Archived Topic

University Rankings, for Expansion discussion purposes

by Mars · 2/13/2010

Advertisement
M
Mars


So we don't have to go by our memories...





PAC-10:

4. Stanford

21. Cal

24. UCLA

26. USC

42. Washington

102. Arizona

106. Washington State

115. Oregon

121. Arizona State

Oregon State - Not Tier 1




Big XII:

47. Texas

61. Texas A&M

77. Colorado


80. Baylor

88. Iowa State

96. Kansas

96. Nebraska

102. Missouri

102. Oklahoma

Kansas State - Not Tier 1

Oklahoma State - Not Tier 1

Texas Tech - Not Tier 1




Big Ten:

12. Northwestern

27. Michigan

39. Illinois

29. Wisconsin

47. Penn State

53. Ohio State

61. Purdue

61. Minnesota

71. Indiana

71. Michigan State

71. Iowa




Others:

17. Rice

20. Notre Dame

42. UC-Davis

50. Tulane

56. Pitt

58. Syracuse

66. Rutgers


68. SMU

71. BYU

88. Tulsa

110. TCU

126. Utah

128. Colorado State




http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-colleges/national-universities-rankings/page+3





If BYU and Utah were added to the PAC-10, BYU would have the 6th best academics in the conference (ahead of Arizona, Washington State, Oregon, Arizona State, and Oregon State). Utah would be 2nd to last.



BYU is also ranked ahead of 10 of 12 Big XII conference members (all but Texas and Texas A&M).
S
Samurai Jack
These are undergraduate rankings from US News and World Report.



Not entirely useless, but not really what is at the heart of the matter.



Graduate studies and more importantly research profile are far more important to the PAC 10 entities, particularly Stanford and Cal-Berkeley. BYU will not fare as well there.



The PAC 10 has a clause that states that the vote on expansion must be UNANIMOUS. Cal, and likely Stanford, will NEVER EVER EVER EVER vote in BYU. More so on the basis of left-leaning politics and "progressive" social issues.



BYU to the PAC 10 is a dead discussion.
M
Mars
Samurai Jack wrote:
These are undergraduate rankings from US News and World Report. Not entirely useless, but not really what is at the heart of the matter. Graduate studies and more importantly research profile are far more important to the PAC 10 entities, particularly Stanford and Cal-Berkeley. BYU will not fare as well there.

So how many Stanford and Cal football players do you think go on to get Master's degrees? 1%?

We're talking about ATHLETIC conferences here...
S
Samurai Jack
Mars wrote:
These are undergraduate rankings from US News and World Report. Not entirely useless, but not really what is at the heart of the matter. Graduate studies and more importantly research profile are far more important to the PAC 10 entities, particularly Stanford and Cal-Berkeley. BYU will not fare as well there.

So how many Stanford and Cal football players do you think go on to get Master's degrees? 1%?

We're talking about ATHLETIC conferences here...


The athletic departments and/or athletic directors at the universities don't make the decision. In fact, it comes down to a vote by the university presidents (which needs to be unanimous, by the way). The PAC-10 presidents consider far more than athletics when it comes to inclusion in their conference. It is well-documented.



Football players and gradute degrees is completely irrelevant. The PAC-10 is incredibly snobbish when it comes to 1) academia and 2) cultural "progressivism". In their minds, BYU has neither.



If it was up to the athletic directors, BYU would be the leading candidate. (Once Texas and any other Big 12 team denies them)
B
BYUROCKS
Samurai Jack wrote:
Samurai Jack wrote:
These are undergraduate rankings from US News and World Report. Not entirely useless, but not really what is at the heart of the matter. Graduate studies and more importantly research profile are far more important to the PAC 10 entities, particularly Stanford and Cal-Berkeley. BYU will not fare as well there.

So how many Stanford and Cal football players do you think go on to get Master's degrees? 1%?

We're talking about ATHLETIC conferences here...


The athletic departments and/or athletic directors at the universities don't make the decision. In fact, it comes down to a vote by the university presidents (which needs to be unanimous, by the way). The PAC-10 presidents consider far more than athletics when it comes to inclusion in their conference. It is well-documented.



