From Wikipedia:

USA
[edit] U.S. News & World Report College and University rankings

Top 40 "National Universities" according to US News & World Report, 2007The best-known American college and university rankings [6] have been compiled since 1983 by the magazine U.S. News & World Report and are based upon data which U.S. News collects from each educational institution either from an annual survey sent to each school or from the school's website. It is also based upon opinion surveys of university faculty and administrators who do not belong to the school.[38] The college rankings were not published in 1984, but were published in all years since. The precise methodology used by the U.S. News rankings has changed many times, and the data are not all available to the public, so peer review of the rankings is limited. As a result, many other rankings arose and seriously challenged the result and methodology of US News's ranking, as shown in other rankings of US universities section below. The U.S. News rankings, unlike some other such lists, create a strict hierarchy of colleges and universities in their "top tier,". Rather than ranking only groups or "tiers" of schools; the individual schools' order changes significantly every year the rankings are published. The U.S News Tiers rank from Tier 1, the highest, to Tier 4, the lowest. The most important factors in the rankings are:

Peer assessment: a survey of the institution's reputation among presidents, provosts, and deans of admission of other institutions
Retention: six-year graduation rate and first-year student retention rate
Student selectivity: standardized test scores of admitted students, proportion of admitted students in upper percentiles of their high-school class, and proportion of applicants accepted
Faculty resources: average class size, faculty salary, faculty degree level, student-faculty ratio, and proportion of full-time faculty
Financial resources: per-student spending
Graduation rate performance: difference between expected and actual graduation rate
Alumni giving rate
All these factors are combined according to statistical weights determined by U.S. News. The weighting is often changed by U.S. News from year to year, and is not empirically determined (the National Opinion Research Center methodology review said that these weights "lack any defensible empirical or theoretical basis"). Critics have charged that U.S. News intentionally changes its methodology every year so that the rankings change and they can sell more magazines. The first four of the listed factors account for the great majority of the U.S. News ranking (80%, according to U.S. News's 2005 methodology), and the "reputational measure" (which surveys high-level administrators at similar institutions about their perceived quality ranking of each college and university) is especially important to the final ranking (accounting by itself for 25% of the ranking according to the 2005 methodology).[39]

A New York Times article reported that, given the U.S. News weighting methodology, "it's easy to guess who's going to end up on top: Harvard, Yale and Princeton round out the first three essentially every year. In fact, when asked how he knew his system was sound, Mel Elfin, the rankings' founder, often answered that he knew it because those three schools always landed on top. When a new lead statistician, Amy Graham, changed the formula in 1999 to one she considered more statistically valid, the California Institute of Technology jumped to first place. Ms. Graham soon left, and a slightly modified system pushed Princeton back to No. 1 the next year."[40] A San Francisco Chronicle article argues that "almost all of US News factors are redundant and can be boiled down to one characteristic: the size of the college or university's endowment."[41]

Some higher education experts, like Kevin Carey of Education Sector, have argued that U.S. News and World Report's college rankings system is merely a list of criteria that mirrors the superficial characteristics of elite colleges and universities. According to Carey, "[The] U.S. News ranking system is deeply flawed. Instead of focusing on the fundamental issues of how well colleges and universities educate their students and how well they prepare them to be successful after college, the magazine's rankings are almost entirely a function of three factors: fame, wealth, and exclusivity." He suggests that there are more important characteristics parents and students should research to select colleges, such as how well students are learning and how likely students are to earn a degree.[2]

--------------------------------

Certainly, the USN&WR rankings are skewed against a Southern urban university such as Memphis because (a) money factors are not adjusted for regional differences in cost of living and (2) many urban students work part time and take more than 6 years to graduate (how does that make their education less valuable?).

I know that many Universities have been critical of USN&WR rankings and some even refuse to participate in their surveys any longer. The result of course is that USN&WR is especially harsh on those institutions and gives them lower rankings off the bat.

