Wedge
Hall of Famer
Posts: 19,862
Joined: May 2010
Reputation: 964
I Root For: California
Location: IV, V, VI, IX
|
RE: New ARWU ratings
(08-23-2016 04:08 PM)Enviro5609 Wrote: Of course you cite it. You'd be a fool not because people clearly do give it weight.
But they shouldn't. Because its stupid.
This comment would be much more appropriately applied to the US News college rankings.
|
|
08-23-2016 05:53 PM |
|
Enviro5609
2nd String
Posts: 455
Joined: Aug 2014
Reputation: 33
I Root For: Tulane
Location:
|
RE: New ARWU ratings
(08-23-2016 05:53 PM)Wedge Wrote: (08-23-2016 04:08 PM)Enviro5609 Wrote: Of course you cite it. You'd be a fool not because people clearly do give it weight.
But they shouldn't. Because its stupid.
This comment would be much more appropriately applied to the US News college rankings.
It applies to the concept of rankings in general. There is no "objective metric" that exists that will not be inherently biased against or towards certain types of institutions. And subjective rankings like USWNR have their own bias.
Prestige is subjective, but it's hard to "rank." So membership in prestige peer groups is a good indicator, like AAU or PBK. Outcomes like employment rates, average pay, loan burdens are probably the best metric out there from a student perspective. You can be a great university at teaching but my a great university at producing research. And vice versa. But most rankings ignore that entirely.
(This post was last modified: 08-24-2016 11:19 AM by Enviro5609.)
|
|
08-24-2016 11:18 AM |
|