We moved down to number 86
http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-colleges/marquette-university-3863
I thought our strategic plan was to move up in the rankings.
Quote from: Marquette Fan In NY on September 09, 2015, 10:22:25 PM
We moved down to number 86
http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-colleges/marquette-university-3863
I thought our strategic plan was to move up in the rankings.
three schools tied at 86 (MU, Denver and Tulsa)
one tick higher was four schools at 82 (Miami/Ohio, TCU, Santa Cruz and Iowa)
two ticks higher seven schools tied at 75 (including Amherst and Mich State)
Move down this year ... yes
Why, we were rounded down. All these schools are that close, barely different from each other.
Oh, Bucky dropped to 41, tied with Illinois, BU, UC - Davis and Tulane. They too were a rounding error lower.
When it comes to rankings, individual program rankings are way more important to a student than university rankings. It's the reason I picked Marquette over Illinois and Northwestern.
At the end of the day, the rankings are rather meaningless
We ought not to vest too much value in these things. The BU case study illustrates how meaningless this game is from an authenticity stand point
Quote from: MUsoxfan on September 09, 2015, 11:30:15 PM
At the end of the day, the rankings are rather meaningless
Actually that matter a ton, we just wish they did not matter. The affect the quality of your incoming class, alumni giving and the overall reputation of the school.
This is why schools are constantly caught cheating (Northeastern, USC, Clemson and Georgetown)
And this is why the Trustees approved as a longer term goal to get into the top 50.
Quote from: Heisenberg on September 10, 2015, 07:28:16 AM
Actually that matter a ton, we just wish they did not matter. The affect the quality of your incoming class, alumni giving and the overall reputation of the school.
This is why schools are constantly caught cheating (Northeastern, USC, Clemson and Georgetown)
And this is why the Trustees approved as a longer term goal to get into the top 50.
So it matters for the cash hustle. A battle for who can charge the most outrageous tuition and get away with it
Would you or anybody else here personally bump up donations because MU was suddenly in the Top 50? I seriously doubt it
Quote from: Heisenberg on September 09, 2015, 10:52:37 PM
three schools tied at 86 (MU, Denver and Tulsa)
one tick higher was four schools at 82 (Miami/Ohio, TCU, Santa Cruz and Iowa)
two ticks higher seven schools tied at 75 (including Amherst and Mich State)
Move down this year ... yes
Why, we were rounded down. All these schools are that close, barely different from each other.
Oh, Bucky dropped to 41, tied with Illinois, BU, UC - Davis and Tulane. They too were a rounding error lower.
Quote from: Heisenberg on September 09, 2015, 10:52:37 PM
three schools tied at 86 (MU, Denver and Tulsa)
one tick higher was four schools at 82 (Miami/Ohio, TCU, Santa Cruz and Iowa)
two ticks higher seven schools tied at 75 (including Amherst and Mich State)
Move down this year ... yes
Why, we were rounded down. All these schools are that close, barely different from each other.
Oh, Bucky dropped to 41, tied with Illinois, BU, UC - Davis and Tulane. They too were a rounding error lower.
Bucky was 47 last year so they improved. We moved to a less desirable neighborhood.
Quote from: MUsoxfan on September 10, 2015, 12:50:21 PM
So it matters for the cash hustle. A battle for who can charge the most outrageous tuition and get away with it
Would you or anybody else here personally bump up donations because MU was suddenly in the Top 50? I seriously doubt it
The correlation between "high ranking" and "charitable support received" is very high. Now is that because...
1. A higher ranking causes people to donate more
2. Donations give schools more resources and therefore more ability to impact rankings
3. Both are a symptom of good leadership
I tend to think it is mostly #3, but with quite a bit of #2 mixed in. I don't think #1 has much of an impact.
The rankings phenomenon is real and extremely important to the business of college admissions. It's no wonder that high school kids, of ability, literally swim upstream like spawnin' salmon, to gain a thick envelope to the Ivies.
As for catholic schools, there is Notre Dame, Georgetown, Boston College, and everyone else, ai na?