They're like the AP rankings: they shouldn't mean anything, but to say that they don't have a large impact on national perception is naive. You can say that the Sagarin rankings or other measurements should mean more or are more accurate, yet 99% of America won't care. Whether that perception is right or wrong is irrelevant. It is what it is.

I don't think that the US News rankings are the be-all end-all, but the peer assessment score (which is the most heavily weighted category in the US News rankings) is VERY relevant to any discussions about academics in terms of conference membership. That score basically measures what the university presidents think of each other's schools, which in the real world is going to trump any statistics that you can throw out there because the university presidents are the only people that matter in conference decisions.

Are the rankings skewed against an urban Southern university like Vanderbilt? Or Rice?

The rankings place weight to admissions selectivity and Memphis is not a very selective university.

(03-09-2010 02:26 PM)DFW HOYA Wrote:  Are the rankings skewed against an urban Southern university like Vanderbilt? Or Rice?

The rankings place weight to admissions selectivity and Memphis is not a very selective university.

As I am sure you actually know, the primary differences there are (1) between private and public higher education and (2) large vs. small enrollments, but you can believe what you will. I like the fact that Forbes has now entered the rankings game and Memphis, even at 337 is ranked ahead of a great many BCS schools, including several in the SEC and Big East.

(03-09-2010 12:59 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  I don't think that the US News rankings are the be-all end-all, but the peer assessment score (which is the most heavily weighted category in the US News rankings) is VERY relevant to any discussions about academics in terms of conference membership. That score basically measures what the university presidents think of each other's schools, which in the real world is going to trump any statistics that you can throw out there because the university presidents are the only people that matter in conference decisions.

And that is one of the reasons I look forward to seeing Memphis join the Big East. I will wager, Frank, that once we are in "the club", UofM will suddenly begin receiving higher peer reviews. Not only because of improved perceptions ("birds of a feather" effect), but for reasons of self-interest ("you scratch my back, I'll scratch yours").

(03-09-2010 02:38 PM)Gray Avenger Wrote:  

(03-09-2010 02:26 PM)DFW HOYA Wrote:  Are the rankings skewed against an urban Southern university like Vanderbilt? Or Rice?

The rankings place weight to admissions selectivity and Memphis is not a very selective university.

As I am sure you actually know, the primary differences there are (1) between private and public higher education and (2) large vs. small enrollments, but you can believe what you will. I like the fact that Forbes has now entered the rankings game and Memphis, even at 337 is ranked ahead of a great many BCS schools, including several in the SEC and Big East.

I'm looking at the Forbes rankings now, and so far, they are a joke. Hampden Sydney College is ranked 50, ahead of UNC for example. Middle Tennessee State is ranked ahead of Pittsburgh. I'm not buying it.

(03-09-2010 02:26 PM)DFW HOYA Wrote:  Are the rankings skewed against an urban Southern university like Vanderbilt? Or Rice?

The rankings place weight to admissions selectivity and Memphis is not a very selective university.

Much to our dismay. The U of M WANTS to go to a competitive admissions format...the governing board won't permit it. As long as you can get ___ score on your SAT or ACT and ___ GPA, you're in. So, according to the State, we can't deny the bottom of the collegiate barrel admission...which not only affects out selectivity, impacts graduation rates and other metrics in the USNWR rankings. Thanks TBR!!! The sad part is the top students at Memphis are highly competitive with the top students from just about any school...but that gets lost in the shuffle.

Some of the colleges within the university are enacting some level of selective admissions on their own.

(03-09-2010 02:55 PM)99Tiger Wrote:  Much to our dismay. The U of M WANTS to go to a competitive admissions format...the governing board won't permit it. As long as you can get ___ score on your SAT or ACT and ___ GPA, you're in. So, according to the State, we can't deny the bottom of the collegiate barrel admission...which not only affects out selectivity, impacts graduation rates and other metrics in the USNWR rankings. Thanks TBR!!!

