Category Archives: National Rankings

U.S. News Best Undergrad Business 2014: Florida, Georgia, Georgia Tech and Maryland Gain the Most

Posted on by

The 2014 U.S. News Best Colleges report lists the top schools for undergraduate business majors, and this year Florida made the biggest advance in the rankings –up 9 places– followed by Georgia, Georgia Tech, and Maryland, each of which gained 4 spots.

Other notable changes involving public universities were the additions of Georgia State University, Miami of Ohio, Oklahoma, and Utah to the top 50.  (The state of Georgia now has three public undergrad business programs in the top 50.)

Public universities with number one business specialty programs in the nation are as follows: UT Austin (accounting); Georgia (insurance); Michigan State (supply chain management/logistics); South Carolina (international business); Michigan (management); and Wisconsin (real estate).

As we have noted elsewhere, changes of four to six places can occur with only minor statistical changes.

Below are the public universities that made the top 50 list in 2014.  We will use the symbols (+, =, -) to indicate whether a school rose, remained the same, or dropped in the rankings compared to 2013.  Schools that gained four or more places will be in all caps.

+UC Berkeley–2014 (2); 2013 (3)

+Michigan–2014 (2); 2013 (3)

=Virginia–2014 (5); 2013 (5)

=North Carolina–2014 (7); (2013 (7)

-UT Austin–2014 (8); 2013 (7)

+Indiana–2014 (10); 2013 (11)

-Illinois–2014 (16); 2013 (14)

-Ohio State–2014 (18); 2013 (17)

+Maryland–2014 (18); 2013 (21)

-Minnesota–2014 (18); 2013 (17)

-Wisconsin–2014 (18); 2013 (17)

-Penn State–2014 (22); 2013 (21)

-Purdue–2014 (22); 2013 (21)

+Arizona–2014 (22); 2013 (24)

+Washington–2014 (22); 2013 (24)

-Arizona State–2014 (27); 2013 (24)

+GEORGIA TECH–2014 (27); 2013 (31)

-Michigan State–2014 (27); 2013 (24)

-Texas A&M–2014 (27); 2013 (24)

+FLORIDA–2014 (27); 2013 (36)

+GEORGIA–2014 (27); 2013 (31)

+Iowa–2014 (34); 2013 (36)

+William & Mary–2014 (38); 2013 (40)

-Colorado–2014 (38); 2013 (36)

+South Carolina–2014 (38); 2013 (40)

-Vermont–2014 (43); 2013 (40)

+GEORGIA STATE–2014 (47); 2013 (not in top 50)

+MIAMI OF OHIO–2014 (47); 2013 (not in top 50)

=Arkansas–2014 (47); 2013 (47)

=Connecticut–2014 (47) 2013 (47)

+OKLAHOMA–2014 (47); 2013 (not in top 50)

=Oregon–2014 (47); 2013 (47)

=Pitt–2014 (47); 2013 (47)

=Tennessee–2014 (47); 2013 (47)

+UTAH–2014 (47); 2013 (not in top 50)

 

 

 

 

U.S. News 2014 Rankings: Lots of Changes for Public Universities

Posted on by

The U.S. News Best Colleges edition for 2014 is out, and the somewhat obscure changes in the magazine’s methodology this year have wrought many changes in the rankings of major public universities.

The 2013 rankings were especially unkind to public universities; the new rankings show gains by 23 of the 50 schools we follow most closely, while 19 declined and 8 remained the same.

Colorado, Penn State, Stony Brook, Vermont, and Indiana made the most dramatic gains.   The new rankings mark the second year in a row that Stony Brook has made a big leap, now ranking 82, versus 111 only two years ago.

What we do know about the changes in methodology probably explain the perhaps surprising fall of two public elites, UT Austin and Washington.  The new methodology places more emphasis on grad and retention rates, and these two schools likely did not better the expectations set by the magazine in these categories or actually fell below projected levels.  It is also possible, though less likely, that other schools performed much better in these categories than they did in 2013.

The magazine has not been forthcoming about possible changes in the weight given to academic reputation.  Both these schools have scored extremely well in that category in recent years, so a reduction in the weight of that category would hurt their rankings.

Alabama, Binghamton, Arizona State, and UC Irvine also fell by at least five places in the 2014 rankings.  It is important to keep in mind that very small statistical changes can result in a ranking difference of 4-6 places.

Below are the 50 universities we follow, showing by the symbols (-, +, or +) whether they fell, stayed the same, or gained in the rankings.  We also list each school’s rankings for a three-year span: 2012, 2013, and 2014.  Schools with gains of five or more places are listed in caps.