I will admit to taking some comfort from the US News rankings when my son was picking his school. He was very intrigued by Elon, which was a school I knew little about. I had a vague recollection that Marquette had played them at some point in time, but that's pretty much all I knew. Seeing that they had some respect in the US News rankings gave me a preliminary comfort level to tell him to go ahead and look into it. Ultimately, it was information I gained from other sources that helped me give Elon the green light, but US News really was the first source I looked at for validation.
We're about three weeks in. So far, so good.
Quote from: Marquette Fan In NY on September 10, 2015, 12:54:29 PM
Bucky was 47 last year so they improved. We moved to a less desirable neighborhood.
My bad, I thought they were 37 last year.
Since US News does not give a numerical number, do we know that Bucky improved or did everyone around then do worse? Similarly, did MU do worse or did everyone around them do better?
Marquette had leadership voids in just about every major leadership position. And then had to institute major layoffs due to mismanagement. Is it any wonder?
But, the poetry class ratings were higher.
Quote from: Heisenberg on September 10, 2015, 03:59:36 PM
My bad, I thought they were 37 last year.
Since US News does not give a numerical number, do we know that Bucky improved or did everyone around then do worse? Similarly, did MU do worse or did everyone around them do better?
I don't know the answer to that. I do know that Dr. Lovell has to embrace the ranking process and go after it the same way he goes after his running. It needs to be a central mission. The guy who runs Northeastern was able to move their rankings from the 100s into the 40s by working the metric hard.
Admissions needs to be sucking up to the guidance offices in the top high schools . Also a big PR effort on some of our research efforts. A lot of this is reputational. We also need to get the endowment up so we can give some bigger money scholarships to the top students. Things like that.
Quote from: Marquette Fan In NY on September 10, 2015, 07:04:24 PM
I don't know the answer to that. I do know that Dr. Lovell has to embrace the ranking process and go after it the same way he goes after his running. It needs to be a central mission. The guy who runs Northeastern was able to move their rankings from the 100s into the 40s by working the metric hard.
Admissions needs to be sucking up to the guidance offices in the top high schools . Also a big PR effort on some of our research efforts. A lot of this is reputational. We also need to get the endowment up so we can give some bigger money scholarships to the top students. Things like that.
Some say they did not game the system but outright lied and cheated to get up the rankings.
http://www.bostonmagazine.com/news/article/2014/08/26/how-northeastern-gamed-the-college-rankings/
Agree about the endowment but that is a decade plus project.
Quote from: Dr. Blackheart on September 10, 2015, 06:10:09 PM
Marquette had leadership voids in just about every major leadership position. And then had to institute major layoffs due to mismanagement. Is it any wonder?
But, the poetry class ratings were higher.
Major layoffs? If I recall correctly, it was far fewer than 100 people out of the thousands that were on the payroll.
Quote from: warriorchick on September 10, 2015, 07:48:18 PM
Major layoffs? If I recall correctly, it was far fewer than 100 people out of the thousands that were on the payroll.
Well, I consider 4% of the workforce major, but you are a bean counter so I guess that is small. Considering no academics were laid off, this cut deep...on top of the major severance packages that had to be paid out.
To say leadership was not focused on the student product would be an understatement. The BOT acted swiftly but there is a hole to dig out of still.
Quote from: Dr. Blackheart on September 10, 2015, 08:06:20 PM
Well, I consider 4% of the workforce major, but you are a bean counter so I guess that is small. Considering no academics were laid off, this cut deep...on top of the major severance packages that had to be paid out.
To say leadership was not focused on the student product would be an understatement. The BOT acted swiftly but there is a hole to dig out of still.
Just looked up the actual JS article - 25 people laid off out of a total workforce of 2,800, or less than one percent. Even if you count That's barely a blip. Even if you want to count the retirements and the positions that they did not plan to fill, it is about 3.75%. If you can't find that amount of dead wood in any organization of that size, you aren't trying.