For those who don't know, "TBR" = Tennessee Board of Regents. There are strong rumors that UofM will soon be allowed to form its own governing board. Gaining the prestige of Big East membership might be a catalyst for pushing that effort over the top.

You are quoting Wikipedia. Do you realize than anyone can go and update anything on Wikipedia? I wouldn't rely too much on the accuracy of that.

Quote:For those who don't know, "TBR" = Tennessee Board of Regents. There are strong rumors that UofM will soon be allowed to form its own governing board. Gaining the prestige of Big East membership might be a catalyst for pushing that effort over the top.

Whoever is spreading those strong rumors is drinking something strong. Every Public school in the state of TN is either governed by the UT Board (UT Knoxville, Chattanooga, Martin) or the Board of Regents (Memphis, MTSU, Austin Peay, TN Tech et al.) I won't believe for a minute the state will allow Memphis to have it's own governing board when UT Knoxville doesn't have it. I'll go one step further and bet you the beverage of your choice that this never happen. I am in Memphis every month on business and I'll be glad to pay up if I am wrong. But I suspect you'll be buying me a Diet Coke instead.

(03-09-2010 12:59 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  They're like the AP rankings: they shouldn't mean anything, but to say that they don't have a large impact on national perception is naive. You can say that the Sagarin rankings or other measurements should mean more or are more accurate, yet 99% of America won't care. Whether that perception is right or wrong is irrelevant. It is what it is.

I don't think that the US News rankings are the be-all end-all, but the peer assessment score (which is the most heavily weighted category in the US News rankings) is VERY relevant to any discussions about academics in terms of conference membership. That score basically measures what the university presidents think of each other's schools, which in the real world is going to trump any statistics that you can throw out there because the university presidents are the only people that matter in conference decisions.

Exactly. The question in many ways is one of perception, not actuality. Memphis may be better than Harvard. However, if everyone believes Harvard is better, better students will apply, acceptance rates will be lower, graduation rates will be higher, and accomplishments of alumni will reflect the higher caliber of students that applied in the first place.

I have cited in a number of my posts the Carnegie Foundation rating of universities. Others have posted research budgets and other factors. I note that Memphis is rated as a Research University (high activity), which is the second highest tier. EVERY current BCS schools is either in this tier or the highest tier, Research University (very high activity). Tennessee and Vanderbilt are in the highest tier. However, no other school in Tennessee beyond these three is in either category.

Since the BCS is made up primarily of state flagships, Land Grant schools, and highly ranked national research universities, its school presidents look for similar characteristics in new conference members. It is notable that Cincinnati and USF are both rated as Research University (very high activity). USF is one of four schools with this rating in Florida. I'll let you guess the other three (hint: they are all in the BCS). Cincy is one of three schools in Ohio with this rating, the other two being Ohio State and Case Western Reserve. Kentucky has only two schools in either RU-VH or RU-H, again, their two BCS members.

This is not rocket science (although a good doctoral program in rocket science may help). State flagship universities with massive research budgets, competitive admissions and high academic workloads for students do not want to play open admission commuter schools in athletics. Not only would they view this a hurting there own prestige, they would have concerns that their student-athletes would be disadvantaged playing against student-athletes not required to meet the same classroom commitments.

In general, the only knock that I see against Memphis as a BCS school from the perspective of college presidents is that it would be a third school from Tennessee. Indiana is the only similarly sized state with 3 BCS schools currently, while Massachusetts, Missouri, Maryland and Wisconsin each have only one. Oversaturation of BCS schools risks the overburdening of recruiting areas and fan interest. In Memphis's case, there is significant geographic separation from the other public school within the state, though, which may provide enough room in which to recruit and generate a fan base at a BCS level.