-Alabama—2014 (86); 2013 (77); 2012 (75)

+Arizona—2014 (119); 2013 (120); 2012 (124)

-Arizona State—2014 (142); 2013 (139); 2012 (132)

+ARKANSAS—2014 (128); 2013 (134); 2012 (132)

-Auburn—2014 (91); 2013 (89); 2012 (82)

-Binghamton—2014 (97); 2013 (89); 2012 (90)

+CLEMSON—2014 (62); 2013 (68); 2012 (68)

+COLORADO—2014 (86); 2013 (97); 2012 (94)

+CONNECTICUT–2014 (57); 2013 (63); 2012 (58)

=Delaware—2014 (75); 2013 (75); 2012 (75)

+FLORIDA–2014 (49); 2013 (54); 2012 (58)

+Georgia—2014 (60); 2013 (63); 2012 (62)

=Georgia Tech—2014 (36); 2013 (36); 2012 (36)

+ILLINOIS—2014 (41); 2013 (46); 2012 (42)

+INDIANA—2014 (75); 2013 (83); 2012 (75)

-Iowa—2014 (73); 2013 (72); 2012 (71)

=Iowa State—2014 (101); 2013 (101); 2012 (97)

+KANSAS—2014 (101); 2013 (106); 2012 (101)

-Maryland—2014 (62); 2013 (58); 2012 (55)

+MASSACHUSETTS—2014 (91); 2012 (97); 2012 (94)

+Michigan—2014 (28); 2013 (29); 2012 (28)

-Michigan State—2014 (73); 2013 (72); 2012 (71)

-Minnesota—2014 (69); 2013 (68); 2012 (68)

+Mississippi—2014 (150); 2013 (151); 2012 (143)

=Missouri—2014 (97); 2013 (97); 2012 (90)

=Nebraska—2014 (101); 2013 (101); 2012 (101)

=North Carolina—2014 (30); 2013 (30); 2012 (29)

+NC STATE—2014 (101); 2013 (106); 2012 (101)

+Ohio State—2014 (52); 2013 (56); 2012 (55)

+OREGON—2014 (109); 2013 (115); 2012 (101)

+PENN STATE—2014 (37); 2013 (46); 2012 (45)

-Pitt—2014 (62); 2013 (58); 2012 (58)

-Purdue—2014 (68); 2013 (65); 2012 (62)

-Rutgers—2014 (69); 2013 (68); 2012 (68)

+South Carolina—2014 (112); 2013 (115); 2012 (111)

+STONY BROOK—2014 (82); 2013 (92); 2012 (111)

-Texas A&M—2014 (69); 2013 (65); 2012 (58)

-UC Davis—2014 (39); 2013 (38); 2012 (38)

-UC Irvine—2014 49); 2013 (44); 2012 (45)

+UCLa 2014 (23); 2013 (24); 2012 (25)

-UC San Diego—2014 (39); 2013 (37); 2012 (38)

=UC Santa Barbara-2014 (41); 2013 (41); 2012 (42)

-University at Buffalo—2014 (109); 2013 (106); 2012 (111)

-UT Austin—2014 (52); 2013 (46); 2012 (45)

+VERMONT—2014 (82); 2013 (92); 2012 (82)

+Virginia—2014 23); 2013 (24); 2012 (25)

+Virginia Tech—2014 (69); 2013 (72); 2012 (71)

-Washington–2014 (52); 2013 (46); 2012 (42)

-Washington State—2014 (128); 2013 (125); 2012 (115)

=Wisconsin—2014 (41); 2013 (41); 2012 (42)

 

U.S. Has 24 of Top 50 Engineering and Tech Universities in the World

Posted on by

According to the Times Higher Education World University Rankings, the U.S. is home to 24 of the top 50 engineering and technology universities in the world.

It is also notable that 13 of the 24 U.S. institutions are public universities.  The United States also has the top four schools on the Times list.

“The 2012-2013 Times Higher Education World University Rankings’ Engineering and Technology table judges world class universities across all of their core missions – teaching, research, knowledge transfer and international outlook. The ranking of the world’s top 50 universities for engineering and technology employs 13 carefully calibrated performance indicators to provide the most comprehensive and balanced comparisons available, which are trusted by students, academics, university leaders, industry and governments.”

