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.
You guys are masochists of the first order. I already told you I don't have much interest in posting further about WVU - in comparison, for example, to the way that Cry Havoc carps about Pitt and the ACC schools constantly on other sub-forums.
My reservations about WVU stem primarily from the fact that kids from my area who've gone there were big partiers who were not very strong academically. The fact that US News assigns the school a low ranking, while it regularly gets identified as among the nation's top party schools, tends to reinforce, rather than assuage, those concerns. Peer groups matter. If you want to send your kid there, or had a decent experience there yourself, that's your business.
First my opinion on the ACC is not based off a survey but their actual performance. Rankings school is much harder. People can party or they can study, some can do both. If they neglect to put effort into their studies they will get bad results but that is not WVU's fault. Also students who study will get much better results. The study doesn't account for that. In fact WVU could be better than Pitt academically, for sake of argument, for students who put in the effort.
As for the ACC they lost to VT and WVU has more titles than the conference combined. It is easy to say they suck.
If you look at enough different school ranking and see similar results, you might sense some truth there. Not so much with one survey, but with 6, you start to see a pattern.
Yes they all use the same flawed methodology. If 6 different school rankings rated schools by how tall the shortest person was you would get the same results and they would not reflect academics.
There are so many variables that it is impossible to account for all of them. Endowments, for example, are generally earmarked for specific purposes. If you study medicine at Pitt, you are going to a very well endowed school in that area. If you study literature or German there, the endowment means very little.
The ratings system is faulty in a large number of ways.
There are so many variables that it is impossible to account for all of them. Endowments, for example, are generally earmarked for specific purposes. If you study medicine at Pitt, you are going to a very well endowed school in that area. If you study literature or German there, the endowment means very little.
The ratings system is faulty in a large number of ways.
That is the problem. It is really impossible to really rank these schools. Ill give them credit and say that for doing such a hard task they do a good job, but it isnt really accurate or particularly useful. There was another article where some group ranked primary schools by standardized testing alone, and that is pure garbage for reviewing schools, but these college rankings are a bit more complicated. In the end if I had to rank colleges I would do something similar, but people need to realize these rankings are based off arbitrary statistics that dont really reflect the institution. Higher ranked institutions just means they ranked better by the criteria of US today, or whoever is doing it.
The problem is idiots who blindly take these things as fact. They dont understand what it means, but some group gave them a number ranking and by god it must be true. Just turn off your brain and accept it.
I'll bet that this thread would look a lot different if WVU was ranked #1 in this poll.
Yeah, it would make the rating system look even more stupid. WVU is a great school but I don't think any major publication should rank it #1. If you notice I have consistent beliefs that value critical thinking over ignorance whereas some people change their views on issues to confirm their biases.
Also I like how some people make actual rational argument based off the ranking system while others resort to unfounded logical fallacies like, " despite your analysis I am going to dismiss what you said by staring without evidence some assumption I made up."
Last edited by cry_havoc; 09-21-2012 at 07:42 AM..
I'll bet that this thread would look a lot different if WVU was ranked #1 in this poll.
You're correct. I would also like to point out a few things
1) The rankings of secondary schools that feed into colleges have something to do with these. The secondary school system in WV is not well regarded nationally, and students coming out of those schools account for 55% of the student body, so that doesn't help. Additionally, while the Promise scholarship is a great for WVians, the standards are low enough that it doesn't help rankings of (any) state school that uses it
2) Other school systems like Penn State or UVA have satellite campuses where they send schools with not-so-great grades for a couple of years before allowing them into the main campus. These satellite campuses take the brunt of the academically challenged students and their rankings are worse. Students that go there have to meet certain expectations before they are allowed into the main campus, so by the time they get there, the only ones left have good grades. Unfortunately for WVU (and Marshall), these systems don't exist in nearly the same capacity, and places like WVU-P & WVU-Tech are basically viewed as distinct schools, so the "academically challenged" students go to the main campus right off the bat and hurt in two ways: First, their SATs and GPAs are not great, and secondly, many fail out within the first couple of years. If they had been filtered through a satellite campus, it would reflect in a more positive light.
3) I'll say this and say it again: By simply having the words "West Virginia" in front of "University", the negative connotations have an immediate impact. Whether earned or not (I believe the latter), "West Virginia" conjurs up very negative stereotypes of ignorant, tobacco spitting hillbillies that people have a hard time associating with academic institutions. Can you imagine the reputation hit Rutgers would take if they renamed it "New Jersey University" and their mascot was a fist pumping guido?
4) Finally, our endowment is not huge considering the size and stature of the university. I don't know if this is because of conservative accounting or because it's the reality, but in order to be taken seriously in many Academic circles, you need to be 1 Billion plus. We're around $400 million now (according to Wiki), but just a few years ago that number was under 300 Million.
You're correct. I would also like to point out a few things
1) The rankings of secondary schools that feed into colleges have something to do with these. The secondary school system in WV is not well regarded nationally, and students coming out of those schools account for 55% of the student body, so that doesn't help. Additionally, while the Promise scholarship is a great for WVians, the standards are low enough that it doesn't help rankings of (any) state school that uses it
2) Other school systems like Penn State or UVA have satellite campuses where they send schools with not-so-great grades for a couple of years before allowing them into the main campus. These satellite campuses take the brunt of the academically challenged students and their rankings are worse. Students that go there have to meet certain expectations before they are allowed into the main campus, so by the time they get there, the only ones left have good grades. Unfortunately for WVU (and Marshall), these systems don't exist in nearly the same capacity, and places like WVU-P & WVU-Tech are basically viewed as distinct schools, so the "academically challenged" students go to the main campus right off the bat and hurt in two ways: First, their SATs and GPAs are not great, and secondly, many fail out within the first couple of years. If they had been filtered through a satellite campus, it would reflect in a more positive light.
3) I'll say this and say it again: By simply having the words "West Virginia" in front of "University", the negative connotations have an immediate impact. Whether earned or not (I believe the latter), "West Virginia" conjurs up very negative stereotypes of ignorant, tobacco spitting hillbillies that people have a hard time associating with academic institutions. Can you imagine the reputation hit Rutgers would take if they renamed it "New Jersey University" and their mascot was a fist pumping guido?
4) Finally, our endowment is not huge considering the size and stature of the university. I don't know if this is because of conservative accounting or because it's the reality, but in order to be taken seriously in many Academic circles, you need to be 1 Billion plus. We're around $400 million now (according to Wiki), but just a few years ago that number was under 300 Million.
Excellent points on the flaws of the ranking system, however WVU's ranking is irrelevant to them if WVU were $1 or last it would not change the fact that the rankings are meaningless and don't really reflect anything.
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.
