Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

East Coast Aztec

OT: USNWR 2017

Recommended Posts

29 minutes ago, #1Stunner said:

Well said.  Just about any state University will offer a very good education.  

I think the biggest difference between a UC/Washington/Texas/Big Ten type of public is three-fold.  First, you're going to be surrounded by better students, and I think that matters.  Being in a classroom where half the class comes in with 30+ ACTs is going to mean better competition and classes being taught at a higher level.  Second, those schools have a higher level of faculty doing a higher level of research.  For someone really motivated, that opens up a lot of opportunities for undergrad research opportunities and so on.  Third, the name cache will be a boost with employers and grad schools.  There are companies and elite government agencies (NASA, State Department, NSA) that recruit at those schools that don't bother with MWC level publics.

All that being said, five years out, what's really going to matter is how well one does their job and how well they're respected by bosses and colleagues.  

SteelCityBlue

November 24th, 2018 at 9:10 PM ^

I'm looking forward to a new head coach who isn't a cud-chewing autistic retard.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cal Poly, Santa Clara and SJSU are all Regional schools so this means they are less than a national category school like Fresno State?  Yep, I don't think so either.  

No brainer, Cal Poly any day over all national category in the MWC members.

But facts or reality based are not something this site is exactly known for.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, davemathew said:

Cal Poly, Santa Clara and SJSU are all Regional schools so this means they are less than a national category school like Fresno State?  Yep, I don't think so either.  

No brainer, Cal Poly any day over all national category in the MWC members.

But facts or reality based are not something this site is exactly known for.

Pretty sure we have all acknowledged that Cal Poly is a great school.  :shrug:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, East Coast Aztec said:

Pretty sure we have all acknowledged that Cal Poly is a great school.  :shrug:

Let's spell it out: Regional schools (Cal Poly, Santa Clara and SJSU) do not mean they are lesser than national schools.  

So yes, we all do indeed acknowledge Cal Poly, a regional school, is a no brainer over a national school like Fresno State (and a barely one at that).  Surely, if Cal Poly, Santa Clara or SJSU were to recategorize to the national lot, they would all be ranked higher than Fresno (based on admission rate, graduate payscale, etc.)

SJSU Engineering ranked 3rd in the nation (link below).

http://www.bizjournals.com/sanjose/news/2016/09/13/sjsu-engineering-program-shines-in-u-s-news.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, davemathew said:

Let's spell it out: Regional schools (Cal Poly, Santa Clara and SJSU) do not mean they are lesser than national schools.  

So yes, we all do indeed acknowledge Cal Poly, a regional school, is a no brainer over a national school like Fresno State.

Are we arguing or agreeing here?  Yes, Cal Poly is the best academic Cal State.  No one is saying otherwise in this thread.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, East Coast Aztec said:

Are we arguing or agreeing here?  Yes, Cal Poly is the best academic Cal State.  No one is saying otherwise in this thread.

 

 

And whatever category one wants to put Santa Clara in, it's still an overrated safety school for rich kids who got Shaq'd by the other 8 schools to which they applied.

SteelCityBlue

November 24th, 2018 at 9:10 PM ^

I'm looking forward to a new head coach who isn't a cud-chewing autistic retard.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, East Coast Aztec said:

Admitted Student Profile Fall 2016

Freshmen
Average high school GPA: 3.85
Average SAT score: 1174
Average ACT score: 27

 

https://arweb.sdsu.edu/es/admissions/facts.html

Thanks man. IIRC my SAT was 1120. With a score like that and a 3.15 like I had kids probably can't get in today.

Boom goes the dynamite.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Victor Maitlin said:

And whatever category one wants to put Santa Clara in, it's still an overrated safety school for rich kids who got Shaq'd by the other 8 schools to which they applied.

It seems he really doesn't like Fresno State

 

1 minute ago, SleepingGiantsFan said:

Thanks man. IIRC my SAT was 1120. With a score like that and a 3.15 like I had kids probably can't get in today.

Victor has the actually enrolled student data, which dropped the averages down a bit.  I feel like the folks I went to school with were pretty good.  Not much different than the undergrads I TA'd at UNC. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, NMpackalum said:

When I went to school you had to qualify to get into an AP class. Now, half the class it seems take AP classes.. My daughter just graduated with a 4.5 and had a couple of Bs. I can't figure that one out. Unfortunately the competitive colleges look at the difficulty of your course load and forces everyone to take those classes with the subsequent grade inflation. It's like an arms race.

I've heard the above 4.0 thing and it's another example of grade creep. Like they add on points for extracurricular stuff in order to separate out the cream of the crop. Back in the day virtually nobody got a 4.0 through HS so they didn't need to do that nonsense.

