National Universities. However, the criteria used for that ranking are: retention, faculty resources, student selectivity, financial resources, graduation rate, and alumni giving. Of those, selectivity is not the highest weighted one. Now, I think this particular ranking can be critiqued because it favors private universities. All of the above criteria, not just selectivity, favors private universities. There are some public universities that should be ranked much higher on this particular list. Both Cal-Berkeley and the University of Michigan come to mind because they are absolute "powerhouse" research universities that can hold their own against the best schools.
USNWR rankings of specific departments and schools can also be critiqued. Obviously their criteria changes depending on which rankings you look at. However, aside from medical schools, law schools, etc., the majority of their rankings seem to be based on ratings by academic deans and senior faculty. I do not have a problem with that, as deans should be very knowledgeable about the quality of their peer and aspirant institutions. You state that the deans' votes are influenced by already existing USNWR rankings. How do you know that? Did you survey the deans to get this information? Or, are you simply guessing? I would think that academic deans would be motivated to rank their own schools/ departments higher on the list, even if previous USNWR rankings have them ranked lower. Yet, the school/ department rankings do not seem to change that much. I wonder why?
Finally, implicit in your post is the notion that schools/ departments that are ranked high on USNWR lists are not deserving of those rankings. I am a product of both prestigious private and prestigious public universities. And, in my opinion, it is a mistake to believe that many of the schools that are ranked high on USNWR list (especially their specific schools/department rankings) are not deserving of those rankings. If you take Cal-Berkeley, for example, they are ranked in the top 10 in more USNWR rankings than any other school. (I think that I am right on that, but feel free to count them up.) They are ranked that high because, as I said before, they are a powerhouse. You can believe that they are not that good - but, they are!
how do professsors, deans, etc have independent knowledge of other colleges that they have never studied at or worked at? It is highly illogical to assume they do, so their perception of it is based on rankings or what other people tell them which mostly likely based on rankings.
SChools may rank their own university high, but that doesn't mean they don't also rank other school high based on the perceptions created by rankings. there are universities that have risen in rankings like Clemson, and they've done this by doing things important to US News, like reducing class sizes, and encouraging alumni to give more money to school, but this stuff has nothing to do with how successful graduates of the university are.
you talk a lot about research but that doesn't have anything to do with the teaching part, and most students don't go work in research or go to graduate schools. most every large flagship university and landgrant university in every state is doing a lot of research. the research thing is a brag for a school but it has nothing to do with the graduates of the school who get jobs elsewhere. COlleges with a medical college oten have higher research activity than colleges without a medical college so that isn't comparing apples to apples.
lists that focus on return on investment, amount of debt, are better starting points.
i do not believe Berkley or Michigan, etc are better than SC and Clemson and NC State, etc. there is no way that you can prove that they are without any knowledge of professors and programs at the comparison schools, or knowledge of the graduates of the schools.
i don' think a degree from Berkely or Michigan would give a person a better chance of getting a job in the Carolinas than a degree from Clemson, SC, etc. your assumption is that employers view colleges the exact same way as people in academics do and i know that isn't true.
Last edited by ClemVegas; 07-09-2016 at 11:33 PM..
I already told you guys. Simpsonvillian's role in this internet life is to be the thread contrarian. Go to any thread on any forum on CD and Simpsonvillian and you will see this. It is a patterned behavior.
The reason you call me a contrarian is you said some things that were clearly not true, such as there are big box stores downtown Greenville that 'crowd everything else out'. There are no big box stores downtown. You took it personally when I pointed it out but somebody else would have pointed it out if I did not. Stating the truth is not contrarian.
Having an opinion about universities is not contrarian. I can easily say anybody who disagrees with me is contrarian. You have been popping up to disagree with me on everything since I pointed out your big box store downtown gaffe. I believe that you are pretending to live in Greenville and have never been downtown. That is easily the weirdest statement that I have seen on here.
You also described Gville as 'nothing but a pittstop for gas 20 years ago' and described CU as a local college for upstate people even though it is a large public university that draws students from all over the state and country.
I note that you did not say anything about the topic.
My original comment was to say USC is ranked high for undergraduate business including international, in response to a person asserting Harvard's graduate business school is much better than the one at SC. The topic is about undergraduate business schools in SC. Harvard does not have an undergraduate business program and it is not in SC.
if questioning the validity of college rankings is contrarian, there are a lot of contrarians out there.
You are one of these guys who want to tell other people how they should view somebody. Why don't you just let them come their own conclusions. This is about the 7th time you have made an off topic post just to call me a contrarian. you don't like it when people disagree with you. it isn't personal.
most of the debates that I have on here are with people who disagree with something that I said. Most of my posts are about new developments in the state or answering people's questions about cities that I have knowledge of. you keep on misrepresenting me though if that makes you happpy. i'll keep pointing out your comment about all the big box stores in downtown Gville.
regarding college rankings, here is an example how they appear to be invalid.
Iowa State is ranked at 108. Clemson is 61. These two land grant universities are basically clones of each other as are most land grants. It doesn't seem legit Iowa State is 47 spots behind Clemson.
Iowa State is in the 'prestigious' AAU, and has been a member since 1958. AAU claims to include the best research universities. Clemson is not in the AAU. Georgia Tech only became in a member in the last few years despite a stellar reputation in research.
regarding college rankings, here is an example how they appear to be invalid.
Iowa State is ranked at 108. Clemson is 61. These two land grant universities are basically clones of each other as are most land grants. It doesn't seem legit Iowa State is 47 spots behind Clemson.
Iowa State is in the 'prestigious' AAU, and has been a member since 1958. AAU claims to include the best research universities. Clemson is not in the AAU. Georgia Tech only became in a member in the last few years despite a stellar reputation in research.
I am impressed that you did some extra research on this topic. Yet, this is a situation where you think you know a lot, when in reality you simply don't know just how much you don't know. Given all the research that you have done on this topic, don't you think there is a very simple (and obvious) explanation for why the two schools that you refer to as clones have different rankings on USNWR top national universities list? Don't respond to my post so quickly. Take time to think about it. I know that you can come up with the answer. I have faith in you!
Ok. Thanks for believing, professor. i'll pass on your exam though.
I thought you were interested in holding a conversation but appears you want to talk down to me without saying anything specific.
I know other people share my view on this topic given I have read their articles and many of them went to Ivy League schools and other schools ranked high in US News. It is ok to question rankings and other things.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
.) They are ranked that high because, as I said before, they are a powerhouse. You can believe that they are not that good - but, they are!
Yet, this is a situation where you think you know a lot, when in reality you simply don't know just how much you don't know. Given all the research that you have done on this topic, don't you think there is a very simple (and obvious) explanation for why the two schools that you refer to as clones have different rankings on USNWR top national universities list? Don't respond to my post so quickly. Take time to think about it. I know that you can come up with the answer. I have faith in you!