Here are the U.S. universities on the list, along with their rank:

1. Caltech

2. Princeton

3. MIT

4. UC Berkeley

5. Stanford

7. UCLA

9. Georgia Tech

13. UT Austin

15. Carnegie Mellon

16. Northwestern

17. UC Santa Barbara

18. Cornell

19. Michigan

20. Illinois

21. Columbia

26. Penn

30. Rice

34. Washington

36. UC San Diego

41. Wisconsin

42. Purdue

45. Minnesota

48. UC Davis

49. Duke

 

New Washington Monthly Rankings: A Strong Resource for Families Earning $75,000 or Less

Posted on by

The new Washington Monthly rankings, like those in previous years, measure the “contribution to the social good” of universities–but this year’s rankings also include a “Best Bang for the Buck” list that ranks institutions according to their net cost to families with incomes of $75,000 or less.

The best bang measure also reflects the best deals for a family’s first time, full time college students.  The magazine may have added the measure in anticipation of President Obama’s higher ed policy announcements, which propose rewarding institutions that perform best in graduating lower income students who receive federal loans, without incurring high default rates.

Washington Monthly has for some time taken a dim view of the U.S. News rankings, and in the recent issue alleges that the U.S. News list is based on “crude and and easily manipulated measures of wealth, exclusivity, and prestige.”  In our view, the U.S. News rankings are useful in some ways, but we strongly agree that they over-emphasize the financial resources of the universities they evaluate, with the result that public institutions are generally underrated.

Below are the top 50 national universities that yield the best bang for low- and middle-income families, according to Washington Monthly.  In parentheses, we will also list a university’s overall ranking by the magazine in the national universities category.  The overall ranking considers the percentage of Pell grant recipients; the graduation rate; the graduation rate in relation to the predicted rate given the number of low-income students; and the loan default rate, which must be no more than 10 percent.

A school’s overall ranking also reflects the dollars brought in by research, B.A. to Ph.D. progression; science and engineering Ph.D.s granted; faculty honors; ROTC and Peace Corps participation; community service requirements; and use of federal work-study funds.  Thus a school’s overall ranking could be enhanced by its academic and research achievements, but also by high ratings in the other areas.

Please note that only the top 284 schools out of more than 1,500 reviewed have a published overall ranking; therefore, some of the schools below will not have a ranking in parentheses.

1. Florida (24)

2. Georgia (60)

3. North Carolina (14)

4. North Carolina State (38)

5. Texas A&M (3)

6. San Diego State (192)

7. Arizona State (49)

8. Indiana (127)

9. Washington (13)

10. Florida State (70)

11. East Carolina (171)

12. Central Florida (211)

13. Utah State (44)

14. Vermont (167)

15. UC Riverside

16. UC Berkeley (5)

17. Oklahoma State (142)

18. Minnesota (56)

19. UC Irvine (84)

20. Arizona (66)

21. UCLA (10)

22. UCSD (1)

23. Michigan State (30)

24. Utah (103)

25. UC Davis (23)

26. Purdue (33)

27. UC Santa Barbara (27)

28. Iowa State (96)

29. Michigan Tech (64)

30. Rutgers at Newark (150)

31. UC Santa Cruz (65)

32. UT Austin (18)

33. SUNY Albany (110)

34. Nebraska (113)

35. Binghamton (174)

36. SUNY Buffalo (204)

37. Illinois (19)

38. Nevada Reno (175)

39. Rhode Island (240)

40. South Dakota State (207)

41. Oregon (128)

42. Washington State (145)

43. Oklahoma (165)

44. Missouri Science and Tech (59)

45. Kansas (75)

46. Western Michigan (123)

47. Illinois State (248)

48. La Verne

49. Oregon State (108)

50. Bowling Green (157)

Please see the Washington Monthly site for the full list of big bang for the bucks universities.

 

 

 

Fiske Guide to Colleges 2014 Lists 18 Public Universities as Best Values

Posted on by

The Fiske Guide to Colleges has long been recognized for providing excellent and highly readable profiles of more than 300 colleges and universities, and this year the Guide also recognizes the best value institutions in the nation based on the relationship of cost and academic quality.

Eighteen public universities in the U.S. are on the list, shown below in alphabetical order.  The Guide also allocates stars for academic quality, with five stars (*****) being the highest.

Please note that the Guide may differ from other publications in its assessment of academic quality because it does not rely on reputation only.  Instead, it considers “the overall academic climate of the institution, including its reputation in the academic world, the quality of the faculty, the level of teaching and research, the academic ability of students, the quality of libraries and other facilities, and the level of academic seriousness among students and faculty members.”

In our view, the Guide is able to do this successfully–though with some surprises–because of its extensive college contacts developed over many years.  We believe it is especially important that the publication shows not only “feel good” atmospherics but also gives readers an idea of just how rigorous a given university is likely to be.