The parameter these Rankings do not take into account is the mission of each University. Yes, ECU could raise admission standards and be more selective and cap our growth. That alone would move us up in the ranking quite a bit as admission selectivity is one of our major flaws. The problem with that approach is that we would not be serving our mission. We are dedicated to providing a college education to kids and minorities from rural North Carolina. As a result we are less selective when it come to in-state applicants.

Also another area where we get hit hard is retention. Now based on the above listed approach we lose a lot of kids. The kicker here is that for a vast majority of these kids it is not a performance issue but rather an economic issue.

We also get a lot of out of state students apply to ECU that have very good academic records that we have to deny admission because the UNC board will penalize us financially if we exceed a certain percentage of out of state students.

So just by the nature of our University's mission we will never rank highly in these reports.

http://www.arwu.org

The Academic Ranking of World Universities

Wednesday, November 04, 2009

Shanghai, People's Republic of China

The Center for World-Class Universities of Shanghai Jiao Tong University today released the 2009 Academic Ranking of World Universities (ARWU) at the Third International Conference on World- Class Universities held in Shanghai from Nov 2-4. The rankings identify the leading 500 universities around the world and are widely referenced by the global university community.

Since its first release in June 2003, ARWU has generated a global following for its transparent and consistent ranking methodology. Prof. LIU Nian Cai, the founder of ARWU, explained: Historically, academic performance, prestige and standing vis-à-vis other institutions have always been amongst the foremost concerns of leading universities. National governments are taking specific measures to promote and support the creation of world-class universities. ARWU has been widely cited and employed as a starting point for identifying national strengths and weaknesses as well as facilitating reform and setting up new initiatives.

"Objectivity, transparency, accuracy and consistency are key to any successful ranking," said Dr. CHENG Ying, who currently plays a major role in ARWU development. Dr. Cheng continued, "in addition to the overall and broad subject field rankings, we introduced subject rankings for the first time. The subjects for the 2009 ranking are chemistry, computer science, economics, mathematics, and physics".

Starting from 2009, the ARWU has been published by ShanghaiRanking Consultancy. Besides ARWU, ShanghaiRanking Consultancy will provide various global comparisons and in-depth analyses of research universities that support relevant decision making by national governments and universities in a global context.

The rankings are updated annually. A complete list of the rankings can be found at the Academic Ranking of World Universities website at http://www.arwu.org/.

Center for World-Class Universities of Shanghai Jiao Tong University and ShanghaiRanking Consultancy

Center for World-Class Universities of Shanghai Jiao Tong University (CWCU): CWCU has been focusing on the study of world-class universities for many years, published the first Chinese-language book titled world-class universities and co-published the first English titled world-class universities with European Centre for Higher Education of UNESCO. CWCU initiated the "First International Conference on World-Class Universities" (WCU-1) in 2005 and organizes the conference every second year, which attracts a large number of participants from all major countries. CWCU endeavors to build databases of major research universities in the world and clearinghouse of literature on world-class universities, and provide consultation for governments and universities.

Methodology is described here: http://www.arwu.org/aboutARWU.jsp

Here's the US portion of the list:
http://www.arwu.org/Country2009Main.jsp?...d%20States