Boom goes the dynamite.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, East Coast Aztec said:

Are we arguing or agreeing here?  Yes, Cal Poly is the best academic Cal State.  No one is saying otherwise in this thread.

 

 

Just pointing out  the category (regional vs. national) on how schools are ranked.  Regional level Schools like Cal Poly, Santa Clara and SJSU are still top schools in comparison to many National level category schools in the Mountain West.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just for comparison's sake, here are percent scoring 30+ on the ACT for several highly selective publics.  I'm not going to do all the SAT and class rank numbers too, but if anyone wants to look stuff up, this is a good site.  It pulls straight from the universities' common data sets.  http://www.collegedata.com/cs/data/college/college_pg02_tmpl.jhtml?schoolId=85

Percent of freshman class scoring 30+ on ACT

Berkeley 72%

UCLA 57%

UC-San Diego 38%

UC-Santa Barbara 34%

UC-Davis 33%

Washington 38%

Michigan 71%

Ohio State 44%

Wisconsin 42%

Illinois 44%

Purdue 36%

Minnesota 36%

Indiana 30% (the Big Ten short bus?)

Texas 51%

Virginia 64%

North Carolina 52%

Georgia Tech 81% (shocked that it's higher than UCB, Michigan and Virginia)

Pitt 41%

For comparison's sake, Cal Poly-SLO is 36%, so they are absolutely competitive with all but the top quarter here.

SteelCityBlue

November 24th, 2018 at 9:10 PM ^

I'm looking forward to a new head coach who isn't a cud-chewing autistic retard.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Victor Maitlin said:

That would be my guess with both schools.  Both are relatively selective, which is what propels their rankings because neither is terribly rich (even by top public standards much less private endowments).  Neither has a faculty full of internationally regarded scholars and National Academy members or is doing top level research.  Attracting a good undergraduate student body seems to be their core strength.  That's a formula Notre Dame has perfected, although they also have a massive endowment.

Yeah, this is my big beef with the USNWR rankings generally. They mostly measure selectivity, which favors smaller private schools and penalizes bigger public schools with larger freshman class sizes. To cite one of the most egregious examples, Berkeley barely makes the top 25 even though it's a top-5 university by any reasonable metric. If Berkeley were to reduce its incoming class size to be less than 2000 like Harvard and Stanford, Berkeley would easily be ranked as high as Harvard or Stanford. But since Berkeley admits more students (including many lower-income/first generation students with lower test scores), it is severely penalized in the rankings. Penalizing a school for giving more students an opportunity to attend college seems really problematic to me. What matters is the quality of the education you receive and your employment/career options at graduation, not the SAT scores of your classmates, but USNWR places much more weight on the latter than the former. Personally I think it would be crazy to attend a place like Emory rather than a place like Berkeley/Michigan/UVa/UNC (particularly if you are eligible for in-state tuition), but USNWR gives Emory a higher ranking just because it's smaller and more selective.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, StanfordAggie said:

Yeah, this is my big beef with the USNWR rankings generally. They mostly measure selectivity, which favors smaller private schools and penalizes bigger public schools with larger freshman class sizes. To cite one of the most egregious examples, Berkeley barely makes the top 25 even though it's a top-5 university by any reasonable metric. If Berkeley were to reduce its incoming class size to be less than 2000 like Harvard and Stanford, Berkeley would easily be ranked as high as Harvard or Stanford. But since Berkeley admits more students (including many lower-income/first generation students with lower test scores), it is severely penalized in the rankings. Penalizing a school for giving more students an opportunity to attend college seems really problematic to me. What matters is the quality of the education you receive and your employment/career options at graduation, not the SAT scores of your classmates, but USNWR places much more weight on the latter than the former. Personally I think it would be crazy to attend a place like Emory rather than a place like Berkeley/Michigan/UVa/UNC (particularly if you are eligible for in-state tuition), but USNWR gives Emory a higher ranking just because it's smaller and more selective.

You're 100% spot on.  There is a huge skew towards private schools.  In my mind, publics like UCB/Michigan/UVA/UNC are much better universities than Emory or Notre Dame (in my mind, the most overrated university in America), and that's at the undergrad level.  As doctoral/research universities, there's literally no comparison.

SteelCityBlue

November 24th, 2018 at 9:10 PM ^

I'm looking forward to a new head coach who isn't a cud-chewing autistic retard.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, SleepingGiantsFan said:

You're missing how less expensively SDSU could provide PhDs now offered only at UCSD. Granted, SDSU will probably never be able to fund the type of laboratory equipment you mention. I'll also grant you that at one time the library capability of SDSU paled in comparison to UCSD. However, not only does SDSU now have a huge library in terms of volume of books, with advent of the Internet that's now almost irrelevant. In most fields a PhD requires another four years of FT work beyond a bacculaureate degree. So if a consideration in whether SDSU should be able to offer independent PhDs is cost to the student to obtain one there versus at UCSD, considering that tuition at UCs is more than double what it is at CSUs, SDSU should be able to offer its own PhDs in the liberal arts, for example.