Football players and gradute degrees is completely irrelevant. The PAC-10 is incredibly snobbish when it comes to 1) academia and 2) cultural "progressivism". In their minds, BYU has neither.



If it was up to the athletic directors, BYU would be the leading candidate. (Once Texas and any other Big 12 team denies them)




Meh, when all the Cal schools have to shut down, because the state goes bankrupt, we will have the last laugh.
Advertisement
M
Mingjai
Mars wrote:


http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-colleges/national-universities-rankings/page+3





If BYU and Utah were added to the PAC-10, BYU would have the 6th best academics in the conference (ahead of Arizona, Washington State, Oregon, Arizona State, and Oregon State). Utah would be 2nd to last.



BYU is also ranked ahead of 10 of 12 Big XII conference members (all but Texas and Texas A&M).


It's also interesting to note that the US News ranks Boise State as a regional masters school because they don't give out enough PhDs to get ranked as a National university. Both Idaho and Idaho State are ranked as National universities (albeit tiers 3 and 4 respectively, which is better than nothing).



I think the Pac 10 tries to build themselves up as a academic conference out of Big Ten envy. After all, the Academic Big Ten (or CIC) still has Chicago as a member. Plus every Big Ten member is an AAU member as well. When the Big Ten expands, it will add another AAU member unless it's Notre Dame. That's why among other reasons that the candidates for Big Ten expansion are Texas, Missouri, Nebraska, Iowa State, Pitt, Syracuse, and Rutgers. All are AAU schools.



Pac 10 AAU member are Arizona, Cal, Oregon, Stanford, UCLA, USC, Washington. The "State" schools are not AAU members. Academically, the Pac 10 is decent, but nothing like the Big Ten. BYU would fit right in.



Big XII AAU members are Colorado, Iowa State, Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska, Texas, Texas A&M.
B
BOID
BYUROCKS wrote:
Mars wrote:
These are undergraduate rankings from US News and World Report. Not entirely useless, but not really what is at the heart of the matter. Graduate studies and more importantly research profile are far more important to the PAC 10 entities, particularly Stanford and Cal-Berkeley. BYU will not fare as well there.

So how many Stanford and Cal football players do you think go on to get Master's degrees? 1%?

We're talking about ATHLETIC conferences here...


The athletic departments and/or athletic directors at the universities don't make the decision. In fact, it comes down to a vote by the university presidents (which needs to be unanimous, by the way). The PAC-10 presidents consider far more than athletics when it comes to inclusion in their conference. It is well-documented.



Football players and gradute degrees is completely irrelevant. The PAC-10 is incredibly snobbish when it comes to 1) academia and 2) cultural "progressivism". In their minds, BYU has neither.



If it was up to the athletic directors, BYU would be the leading candidate. (Once Texas and any other Big 12 team denies them)




Meh, when all the Cal schools have to shut down, because the state goes bankrupt, we will have the last laugh.


I'm afraid that this all seems true to me (the exclusion for religious/political reasons). Sure, no official statements, no official announcements as yet, but these rumors and rumblings of wanting Utah but not BYU, have been coming out of the PAC 10 for years now. The graduate school criteria should have no bearing on requirements for an athletic conference. Also, if the research instution club were for real, then half of the PAC 10 would be under-qualified compared to BYU. I agree with Samarai Jack that its athletic directors would not be discriminatory in this way. But I cannot imagine Cal's or Stanford's academic leaderships being able to forgive the LDS belief in right and wrong (moral absolutism vs their moral relativism) or the LDS support of Proposition 8. Too bad that the PAC 10 feels it must use such a lame excuse as cover for its liberal facism.



Oh well, the annoying bit of all this is that I have to put up with gloating from Ute fans acquainted with me. They want to interpret these media rumors about Utah getting PAC 10 love as evidence that the Utes are a better football/basketball program than BYU is. All of us here know that such is not the case, but it is irksome, none the less.