National Rank Institution* World Rank Region Regional Rank
1
Harvard University
1 Americas 1
2
Stanford University
2 Americas 2
3
University of California, Berkeley
3 Americas 3
4
Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT)
5 Americas 4
5
California Institute of Technology
6 Americas 5
6
Columbia University
7 Americas 6
7
Princeton University
8 Americas 7
8
University of Chicago
9 Americas 8
9
Yale University
11 Americas 9
10
Cornell University
12 Americas 10
11
University of California, Los Angeles
13 Americas 11
12
University of California, San Diego
14 Americas 12
13
University of Pennsylvania
15 Americas 13
14
University of Washington
16 Americas 14
15
University of Wisconsin - Madison
17 Americas 15
16
University of California, San Francisco
18 Americas 16
17
The Johns Hopkins University
19 Americas 17
18
University of Michigan - Ann Arbor
22 Americas 18
19
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
25 Americas 19
20
University of Minnesota, Twin Cities
28 Americas 21
21
Washington University in St. Louis
29 Americas 22
22
Northwestern University
30 Americas 23
23
Duke University
31 Americas 24
24
New York University
32 Americas 25
24
Rockefeller University
32 Americas 25
26
University of Colorado at Boulder
34 Americas 27
27
University of California, Santa Barbara
35 Americas 28
28
University of Maryland, College Park
37 Americas 30
29
The University of Texas at Austin
38 Americas 31
30
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
39 Americas 32
31
Vanderbilt University
41 Americas 33
32
Pennsylvania State University - University Park
45 Americas 34
33
University of California, Irvine
46 Americas 35
33
University of Southern California
46 Americas 35
35
The University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center at Dallas
48 Americas 37
36
University of California, Davis
49 Americas 38
37
University of Pittsburgh
50 Americas 39
38
Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey - New Brunswick
55 Americas 40
39
University of Florida
58 Americas 41
40
Carnegie Mellon University
59 Americas 42
41
The Ohio State University - Columbus
62 Americas 43
42
Purdue University - West Lafayette
65 Americas 44
43
Brown University
69 Americas 46
44
Boston University
74 Americas 47
45
University of Arizona
77 Americas 48
45
University of Rochester
77 Americas 48
47
University of Utah
80 Americas 50
48
Michigan State University
86 Americas 51
49
Case Western Reserve University
87 Americas 52
50
Texas A&M University - College Station
88 Americas 53
51
University of Virginia
91 Americas 54
52
Indiana University Bloomington
93 Americas 56
53
Arizona State University - Tempe
94 Americas 57
54
Rice University
99 Americas 58
55
Emory University
100 Americas 59
56-70
Baylor College of Medicine
101-151 Americas 60-77
56-70
Dartmouth College
101-151 Americas 60-77
56-70
Georgia Institute of Technology
101-151 Americas 60-77
56-70
Mayo Medical School
101-151 Americas 60-77
56-70
North Carolina State University - Raleigh
101-151 Americas 60-77
56-70
Oregon State University
101-151 Americas 60-77
56-70
The University of Georgia
101-151 Americas 60-77
56-70
Tufts University
101-151 Americas 60-77
56-70
University of California, Riverside
101-151 Americas 60-77
56-70
University of California, Santa Cruz
101-151 Americas 60-77
56-70
University of Hawaii at Manoa
101-151 Americas 60-77
56-70
University of Iowa
101-151 Americas 60-77
56-70
University of Massachusetts Amherst
101-151 Americas 60-77
56-70
University of Massachusetts Medical School - Worcester
101-151 Americas 60-77
56-70
University of Miami
101-151 Americas 60-77
71-90
Colorado State University
152-200 Americas 78-99
71-90
Florida State University
152-200 Americas 78-99
71-90
George Mason University
152-200 Americas 78-99
71-90
Iowa State University
152-200 Americas 78-99
71-90
Mount Sinai School of Medicine
152-200 Americas 78-99
71-90
Oregon Health and Science University
152-200 Americas 78-99
71-90
State University of New York at Stony Brook
152-200 Americas 78-99
71-90
The University of Alabama at Birmingham
152-200 Americas 78-99
71-90
The University of Connecticut - Storrs
152-200 Americas 78-99
71-90
The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston
152-200 Americas 78-99
71-90
The University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center
152-200 Americas 78-99
71-90
University of Cincinnati
152-200 Americas 78-99
71-90
University of Colorado at Denver