My objection with that idea is that, if anything, the state of California (and universities nationwide) should be shutting down liberal arts/humanities PhD programs, not creating new ones. Universities produce far more humanities PhD than the job market can afford. In many fields, the number of new PhD graduates exceeds the number of job openings by a factor of 3 or 4. Most PhD's in the humanities will end up basically wasting 4-6 years of their lives as they ultimately compete with fresh college grads for entry-level jobs (and be at a disadvantage compared to fresh grads since they are older and clearly overqualified for most positions). And the job placement of a PhD program depends heavily on the reputation of its faculty. So if a school like SDSU created a humanities PhD program, either they would have to try to poach well-known faculty from other schools (which is likely to be very expensive, especially since they would be moving to a high COL area), or they would probably be a low-ranked program where virtually none of their graduates get jobs. The bottom line is that adding humanities PhD programs to SDSU would probably accomplish nothing other than allowing a few faculty to pad their resumes and justify their salaries and lower teaching loads while ruining the lives of most of the students in the program. Also, any decent PhD program provides full funding for students, the tuition costs are largely irrelevant. Getting a PhD in the humanities is a bad decision in almost all circumstances even if the degree is fully funded. Getting a PhD in the humanities that isn't funded would almost certainly result in massive debt and terrible job prospects, and I wouldn't recommend that to anyone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, StanfordAggie said:

Yeah, this is my big beef with the USNWR rankings generally. They mostly measure selectivity, which favors smaller private schools and penalizes bigger public schools with larger freshman class sizes. To cite one of the most egregious examples, Berkeley barely makes the top 25 even though it's a top-5 university by any reasonable metric. If Berkeley were to reduce its incoming class size to be less than 2000 like Harvard and Stanford, Berkeley would easily be ranked as high as Harvard or Stanford. But since Berkeley admits more students (including many lower-income/first generation students with lower test scores), it is severely penalized in the rankings. Penalizing a school for giving more students an opportunity to attend college seems really problematic to me. What matters is the quality of the education you receive and your employment/career options at graduation, not the SAT scores of your classmates, but USNWR places much more weight on the latter than the former. Personally I think it would be crazy to attend a place like Emory rather than a place like Berkeley/Michigan/UVa/UNC (particularly if you are eligible for in-state tuition), but USNWR gives Emory a higher ranking just because it's smaller and more selective.

This exactly, and this even applies for MW vs WCC admissions. Someone posted USD's impressive admission averages earlier in the thread, but the fact is that their enrollment is only 8,200. I'm sure that the top 25% admitted for most MW schools could get averages like that, but the missions are simply different for large public schools vs small privates. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, davemathew said:

Let's spell it out: Regional schools (Cal Poly, Santa Clara and SJSU) do not mean they are lesser than national schools.  

So yes, we all do indeed acknowledge Cal Poly, a regional school, is a no brainer over a national school like Fresno State (and a barely one at that).  Surely, if Cal Poly, Santa Clara or SJSU were to recategorize to the national lot, they would all be ranked higher than Fresno (based on admission rate, graduate payscale, etc.)

SJSU Engineering ranked 3rd in the nation (link below).

http://www.bizjournals.com/sanjose/news/2016/09/13/sjsu-engineering-program-shines-in-u-s-news.html

Lol. You talk about a lack of facts then make a giant homer assumption that SJSU would be ranked higher than Fresno if reclassified. 100% false. 

Fresno was tied in the regional category with SJSU 2 years ago before making the jump to national university. Fresno State has made huge academic strides in the last decade while SJSU has remained, well, stagnant. It's just what SJSU does. Academically and athletically. Stagnant as you watch every institution pass you and lap you. 

Fresno_State_Jim_Sweeny_Field_(_Bulldog_Stadium).jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, StanfordAggie said:

My objection with that idea is that, if anything, the state of California (and universities nationwide) should be shutting down liberal arts/humanities PhD programs, not creating new ones. Universities produce far more humanities PhD than the job market can afford. In many fields, the number of new PhD graduates exceeds the number of job openings by a factor of 3 or 4. Most PhD's in the humanities will end up basically wasting 4-6 years of their lives as they ultimately compete with fresh college grads for entry-level jobs (and be at a disadvantage compared to fresh grads since they are older and clearly overqualified for most positions). And the job placement of a PhD program depends heavily on the reputation of its faculty. So if a school like SDSU created a humanities PhD program, either they would have to try to poach well-known faculty from other schools (which is likely to be very expensive, especially since they would be moving to a high COL area), or they would probably be a low-ranked program where virtually none of their graduates get jobs. The bottom line is that adding humanities PhD programs to SDSU would probably accomplish nothing other than allowing a few faculty to pad their resumes and justify their salaries and lower teaching loads while ruining the lives of most of the students in the program. Also, any decent PhD program provides full funding for students, the tuition costs are largely irrelevant. Getting a PhD in the humanities is a bad decision in almost all circumstances even if the degree is fully funded. Getting a PhD in the humanities that isn't funded would almost certainly result in massive debt and terrible job prospects, and I wouldn't recommend that to anyone.