By the way, isn't the Big 12 the better football conference regardless (supposing the "dominoes" fall the predicted way) of PAC 10 assertions?
G
GolfDiveNCougs
There's one connection most people aren't making regarding a university's status as a "research" institution. Just like the label "Christian," which, according to most Christians, doesn't apply to members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, a "Research Institution" isn't named such for the actual quantity and quality of research done, but for who does it, how it's used, what it's for and how it's financed. It's just not being done OUR WAY (sound similar to the "christian" arguments???).

It's no secret that BYU's emphasis is on Undergraduate education. Yes, we have many and great graduate, doctural and JD programs, but that's not the reason BYU's there (as an aside, I still say one of the biggest reasons is getting a lot of worthy little Mormon boys in the same place as a lot of worthy little Mormon girls, and I don't have a problem in the world with that. Maybe it's the biggest reason, maybe not, but if it's up there, it also helps explain why undergrad is more important than grad work. If you're not going to get married in the 4 (5.5? :whistle: ) years it takes you to get your Bachelors, you're less likely to it in the 2 years it takes for your Masters either).

Regardless the reasons though, BYU has poured the lion's share of its resources into getting students an undergraduate degree, when they know that's not where a University's prestige.

I don't have the particulars on all the data that goes into ranking a school on the Research scale, but I do know that it's much more involved than just the number of graduate or doctoral programs offered, or the percentage of the students getting those degrees. A heavy hitter is the amount of Grant mony is awarded the school, and most of that money comes directly from the Federal Government. BYU also makes no secret of the fact that they're very selective about what money they take from the Gov't, because of those pesky little strings that manage to attach themselves to the money. BYU simply doesn't get its research funding from places that are counted by said rankings.

Thoroughly UNDER-represented in the calculations is, oh, the ACTUAL research being done. BYU, contrary to most peoples' assumptions, is a HUGE and well-respected research institution, with tens of millions that go towards it every year. For a school without a Med Program and Hospital (calculatedly so, by the way, for those who are annoyed at the Church for that, much less liability and overhead. Whaddaya need for a business and law program? Two buildings and two staffs, and books. Whaddaya need for a Med School? A bleeding (forgive the pun) lot of technology, instruments, insurance out the wazoo, oh, and an entire HOSPITAL. Not gonna happen. Doesn't need to), that's quite a lot. So if BYU is doing a lot of research, but it's not all being done by Grad- and Doctoral Students, who's doing it???

People just assume that any undergraduate education is a cookie cutter match of any other, or at least treat them that way, and that an undergrad from BYU is the exact same as an undergrad at any other school known for its "research." In my experience, there is a HUGE difference. For example, people may or may not know much about the donations Ira and MaryLou Fulton have given the Engineering Schools and what the money went to. We're talking about literally HUNDREDS of millions of dollars here, and it has gone towards cutting edge software and machinery and technologies, the likes of which are found at few other Universities. The MAJOR difference between us and them is that at other schools those technologies are being accessed by Doctors and Doctoral Students exclusively, and at BYU, undergrads like me had access to them. I didn't really realize at the time why all my professors were raving about it, but literally ALL of them were telling my classes that NOBODY had access to the types of technologies we had access to unless they had a certain 3 letters following their name. It was simply without precident. We worked directly with our professors on their research. Now, this isn't to say that my education was necessarily BETTER than anyone else's, but I have found in the last few years in the industry that friends with undergrads from other schools universally had professors who treated their students like it was beneath them to be there and that they had better things to be doing, and had minimal technology available to them.

Interesting to me that BYU doesn't focus on the exclusivity of the system, but more than holds its own in terms of results. More and more, the Pac-10's Academics complaint is looking like another invalid excuse, and even though it could be considered a disadvantage for sports, I'm kind of proud that we don't make our University's emphasis worshiping in Nibley's "robes of a false priesthood" like others do. ;)
M
Mars


(Going along with what was already said above)



~BYU does about $30MM worth of research a year. The national cut-off for many research rankings is $40MM. The quality of the research done is very, very high though.



~BYU doesn't take much Federal money at all, whereas most schools get the vast majority of their research dollars from the government.