152-200 Americas 78-99
71-90
University of Delaware
152-200 Americas 78-99
71-90
University of Illinois at Chicago
152-200 Americas 78-99
71-90
University of Maryland, Baltimore
152-200 Americas 78-99
71-90
University of Nebraska - Lincoln
152-200 Americas 78-99
71-90
University of Tennessee - Knoxville
152-200 Americas 78-99
71-90
Virginia Commonwealth University
152-200 Americas 78-99
71-90
Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University
152-200 Americas 78-99
91-112
Brandeis University
201-302 Americas 100-134
91-112
Louisiana State University - Baton Rouge
201-302 Americas 100-134
91-112
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute
201-302 Americas 100-134
91-112
State University of New York at Albany
201-302 Americas 100-134
91-112
State University of New York at Buffalo
201-302 Americas 100-134
91-112
The George Washington University
201-302 Americas 100-134
91-112
The University of New Mexico - Albuquerque
201-302 Americas 100-134
91-112
The University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio
201-302 Americas 100-134
91-112
University of Central Florida
201-302 Americas 100-134
91-112
University of Houston
201-302 Americas 100-134
91-112
University of Kansas - Lawrence
201-302 Americas 100-134
91-112
University of Kentucky
201-302 Americas 100-134
91-112
University of Medicine and Dentistry New Jersey
201-302 Americas 100-134
91-112
University of Missouri - Columbia
201-302 Americas 100-134
91-112
University of Notre Dame
201-302 Americas 100-134
91-112
University of Oregon
201-302 Americas 100-134
91-112
University of South Carolina - Columbia
201-302 Americas 100-134
91-112
University of South Florida
201-302 Americas 100-134
91-112
University of Vermont
201-302 Americas 100-134
91-112
Washington State University - Pullman
201-302 Americas 100-134
91-112
Wayne State University
201-302 Americas 100-134
91-112
Yeshiva University
201-302 Americas 100-134
113-138
Brigham Young University
303-401 Americas 135-162
113-138
City University of New York City College
303-401 Americas 135-162
113-138
Clemson University
303-401 Americas 135-162
113-138
Georgetown University
303-401 Americas 135-162
113-138
Indiana University-Purdue University at Indianapolis
303-401 Americas 135-162
113-138
Kansas State University
303-401 Americas 135-162
113-138
Medical University of South Carolina
303-401 Americas 135-162
113-138
Saint Louis University
303-401 Americas 135-162
113-138
San Diego State University
303-401 Americas 135-162
113-138
State University of New York Health Science Center at Brooklyn
303-401 Americas 135-162
113-138
Syracuse University
303-401 Americas 135-162
113-138
Temple University
303-401 Americas 135-162
113-138
Texas Tech University
303-401 Americas 135-162
113-138
The University of Montana - Missoula
303-401 Americas 135-162
113-138
The University of Texas at Dallas
303-401 Americas 135-162
113-138
The University of Texas Medical Branch at Galveston
303-401 Americas 135-162
113-138
Thomas Jefferson University
303-401 Americas 135-162
113-138
Tulane University
303-401 Americas 135-162
113-138
University of Alaska - Fairbanks
303-401 Americas 135-162
113-138
University of Arkansas at Fayetteville
303-401 Americas 135-162
113-138
University of Nebraska Medical Center
303-401 Americas 135-162
113-138
University of Nevada - Reno
303-401 Americas 135-162
113-138
University of New Hampshire - Durham
303-401 Americas 135-162
113-138
University of Oklahoma - Norman
303-401 Americas 135-162
113-138
University of Rhode Island
303-401 Americas 135-162
113-138
Wake Forest University
303-401 Americas 135-162
139-152
Auburn University
402-501 Americas 163-184
139-152
Boston College
402-501 Americas 163-184
139-152
Drexel University
402-501 Americas 163-184
139-152
Lehigh University
402-501 Americas 163-184
139-152
Medical College of Wisconsin
402-501 Americas 163-184
139-152
Montana State University - Bozeman
402-501 Americas 163-184
139-152
Northeastern University
402-501 Americas 163-184
139-152
Southern Methodist University
402-501 Americas 163-184
139-152
The University of Connecticut Health Center
402-501 Americas 163-184
139-152
University of Kansas Medical Center
402-501 Americas 163-184
139-152
University of Louisville
402-501 Americas 163-184
139-152
University of Maryland, Baltimore County
402-501 Americas 163-184
139-152
University of Wyoming
402-501 Americas 163-184
139-152
Utah State University
402-501 Americas 163-184

