Top 400 Universities - US news report

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:i think the IITs score poorly because of faculty don't publish much and so most of the IITs don't even have an entry in the citations per faculty field! my q, why isn't the indian institute of science on the list (at least i didn't see it)? it should be.

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:i take that back. only my alma mater doesn't have an entry in that field. the other four do.

Marathadi-Saamiyaar wrote:
No sign of IISc.

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:

Marathadi-Saamiyaar wrote:
No sign of IISc.

why? it doesn't make sense that the IITs should be ranked but not the IISc. perhaps they don't rank universities that don't have an undergraduate program?

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:IMO dental schools are glorified vocational schools. no need to rank them.

Marathadi-Saamiyaar wrote:

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:IMO dental schools are glorified vocational schools. no need to rank them.

actually, I put dentist on par with used car dealers...

Another Brick wrote:

Marathadi-Saamiyaar wrote:

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:IMO dental schools are glorified vocational schools. no need to rank them.

actually, I put dentist on par with used car dealers...

uppili saar!! i say, why don't you post a pictorial presentation of how you view all professions for our benefit? i am curious to know who tops that chart. none of the following, i assume - doctors, nurses, dentists, surgeons, chiropracters(sp?), liars, plane drivers, plane waitresses, submarine navigators, politicians, professors, scientists, wall-street looters, MBAs, bureaucrats and code coolies.

Propagandhi711 wrote:

Another Brick wrote:

Marathadi-Saamiyaar wrote:

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:IMO dental schools are glorified vocational schools. no need to rank them.

actually, I put dentist on par with used car dealers...

uppili saar!! i say, why don't you post a pictorial presentation of how you view all professions for our benefit? i am curious to know who tops that chart. none of the following, i assume - doctors, nurses, dentists, surgeons, chiropracters(sp?), liars, plane drivers, plane waitresses, submarine navigators, politicians, professors, scientists, wall-street looters, MBAs, bureaucrats and code coolies.

advising fat midwestern blondes on "womanly problems" is the best profession, sitting lone at the very top next to god. rest are far far below

Propagandhi711 wrote:

Another Brick wrote:
uppili saar!! i say, why don't you post a pictorial presentation of how you view all professions for our benefit? i am curious to know who tops that chart. none of the following, i assume - doctors, nurses, dentists, surgeons, chiropracters(sp?), liars, plane drivers, plane waitresses, submarine navigators, politicians, professors, scientists, wall-street looters, MBAs, bureaucrats and code coolies.

advising fat midwestern blondes on "womanly problems" is the best profession, sitting lone at the very top next to god. rest are far far below

Propagandhi711 wrote:

advising fat midwestern blondes on "womanly problems" is the best profession, sitting lone at the very top next to god. rest are far far below

Another Brick wrote:

Propagandhi711 wrote:

advising fat midwestern blondes on "womanly problems" is the best profession, sitting lone at the very top next to god. rest are far far below

haha, that and prophesying about random worldly events with utmost accuracy.

Marathadi-Saamiyaar wrote:

hahahaha....

So what do you think about the ranking?

Another Brick wrote:

Marathadi-Saamiyaar wrote:

hahahaha....

So what do you think about the ranking?

uppili saar! i don't have enough knowledge about the topic. i graduated from the oldest college in MH (govt college of engg, pune - 1854) and it is considered as the third best engg college in MH (after VJTI and REC, nagpur) and i find it overrated. the quality of students was average and the staff was incompetent. i have no idea why it is considered as one of the best colleges when all it has done so far in its history is that it has churned out 9-5 pencil-pushers year after year. given my experience with this college, i wonder if such rankings matter at all.

Another Brick wrote:no no, i understood your question, but since i hadn't seen the link you had posted - mainly because i thought i wouldn't know anything about the 400 universities in the article - i chose to remark on the rankings in general.

Richard Hed wrote:Rankings in general should be taken with a grain of salt, US news' - with a giant salt mine...

Richard Hed wrote:Rankings in general should be taken with a grain of salt, US news' - with a giant salt mine...

Gladwell's got some good points:


www.newyorker.com/reporting/2011/02/14/110214fa_fact_gladwell

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:

Richard Hed wrote:Rankings in general should be taken with a grain of salt, US news' - with a giant salt mine...

Gladwell's got some good points:


www.newyorker.com/reporting/2011/02/14/110214fa_fact_gladwell

salt or no salt, this ranking matters because the people who pay the bills think it matters. there's a lot to be frustrated about these rankings, but unfortunately people, as in parents and kids who cough up the green stuff do set store by it. and therefore deans, provosts, and college presidents take them seriously. faculty hate it.

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:

Richard Hed wrote:Rankings in general should be taken with a grain of salt, US news' - with a giant salt mine...

Gladwell's got some good points:


www.newyorker.com/reporting/2011/02/14/110214fa_fact_gladwell

salt or no salt, this ranking matters because the people who pay the bills think it matters. there's a lot to be frustrated about these rankings, but unfortunately people, as in parents and kids who cough up the green stuff do set store by it. and therefore deans, provosts, and college presidents take them seriously. faculty hate it.