Undergrad is 71 in USNEWS

[PerunaRaider]

How are we ranked below UT and especially the Aggies?

[Kappas Are Yummy]

PREDICTION: 15 minutes until Longhornfan68 swoops in to defend UT's honor...

[mr. pony]

Yup. And the post will begin with 'Um...'

[Stallion]

behind would be a better word.

[Stallion]

Schools of Interest:

17. Rice
43. Tulane
52. UT
55. University of Miami
60. Texas A&M
72. SMU
79. Baylor
93. Tulsa
97. TCU

[MustangFan]

Aggie jokes aside, all of the schools ranked above us (thanks, Stallion) have solid academic reputations -- not Harvard, but not a bad school in the bunch. And there's no question we belong ahead of Tulsa, Baylor High and Froggy High. In addition to the fact that this list ranks our education above those, we have the added benefit of not being located in Tulsa, Waco or Fort Worth, which separates us even more. (Of course, if location played a role, nobody would go to A&M, either, but that's another debate for another day.)

[mrydel]

Ok, a stupid question which I guess requires a stupid answer, but here goes. What is the criteria for the rankings. Is it academic grades? If so you can not compare due to different profs at each school with different styles and grading. I would imagine that a lot of it is based on post degree perfromance after graduating such as executives in Fortune 500 companies and from what school did they get their degree. If that is the case is it not logical that schools with equal performance but one having many more graduates (hypothetically, SMU vs. A&M) that the school with the greater number of grads would "out perform" the other.

I in no way am questioning the rankings. This is not meant to sound like sour grapes in any way. I do not have any argument with the rankings at all. But it would seem that the larger schools, if educating at a decent level of performance, should often out rank the smaller schools. I am sure there are exceptions to that theory, like Harvard, Yale, and even Rice, but I am just wondering is there is room for a skewed ranking simply due to enrollment size.

Any insight is greatly appreciated.

And again please do not let this turn into a debate about shouldn't we be ranked higher than that school because they have alumni providing their kids with SAT scores under the table.

[Stallion]

actually the fact that the Texas public schools are ranked 52 and 60 is pretty pathetic-and a very poor reflection on the State of Texas. Compare to the California System which has several schools you may not of heard of that are Top 50 schools. I believe UT was ranked near Top 30 a few years ago before the furor over the "Poor White Kids" decision by the 5th Circuit (whose analsis was essentially rejected in a separate Supreme Court suit) which forced the inception of the Top 10% rule in order to retain minorities.

[Fresh]

Are you surprised? Texas high schools rank at or near the bottom of every major ranking (graduation rates, percentage of grads going on to college, standardized test scores, dropout rates, etc.), too. Personally, I think the administrations at Texas colleges - from Rice down to TCU - do a pretty solid job of putting together a curriculum that allows students to get a good education, if they choose to put in the necessary effort.

[mrydel]

Are you surprised? Texas high schools rank at or near the bottom of every major ranking (graduation rates, percentage of grads going on to college, standardized test scores, dropout rates, etc.), too. Personally, I think the administrations at Texas colleges - from Rice down to TCU - do a pretty solid job of putting together a curriculum that allows students to get a good education, if they choose to put in the necessary effort.

This is an area where Arkansas beats you!!! We rank nearer the bottom in education thatn Texas.

[EastStang]

I think US News ranks on a number of criteria: class sizes, full professors teaching classes, credentials of professors, average SAT of entering freshmen. That sort of thing. I suspect that the SAT numbers are not what they once were, and perhaps our professors are not as renouned as they once were in the Undergraduate disciplines. A&M has put a lot of money into recruiting big names for its faculty. They mostly do research and teach one class, but it pushes them up the US News Rankings.

[Stallion]

When USN&WR learns that TCU had a Book(store) Burning the other Nite-that should drop them out of the Top 100. Bad Froggies-don't Burn Books.

[mrydel]

When USN&WR learns that TCU had a Book(store) Burning the other Nite-that should drop them out of the Top 100. Bad Froggies-don't Burn Books.

Did they burn the crayons too or did they just melt in the heat?

[LonghornFan68]

PREDICTION: 15 minutes until Longhornfan68 swoops in to defend UT's honor...

What's to defefnd? The numbers speak for themselves. UT is still ranked ahead of SMU despite the fact that it has some really weak programs (ie - Liberal Arts).

Good try at a lame insult, though.

[CalallenStang]

I think US News ranks on a number of criteria: class sizes, full professors teaching classes, credentials of professors, average SAT of entering freshmen. That sort of thing. I suspect that the SAT numbers are not what they once were, and perhaps our professors are not as renouned as they once were in the Undergraduate disciplines. A&M has put a lot of money into recruiting big names for its faculty. They mostly do research and teach one class, but it pushes them up the US News Rankings.

One of the categories is percentage of alumni who give money to academic programs (and there's others that are no reflection of the quality of faculty). I don't take much stock in these rankings.