SA, I don't even know what USNWR is or how it has any affect on an incoming freshman's decision to attend a particular school. It really seems like just another stupid data mined stat for "bragging rights". My oldest was accepted everywhere he applied, including UCLA and UC Davis, this metric had absolutely nothing to do with where he applied or his decision.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, FalesGoesB4Carr said:

Fresno was tied in the regional category with SJSU 2 years ago before making the jump to national university. 

SJSU Engineering rank #3 according to U.S News & World Report (link below).  I don't think Fresno or any MWC would be anywhere close if in the same category.  

SJSU is an engineering school and they build on that reputation (again, see below article).  

The quote from the publishing also say the same: "more alumni from SJSU work at top Silicon Valley companies than any other school."  Apple for example employs more SJSU grads than any other school - this despite the bay area is known to attract millions of talents from around the country (esp Ivy League) and the world, yet apple and most top tech companies still select SJSU grads over everyone else.  That to me speaks for itself.  Remember, these top tech companies receive something like 20,000 resumes a week so they have choices and yet they pick SJSU!

But you would never know that about SJSU if you only live on this board.  

http://www.bizjournals.com/sanjose/news/2016/09/13/sjsu-engineering-program-shines-in-u-s-news.html

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, davemathew said:

SJSU Engineering rank #3 according to U.S News & World Report (link below).  I don't think Fresno or any MWC would be anywhere close if in the same category.  

SJSU is an engineering school and they build on that reputation (again, see below article).  

The quote from the publishing also say the same: "more alumni from SJSU work at top Silicon Valley companies than any other school."  Apple for example employs more SJSU grads than any other school - this despite the bay area is known to attract millions of talents from around the country (esp Ivy League) and the world, yet apple and most top tech companies still select SJSU grads over everyone else.  That to me speaks for itself.  Remember, these top tech companies receive something like 20,000 resumes a week so they have choices and yet they pick SJSU!

But you would never know that about SJSU if you only live on this board.  

http://www.bizjournals.com/sanjose/news/2016/09/13/sjsu-engineering-program-shines-in-u-s-news.html

 

Read the fine print. That's #3 among engineering colleges that offer only up to a Master's Degree.  In other words, you're sitting near the front of the short bus.  If you think SJSU is considered anywhere near the level of the top public doctoral granting schools like the UC campuses, UW, Texas, Michigan, Illinois, Wisconsin, Purdue, Ohio State, Georgia Tech and a dozen others, you're delusional.  It's like comparing a major league team with its Double-A affiliate. 

 

As for the number of SJSU grads employed in Silicon Valley goes, do you think that might have something to do with proximity?  Don't confuse a bunch of "locals" hired to scrub off dick pics or be "blood boys" as the same thing as the talent that comes into SV from top tier universities. 

SteelCityBlue

November 24th, 2018 at 9:10 PM ^

I'm looking forward to a new head coach who isn't a cud-chewing autistic retard.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Victor Maitlin said:

Read the fine print. That's #3 among engineering colleges that offer only up to a Master's Degree.  In other words, you're sitting near the front of the short bus.  If you think SJSU is considered anywhere near the level of the top public doctoral granting schools like the UC campuses, UW, Texas, Michigan, Illinois, Wisconsin, Purdue, Ohio State, Georgia Tech and a dozen others, you're delusional.  It's like comparing a major league team with its Double-A affiliate. 

As for the number of SJSU grads employed in Silicon Valley goes, do you think that might have something to do with proximity?  Don't confuse a bunch of "locals" hired to scrub off dick pics or be "blood boys" as the same thing as the talent that comes into SV from top tier universities. 

Cal Poly only offers to Master's degree too, so your point is?  Is Cal Poly on the "short bus" too?

Proximity may not be that big of a factor given a SINGLE top Silicon Valley company can receive some 20,000 resumes a week (count them, ONE COMPANY, ONE WEEK, RECEIVING 20,000 resumes) from around the country and the world from top schools, so they have plenty of choices (and money with top Engineering paying for $200K salary) yet these companies choose SJSU.  Money talks and that speaks for itself doesn't it?

Again, Apple a top company (with unlimited hiring funds) receiving resume around the clock from around the country and the world every second, yet they hire more SJSU grads than any other school. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites



  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...