Originally posted by derleider:
Originally posted by Upstream:
Originally posted by camdenlawprof:
Originally posted by Upstream:
Originally posted by derleider:
Originally posted by srru86:
They are not the same ratings. The US one leans on exclusivity, how hard is it to get in, how much do alums donate that hurt RU.
The global rankings value research dollars. With the addition of UMDNJ to our already large portfolio we leave behind the small snobby privates that don't do much research in this ranking.
I would say -
the US one relies on the factors that American students use to make their college decisions, while the global one is more in tune with what international students are looking for when they come here (or go anywhere other than their own country).
What? Do HS students really make college decisions based on factors like Faculty Salary or Alumni Giving? I would think that the research factors in the global rankings would be more important to domestic students, especially the ones looking to go to a research university.
Rather, students make their decisions in part on the basis of what the US is, and do not concern themselves with the individual factors that go into that ranking. They don't pay attention to something like the worldwide ranking, because most students have no reason to be concerned with the amount of research dollars attracted by the institution.
The USNews global rankings aren't based on "research dollars" (at least not directly, anyway).
The research factors are things like research reputation, publications, and citations. I would think these are things that matter to some extent to HS students, and certainly more than things like faculty salary or alumni giving.
If I am an undergraduate planning to major in history, I think I would be more drawn to a school whose faculty has a strong reputation in History and are thought leaders in their subjects. I don't think I'd have a clue which school pays its faculty $20K per year more.
One would expect something of a correlation between faculty salary and faculty quality.
But reality is - most students aren't going to research schools, and even those that do, are often not going into science, and even when they do, they dont care all that much about the strength of the faculty. And when they do care, its more based on something like the ability of that link to get you a job, not straight up research prestige.
I mean seriously - think back to when you were 18 and picking a college. Could you name one professor in the department other than maybe the department head who's name was on the letters? Had you read a single publication by any of those professors to see what they were researching?
Very few people are going to college to get an education in how to conduct scientific research. There are maybe 35,000 PHDs in science and engineering handed out each year, nationally, and alot of those are going to international students. That out of roughly 14 MILLION kids who enroll in four year undergraduate programs each year (so mabye 3 million students per cohort - so 1-2% are going to go on to get PhDs). And so while the research quality might be interesting, its probably not a major factor for most students.
But as Camden points out - its not so much the individual factors, so much as the overall impression that they build. And I'm pretty sure reality would show - American students tend to pick the US News domestic list over the US news global list (ignoring foreign schools completely of course.)
