UVA ranked #2 public university, again

US News & World Report's newest college rankings are out, and once again UVA is the 2nd ranked public university in the land, right behind UC-Berkeley. In 2003, UVA was the top-ranked public university. Nationally, UVA is ranked 23rd among all universities in a tie with Georgetown. For the eighth straight year, Princeton University holds the top spot, followed by Harvard, Yale, and Stanford (surprise!)

11 comments

And what does a snapshot news magazine know about ranking institutions of higher education?

CC, you have covered many of the corners of the debate about suitable rankings. Great job. I have a feeling you have been following this subject for a number of years. Still, I'm back to my first question. I guess the answer is neither here nor there, since obviously most people do not choose their college only after reading the mag.

I love how colleges, whose entire admissions policy is based on making ranking judgements on 18 year olds, has a hissy fit when rankings are applied to them.

Karma's a bitch

Clearly, more than you.

Check their methodology before posting your ignorance.

Hey screw Ron Paul. WE'RE #2! WE'RE #2! WE'RE #2!

I am so proud to be a wahoo and to be part of a history of excellence! The charlottesville community should be glad to have such a University that provides an excellent education and plenty of opportunities for its inhabitants, as well as those new to the state of VIrginia! Keep up the outstanding commitment to Education! I know we may hve our problems and issues, as does every College community, but whether ir be race, class or whatever else that may challenge UVa along the way..I know we can make it!!

Way to go WAHOOS! Class of 05' !! Love it!

>>

...Or producing undergrad-U-ates who cain't spail 2 gud.

Cheers,

-- CC (UVA; M.A. '93).

I think a lot of his supporters are interested in his proposals to eliminate many of the federal social programs and pork spending.

In other words, Ron Paul might be working to protect those behind 9/11 by directing the revolutionary energy generated by a large portion of very angry, very activist American citizens who know 9/11 was an inside job toward a candidate who says he will do just about everything they want a new President to do, except go after the folks who really did carry out 9/11. You're supposed to consider everything else he would do as President a fair trade-off for pretty much garaunteeing that the folks behind 9/11 will never be brought to justice. DEATH TO RON PAUL! RON PAUL DESERVES TO BE SHOT!

I checked out the following at http://64.233.169.104/search?q=cache:97Pp_w7eIj4J:www.educationsector.or....

College Rankings Reformed
The Case for a New Order in Higher Education
Author: Kevin Carey

"Many other ranking reports and often-bulky guides to college admissions, including those from Barron's, Peterson's, and the Princeton Review, crowd book shelves and magazine racks."

By asking a question, I exposed my ignorance; by your response CC, perhaps you exposed your gullableness.
Cut and paste the above link. This discussion is wide spread in American education circles.

Gullibleness? I think not.

While the author, Kevin Carey, raises a valid point or two -- from the idealistic perspective of how things ought to be in a perfect world, yes, quality of education ought to be the benchstone for the best -- the song remains the same:

Perception is reality.

I have known Harvard-educated individuals who could not fathom a road map. One of them, a Ph.D., no less, is dumb as a sack of hammers. But money and the fortunate circumstances of his birth got him into that august little school in Massachusetts. And the upshot? He is well-paid and well-placed on the faculty of a major university -- and he is still as stoopid as a big, dumb duck squawking in the marshlands. Hell, the sitting president of these United States allegedly graduated from Yale, renderign the quality of a Yale education rather specious.

I cannot in clear conscience say that either of these universities offers a "better" education than UVA, or the local community college. Rather, I believe that motivated students get out of an education what they are willing to put into it, namely, an investment of discipline and hard work will invariably derive maximum educational results.

Beyond that, it becomes an issue of a school's prestige. I suspect brilliant students graduate from the Ivy league schools just as bright minds come out of small colleges you never heard of.

Now, while I reiterate that I agree the merits of a school should be based on the quality of education it dleivers, the simple fact is that a 4.0 from Harvard means more from the perception of a recruiter than a 4.0 from Faber College (motto: "Knowledge is good"). It ain't fair, but neither is life. And so, while smartsw and a solid work ethic still go a long way in this country, having a highly-ranked deesigner label on one's sheepskin affords a competitive edge. In a culture obsessed with fame, celebrity and success, how could it be otherwise?

So unless all the schools that participate in the rankings decide unilaterally to ignore them instead (and they would do so at their peril, since not everyone will rise up in rebellion) then the rankings game will continue to be played.

Are college and university presidents bewing hypocritical to their greater, ostensible mision of educating students when they pander to rankings? That's another debate.

For good or ill, they're playing the game because everyone else is doing so. Is it wrong? Almost certainly.

But it is what it is. Knowing that, an informed consumer can choose to take seriously these rankings. Or not. There's just no ignoring their influence.

Call it cynicism if you will. I call it pragmatism.