Wow...that was WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAY too long of a post. But what the hell are those rankings about? The first thing that jumps out is why is Tulane so damn low? There are a lot of rankings on that list that make me scratch my head. Maybe I should invent my own system...as long as the Ivy's appear on top nobody will question the rest, right?

(03-09-2010 04:21 PM)Shannon Panther Wrote:  Whoever is spreading those strong rumors is drinking something strong. Every Public school in the state of TN is either governed by the UT Board (UT Knoxville, Chattanooga, Martin) or the Board of Regents (Memphis, MTSU, Austin Peay, TN Tech et al.) I won't believe for a minute the state will allow Memphis to have it's own governing board when UT Knoxville doesn't have it.

In essence, UT DOES have its own governing board.

(03-10-2010 09:21 AM)Gray Avenger Wrote:  

(03-09-2010 04:21 PM)Shannon Panther Wrote:  Whoever is spreading those strong rumors is drinking something strong. Every Public school in the state of TN is either governed by the UT Board (UT Knoxville, Chattanooga, Martin) or the Board of Regents (Memphis, MTSU, Austin Peay, TN Tech et al.) I won't believe for a minute the state will allow Memphis to have it's own governing board when UT Knoxville doesn't have it.

In essence, UT DOES have its own governing board.

It does but it governs 3 schools, 4 if you count the Med Center in Memphis.

This article illustrates some of the personal/political bias in the rankings:

http://www.gainesville.com/article/20090.../906171007

Bulls fans might enjoy what this UF blogger says about USF in comparison to FSU:

http://www.alligatorarmy.com/2009/6/17/9...our-school

(03-10-2010 09:26 AM)Shannon Panther Wrote:  

(03-10-2010 09:21 AM)Gray Avenger Wrote:  

(03-09-2010 04:21 PM)Shannon Panther Wrote:  Whoever is spreading those strong rumors is drinking something strong. Every Public school in the state of TN is either governed by the UT Board (UT Knoxville, Chattanooga, Martin) or the Board of Regents (Memphis, MTSU, Austin Peay, TN Tech et al.) I won't believe for a minute the state will allow Memphis to have it's own governing board when UT Knoxville doesn't have it.

In essence, UT DOES have its own governing board.

It does but it governs 3 schools, 4 if you count the Med Center in Memphis.

Put me in the "I'll believe it when I see it crowd", but the thing that chaps the UofM's collective a$$ is that we are very different than any of the other TBR schools. Our level of graduate research is far above the other TBR schools. 12 or so years ago, they were talking about merging UT and TBR...but Martin and Chattanooga were going to be artificially elevated over ever TBR school. As a student, I even wrote an article complaining about the prospect of throwing away all the U of M's research because we didn't start with "UT".

The separate governing board issue is really related to the fact that the UofM does perform at a different level than our fellow TBR schools, including MTSU. The simple fact is UofM research >>> MTSU research; and the university is trying to direct attention towards that and emphasize it more...and TBR isn't helping.

Oh, UT has a board that technically governs 4 schools...but they are all seen as subordinate (maybe not UT-Memphis) to the flagship and it operates more as UT-K's board with control over satellite schools.

(03-10-2010 10:26 AM)99Tiger Wrote:  Oh, UT has a board that technically governs 4 schools...but they are all seen as subordinate (maybe not UT-Memphis) to the flagship and it operates more as UT-K's board with control over satellite schools.

Bingo, the University of Michigan Board of Regents has a similar arrangement over its satellite campuses, and I would imagine the same holds true for most flagship universities.