–Evergreen State College ***

–Georgia Tech *****

–Florida ****

–Iowa ****

–Iowa State ***

–Mary Washington ***1/2

–Nebraska ***

–New College of Florida ****

–North Carolina at Asheville ****

–North Carolina at Chapel Hill ****

–Oregon ***1/2

–Oregon State ***

–Purdue ***1/2

–SUNY Binghamton ****1/2

–SUNY Geneseo ***1/2

–Texas at Austin ****1/2

–Texas A&M ****

–Wisconsin ****1/2

 

 

 

 

 


We’re Considering a New Edition–Nominate a Regional University!

Posted on by

Our current publication, A Review of Fifty Public University Honors Programs,
is going to be updated, possibly as soon as the latter part of 2014 if all goes according to plan.

That plan is for the second edition to include evaluations of 100 public honors colleges and programs, although we will use a two-tiered approach for the new edition.  One tier will likely include most of the 50 institutions that we reviewed in the 2012 edition. (A few might not be included, while some new ones are likely to be added. The selection process for this tier will be one reason for the minor changes.)

The other tier will cover regional public university honors colleges and programs.  A few of these have already been profiled on this site (please see, for example, Western Kentucky Honors College: Regional Excellence, International Impact and East Tenn State Univ: Exemplary Honors Coordination).

For regional universities to be competitive, the honors curriculum should be strong and comprehensive.   Although the examples above signal their regional nature by their very names, there are certainly other, similar schools that do not have similar “regional” names.

We have several of these institutions in mind already, but we are open to suggestions, preferably from the senior staff of a prospective honors college or program, on a confidential basis.  One important element in our consideration of universities for both tiers will be the extent to which a college or program is inclined to be reasonably cooperative and forthcoming with data that meet our category requirements.

(Please contact editor@publicuniversityhonors.com to make inquiries or to suggest an honors college or program for inclusion.)

In particular, we need accurate data for six-year graduation rates, freshman honors entrants only (not honors completers), and data showing the percentage of honors students who study abroad for at least one full summer term or longer.

Although we will look very closely at curricula and honors housing ourselves, these are two categories that can be clarified through dialogue.  As we did for the 2012 edition, all universities will receive advance copies of both their narrative profiles and statistical data prior to publication.  This was a very effective means of obtaining the best information in 2012, at least from the programs that participated in the dialogue.

One critical improvement over 2012 is that there will be a firm, detailed, and uniform questionnaire sent to selected programs–none of that “evolving” stuff that characterized our first, tentative effort.  We are open to suggestions for ways of making the questionnaire as effective as possible.

We hope to hear from you soon!

John Willingham, Editor


 



Business Insider’s Fifty Best Colleges According to Readers

Posted on by

For the fifth year, Business Insider has published its own rankings, called “The 50 Best Colleges in America .”

The rankings are based on the responses of 1,500 Business Insider readers, most of them from the finance and tech sectors.

“Almost 30 percent of the respondents work in finance, 22 percent work in technology, 9.9 percent work in education, 9.9 are current students, 9.2 percent work in media and marketing, and 8 percent work in law,” according to the publication.

Also interesting is that BI combines national universities and liberal arts colleges in the same list, just as Forbes does.

Please to to the BI link to see comments from the respondents.  In the meantime, here is the list of the top 50:

1. MIT

2. Stanford

3. Harvard

4. Princeton

5. Yale

6. Caltech

7. Columbia

8. Penn

9. Dartmouth

10. Cornell

11. Chicago

12. West Point

13. Annapolis

14. Johns Hopkins

15. Duke

16. UC Berkeley

17. Northwestern

18. Carnegie Mellon

19. Georgetown

20. Brown

21. Michigan

22. Virginia

23. Williams

24. NYU

25. UCLA

26. Notre Dame

27. Amherst

28. Georgia Tech

29. North Carolina

30. Harvey Mudd

31. Vanderbilt

32. UT Austin

33. Emory

34. Washington U

35. Rice

36. Boston College

37. Tufts

38. Swarthmore

39. RPI

40. Middlebury

41. USC

42. Wisconsin

43. William & Mary

44. Wellesley

45. Boston University

46. Washington

47. Bowdoin

48. Claremont McKenna

49. Wesleyan

50. Penn State

RIT President on Deficiencies of College Rankings

Posted on by

Bill Destler, president of Rochester Institute of Technology, recently posted on the Huff Post College Page that college rankings are universally deficient because of their focus on “inputs” such as SAT scores and high school gpa’s.  He might well have added financial resources to the list.

Although we have published a de facto ranking of public university honors programs that isn’t based on any of these criteria, we agree that all rankings, including our own, have deficiencies. 

We also agree with Destler that the annual Forbes rankings are the most deficient of all because, even though they claim to rely on output measures, they also focus on “data” from Rate My Professor and Payscale.Com.  The first is subjective, and the second reduces the value of a college education to dollars and cents. 