~BYU doesn't have a hospital, which is a major source of research and spending for many schools. Which is cost-effective, but also too bad in my opinion.



~Research is so important to some schools, like USC, that they actually have MORE graduate students than undergrad. This will never be BYU's model.
C
CougarClaw
One of Yale's problems over the past few years was that they weren't doin ga very good job keeping track of all their grant convenants. When the government audited them, they got in a lot of trouble but besides the lack of morality at that campus, a big part of the problem was simply keeping track of everything the money came attached to and what it could be used for and what it couldn't.



It's hard to pay a professor and his staff from 50 sources of revenue, each of which require a detailed description of what you were doing.



Another reason BYU doesn't take government money? So we can hire whomever we want, fire whomever we want, and teach whatever we want.



Kind of reminds me of another reason that BYU's rankings drop, 75%+ of all freshman don't come back for their sophomore year. (at least for 2 years...)
Advertisement
J
jonnylingo
My economics professor at BYU was of the opinion that BYU should scrap the post graduate stuff and focus purely on being an elite undergrad school. They our system is set up we will never compete as a research university but we definitely have what it take to become an elite undergrad institution. Many would argue we already are. He thinks BYU's resources should be more focused on its strengths.
U
urroner
jonnylingo wrote:
He thinks BYU's resources should be more focused on its strengths.


Ether 12:27: ...I give unto men weakness that they may be humble...for if they humble themselves before me...then will I make weak things become strong unto them.



I read your post jonny and being a horse's butt, I just had to post this scripture.
M
Mars


Riddle me this Batman-



How come the LDS Church can afford to sponsor a hospital, insurance and all, in Salt Lake City ("LDS Hospital"), but they cannot afford to sponsor a hospital and a Medical program in Provo...?
M
Mingjai
jonnylingo wrote:
My economics professor at BYU was of the opinion that BYU should scrap the post graduate stuff and focus purely on being an elite undergrad school. They our system is set up we will never compete as a research university but we definitely have what it take to become an elite undergrad institution. Many would argue we already are. He thinks BYU's resources should be more focused on its strengths.


Which prof was that? Just curious.
W
Wickchad
Mars wrote:


Riddle me this Batman-



How come the LDS Church can afford to sponsor a hospital, insurance and all, in Salt Lake City ("LDS Hospital"), but they cannot afford to sponsor a hospital and a Medical program in Provo...?


I believe the church sold that hospital to IHC. It just still carries the name.
Advertisement
D
Dcr36
jonnylingo wrote:
My economics professor at BYU was of the opinion that BYU should scrap the post graduate stuff and focus purely on being an elite undergrad school. They our system is set up we will never compete as a research university but we definitely have what it take to become an elite undergrad institution. Many would argue we already are. He thinks BYU's resources should be more focused on its strengths.


I've heard this from time to time too. Somebody told me that one of the major legal types in church leadership (Dallin H. Oaks, maybe, but I can't remember) was really opposed to the creation of the J. Reuben Clark school on the same grounds.



And I see their point, but I do like seeing BYU's business and law grad programs kick some solid butt year in and year out.
Y
Y 4 Ever
I think BYU should drop academics all together and just focus on FOOTBALL :evil:
J
jonnylingo
Mingjai wrote:
My economics professor at BYU was of the opinion that BYU should scrap the post graduate stuff and focus purely on being an elite undergrad school. They our system is set up we will never compete as a research university but we definitely have what it take to become an elite undergrad institution. Many would argue we already are. He thinks BYU's resources should be more focused on its strengths.


Which prof was that? Just curious.


Showalter
J
jonnylingo
Wickchad84087 wrote:


Riddle me this Batman-



How come the LDS Church can afford to sponsor a hospital, insurance and all, in Salt Lake City ("LDS Hospital"), but they cannot afford to sponsor a hospital and a Medical program in Provo...?


I believe the church sold that hospital to IHC. It just still carries the name.


also beneficial life pretty much went belly up. they fired most of their employees and are pretty much quitting the insurance bus.
This is an archived topic from the original CougarCorner forum. New replies are not accepted.