Quote from: warriorchick on September 10, 2015, 09:31:56 PM
Just looked up the actual JS article - 25 people laid off out of a total workforce of 2,800, or less than one percent. Even if you count That's barely a blip. Even if you want to count the retirements and the positions that they did not plan to fill, it is about 3.75%. If you can't find that amount of dead wood in any organization of that size, you aren't trying.
So your hubby's friends are "dead wood"? Nice.
http://www.muscoop.com/index.php?topic=42090.msg571229#msg571229
Final "Dead Pool" over 100. More importantly, to the topic, was the complete void of leadership, in place or left vacant.
Quote from: ChitownSpaceForRent on September 09, 2015, 11:14:28 PM
When it comes to rankings, individual program rankings are way more important to a student than university rankings. It's the reason I picked Marquette over Illinois and Northwestern.
Real Estate program is ranked #9 amongst national universities. Highest I've found amongst individual MU programs so far.
Not bad for a program that was introduced less than a decade ago.
Quote from: Benny B on September 10, 2015, 11:02:35 PM
Real Estate program is ranked #9 amongst national universities. Highest I've found amongst individual MU programs so far.
Not bad for a program that was introduced less than a decade ago.
PT is up to like 10 or something crazy like that right now.
Supply Chain was 16th last year.
Quote from: Dr. Blackheart on September 10, 2015, 10:36:35 PM
So your hubby's friends are "dead wood"? Nice.
http://www.muscoop.com/index.php?topic=42090.msg571229#msg571229
Final "Dead Pool" over 100. More importantly, to the topic, was the complete void of leadership, in place or left vacant.
I am not saying I agreed with every single one of the layoffs. I am simply disagreeing with the term "major" as you used it.
Periodically evaluating personnel needs and making the tough decisions is a sign of a strong institution, not a weak one.
Link to all rankings; some of the rankings are locked to subscribers (help, anyone?), but some notables on the public info:
Grad PT solid at #12.
#71 in the HS Counselor ranking... on the surface, that seems like it deserves a "meh, whatever," but when you think about it, it seems pretty significant that when you poll HS counselors across the country, MU is on the same level as two Big ? schools (Moo U and Minny), both Miami's, Cal-SB and SMU.* Not to mention, MU has a higher rank than Arizona, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisville, and Dayton... this should help with recruiting, a'i'na? And of course, I have to point out that while the last bastion of academic excellence just 90 miles west of us may be ranked higher than MU, 'tis by a mere two-tenths of a point (on a 5 pt. scale). Becky must be fuming.
* And here we were worried about losing our former coach to SMU... even the HS counselors agree that's a lateral move, at best.
#28 for "Best Online Graduate Computer Information Technology Programs"... WTF? I didn't even know that existed.
Law school #105 overall... I believe that makes them a "Tier 3" law school; although wjat's interesting is that the part-time program is ranked #17. What's even more interesting is dispute resolution being ranked #8... I'll leave it to everyone else to draw their own pictures of irony there.
#135 for graduate engineering is disappointing; I would have expected it to be much higher, though I suppose in addition to the national universities, you're also dealing with the smaller, dedicated E-schools (MSOE, Rose Hulman, Embry Riddle, and the like... well, at least the latter two more than the former.)
P/T MBA has dropped to #97... how the hell does that happen when they were consistently around the top 10 in the mid 2000s.
At the end of the day, remember that rankings suck and will continue to do so as long as Northeastern University is anywhere near the top 50; but at least they're fun to look at.
Quote from: Benny B on September 11, 2015, 09:23:27 AM
#135 for graduate engineering is disappointing; I would have expected it to be much higher, though I suppose in addition to the national universities, you're also dealing with the smaller, dedicated E-schools (MSOE, Rose Hulman, Embry Riddle, and the like... well, at least the latter two more than the former.)
The focus of engineering at MU is clearly on undergrads, and I think we do great in that area. We're just not a large research university, which is what drives the graduate program rankings, so I don't think that will change much.
Until we're ranked higher, none of these rankings are reliable or meaningful.
Quote from: Jay Bee on September 11, 2015, 08:21:10 PM
Until we're ranked higher, none of these rankings are reliable or meaningful.
Correct.