The Forbes rankings also have a strong bias against public universities, part of which comes from a desire on the part of the people behind the rankings to “reform” public universities so that they become places for cheap, assembly-line education rather than research institutions with outstanding academic programs.

Destler also points out that rankings based on return on investment will only affirm what most people already know:  universities with large numbers of STEM grads, especially in engineering, will necessarily fare better in the rankings because engineering as a field often provides excellent starting salaries for new graduates.

Destler is also correct in claiming that all rankings distort the value of universities to the extent that their rankings methodology apply uniform input measures to essentially dissimilar institutions.  Grad rates for a private university that accepts only 6 percent of its applicants will clearly be higher than a college with a 65 percent acceptance rate based on the extremely selectivity of the former.

In the case of our rankings, we would say that the overreach is somewhat less severe, since all the honors programs we follow have much lower acceptance rates than most colleges and because our dominant category is honors curriculum, which can be extensive and demanding regardless of admissions requirements.

In addition, we have two basic rankings, Overall Excellence and Honors Factors Only.  The former does generally favor honors programs in universities that have more uniform excellence across the student body because there is a metric for achieving Rhodes, Marshall, Truman, and Goldwater awards by all students, and not just those won by honors students.

But Honors Factors excludes the metric for prestigious award and is based strictly on honors-specific elements such as curriculum, grad rates, honors housing, and study-abroad programs.

In the end, our rankings are only suggestive, not definitive.  The same is true for all rankings.  They are best used to suggest possible routes on the journey rather than pinpointing the final destination.


 


Payscale.Com: Top Public Universities for Return on Investment

Posted on by

Although we have written frequently about the inherent value of a college education and the downside of looking at a degree only in terms of the financial rewards to recipients, there is no question that many, if not most, parents and students are extremely concerned about salary prospects after graduation.

The recent Payscale.Com 2012 ROI Rankings are useful in this regard, especially if prospective students are pursuing careers in science, technology, engineering, or business.  There are some caveats about the data: (1) they only include bachelors degree holders and do not include the salaries of alumni who have gone on to graduate or professional school–a significant fact; and (2) they generally favor universities located in the Northeast, the Washington, DC area, or the West Coast, where overall pay is often much higher than it is in other regions.

Partly for these reasons, all but two of the top 13 universities in the Payscale ROI are located in the Northeast or the West Coast.  All of these are private institutions, many with strong financial aid to students, a fact that helps to offset high tuition in determining the ROI.

The ROI itself is the amount of career earnings over and above the median earnings of high school graduates.  For more information on how Payscale derives net cost and ROI, please see the Payscale methodology.

Based on the methodology, below are the public universities that Payscale ranks in the top 100 (in-state tuition only for purposes of ROI).  From the list it is clear that the methodology strongly favors universities with high STEM or business enrollments, that offer specialized programs, such as maritime instruction:

Colorado School of Mines–14

Georgia Tech–17

UC Berkeley–21

UC San Diego–40

SUNY Maritime Academy–43

Virginia–49

Illinois–50

Texas A&M–58

Virginia Tech–60

William & Mary–61

Cal Poly San Luis Obispo–62

Massachusetts Maritime Academy–63

UCLA–67

Maryland–70

Michigan–71

Missouri Inst. of Science and Technology–73

UC Irvine–80

Washington–86

Stony Brook–88

UT Austin–90

UC Santa Barbara–96

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Business Week: Best Public B-Schools Are Virginia, Michigan, UT Austin, North Carolina

Posted on by

The annual Bloomberg Business Week Best Undergraduate Business Schools report is out, and the business schools at the universities of Virginia, Michigan, Texas, and North Carolina are all in the top ten, based on student satisfaction, employer opinion, placement rates, and salary.

Bloomberg/Business Week survey 145 schools and 519 leading employers, along with 85,000 graduating seniors.  The response rates exceeded 32 percent in all categories.

The metrics also included the percentage of graduates pursuing MBA degrees, SAT scores, and class size.

The public university business schools ranked in the top 50 are listed below, with their national ranking among all schools public and private preceding the name of the university:

2–Virginia

8–Michigan

9–UT Austin

10–North Carolina

11–UC Berkeley

13–Indiana

21–Illinois

22–Miami of Ohio

26–Penn State

27–William & Mary

29–James Madison

32–Wisconsin

33–Texas A&M

34–Ohio State

37–Florida

39–Minnesota

41–Georgia Tech

43–Michigan State

44–Georgia

45–Massachusetts Amherst

48–Washington

50–Arizona