MU #2 in Wisconsin, behind MSOE

[MUDPT]

http://www.brookings.edu/research/reports2/2015/04/29-beyond-college-rankings-rothwell-kulkarni

Type in Wis in the 4 year tab and get the complete list.  UW Madison 6th.

[mu_hilltopper]

More interesting is that UWM is close to the bottom.  Surprised at that.

[Chicos' Buzz Scandal Countdown]

I'm glad these objective measurements of universities will be available to my kids when they make this choice. Long overdue.

[GGGG]

Why are they emphasizing STEM professions by measuring "The share of graduates prepared to work in STEM occupations?"  That's why MSOE is #1, and likely why MU is #2.  They mention Rose Hulman...that's an engineering school. 

I mean, a business school is going to give you a good value-add as well.  Why focus solely on STEM when you may not have the interest or the ability?

[MUDPT]

In the article:

Five college quality factors seem to be key to how well students perform economically in the years after college:

Curriculum value: The amount earned by people who hold degrees in a field offered by the college;

Alumni skills: The average labor market value of skills listed on resumes;

STEM orientation: The share of graduates prepared to work in STEM occupations;

Completion rates: The share earning their degrees within four years for a two-year college and eight years for a four-year college;

Student aid: The average financial support offered by the institution.

[Eldon]

I'm glad these objective measurements of universities will be available to my kids when they make this choice. Long overdue.

Teal?

Rankings are based on statistics.  Statistics are summary measures that focus on ease of interpretation at the expense of precision.  The choice of college (and major/minor) is so important that I would not rely on any statistic, even if it is objective.

[Chicos' Buzz Scandal Countdown]

Teal?

Rankings are based on statistics.  Statistics are summary measures that focus on ease of interpretation at the expense of precision.  The choice of college (and major/minor) is so important that I would not rely on any statistic, even if it is objective.

Not teal. Also didn't say rely.

Would you prefer less information to more information when making an important decision?

[GGGG]

In the article:

Five college quality factors seem to be key to how well students perform economically in the years after college:

Curriculum value: The amount earned by people who hold degrees in a field offered by the college;

Alumni skills: The average labor market value of skills listed on resumes;

STEM orientation: The share of graduates prepared to work in STEM occupations;

Completion rates: The share earning their degrees within four years for a two-year college and eight years for a four-year college;

Student aid: The average financial support offered by the institution.

I read that about 100 times, but it didn't click until you posted it.

[PBRme]

Teal?

Rankings are based on statistics.  Statistics are summary measures that focus on ease of interpretation at the expense of precision.  The choice of college (and major/minor) is so important that I would not rely on any statistic, even if it is objective.

I agree, I'd suggest team mascot, number of porn stars, or how often and how many of the cheerleaders make playboys "girls of" issue.  These are all much better than "objective statistics".