WSJ Ranking of Colleges and Universities

[WhiteTrash]

WSJ rankings came out:

56. Marquette University
.
.
.
.
.
.
79. University of Wisconsin - Madison

 

[Galway Eagle]

Now broadcast this everywhere and spread articles of why it's a better ranking than US World News

[MU Fan in Connecticut]

Better than Harvard of the Midwest?

[Scoop Snoop]

Better than Harvard of the Midwest?

My wife tells people that one of the things that impressed her when we first met was that I am an alumnus of Marquette, which she refers to as "the Harvard of the Midwest".

[Herman Cain]

https://www.wsj.com/us-news/education/wsj-college-pulse-college-rankings-methodology-f010fc11

[WhiteTrash]

Better than Harvard of the Midwest?

Get it right, you sound like an MU grad.

Harvard is the UW-Madison of the East Coast.

[Heisenberg v2.0]

2024 College Free Speech Rankings

Presented by College Pulse and the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE), the 2024 College Free Speech Rankings is a comprehensive comparison of the student experience of free speech on their campuses. These rankings are based on the voices of over 55,000 currently enrolled students at over 250 colleges and are designed to help parents and prospective students choose the right college.

https://rankings.thefire.org/

#230 Marquette, rated as poor

#248 (last place) Harvard University

Larry Summers, former President of Harvard

@LHSummers
I am proud to be on @TheFIREorg's advisory board as it does vitally important work standing up for open debate on college campuses. I was dismayed to discover that
@Harvard ranks last out of 248 schools in their free speech rankings.

@LHSummers

While I am sure that the procedures can be challenged, @Harvard clearly needs reforms to protect free speech and insure a culture of open debate.  I hope this will be a leadership priority going forward.

[rocket surgeon]

Get it right, you sound like an MU grad.

Harvard is the UW-Madison of the East Coast.

   and berkeley of the left coast

[WhiteTrash]

2024 College Free Speech Rankings

Presented by College Pulse and the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE), the 2024 College Free Speech Rankings is a comprehensive comparison of the student experience of free speech on their campuses. These rankings are based on the voices of over 55,000 currently enrolled students at over 250 colleges and are designed to help parents and prospective students choose the right college.

https://rankings.thefire.org/

#230 Marquette, rated as poor

#248 (last place) Harvard University

Larry Summers, former President of Harvard

@LHSummers
I am proud to be on @TheFIREorg's advisory board as it does vitally important work standing up for open debate on college campuses. I was dismayed to discover that
@Harvard ranks last out of 248 schools in their free speech rankings.

@LHSummers

While I am sure that the procedures can be challenged, @Harvard clearly needs reforms to protect free speech and insure a culture of open debate.  I hope this will be a leadership priority going forward.

I think if I had to come up with a top 100 list of places in America where free speech is embraced, college campuses would be about 101, but just right before Evangelical churches.

[Frenns Liquor Depot]

I think if I had to come up with a top 100 list of places in America where free speech is embraced, college campuses would be about 101, but just right before Evangelical churches.

Are you spending a lot of time on college campuses and evangelical churches?

[ZiggysFryBoy]

Are you spending a lot of time on college campuses and evangelical churches?

That's where the babes are.

[Efficient Frontier]

My wife tells people that one of the things that impressed her when we first met was that I am an alumnus of Marquette, which she refers to as "the Harvard of the Midwest".

I am sure your wife is an exceptional woman. However this take is baffling to me.

I say this with an unblemished record of staunch MU support.

I wouldn’t want MU to be Harvard. Crimson basketball sucks.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

I think if I had to come up with a top 100 list of places in America where free speech is embraced, college campuses would be about 101, but just right before Evangelical churches.

Spoken like someone with either no knowledge of college campuses or no knowledge of free speech. Possibly both.

[Scoop Snoop]

I am sure your wife is an exceptional woman. However this take is baffling to me.

I say this with an unblemished record of staunch MU support.

I wouldn’t want MU to be Harvard. Crimson basketball sucks.

I never said anything to the contrary. If she wants to think and say that, who am I to say"What?"

[Plaque Lives Matter!]

2024 College Free Speech Rankings

Presented by College Pulse and the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE), the 2024 College Free Speech Rankings is a comprehensive comparison of the student experience of free speech on their campuses. These rankings are based on the voices of over 55,000 currently enrolled students at over 250 colleges and are designed to help parents and prospective students choose the right college.

https://rankings.thefire.org/

#230 Marquette, rated as poor

#248 (last place) Harvard University

Larry Summers, former President of Harvard

@LHSummers
I am proud to be on @TheFIREorg's advisory board as it does vitally important work standing up for open debate on college campuses. I was dismayed to discover that
@Harvard ranks last out of 248 schools in their free speech rankings.

@LHSummers

While I am sure that the procedures can be challenged, @Harvard clearly needs reforms to protect free speech and insure a culture of open debate.  I hope this will be a leadership priority going forward.

Uh huh.

"The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression is funded by donations from individuals, foundations, and businesses. While FIRE does not disclose its donors, tax filings confirm donations from the John Templeton Foundation ($2.5 million in 2016), 8 the J. P. Humphreys Foundation ($1.15 million in 2019), 9 and the Charles Koch Foundation ($1 million in 2019)."

https://www.influencewatch.org/non-profit/foundation-for-individual-rights-and-expression-fire/

[The Sultan of Semantics]

Spoken like someone with either no knowledge of college campuses or no knowledge of free speech. Possibly both.

Yeah I would argue that we have done a poor job as a society with understanding what free speech means.

First, free speech does not mean you can say whatever you want without consequence.

Second, free speech does not mean you can say whatever you want in whatever setting you want.

In my experience, the issues with free speech on college campuses usually fall into one of the two categories above. Sure there are incidents where people shout one another down to prevent them from saying anything - those are unfortunate, uncivil and need to be addressed.

[TSmith34, Inc.]

Right, the very term free speech has been corrupted by a certain faction to mean, as they use the term, that every private entity should be forced to platform their views, that any criticism of their expressed views impinges on their free speech, and there should be absolutely no consequences when they express their hateful and/or batsh!t crazy ideas.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

Sure there are incidents where people shout one another down to prevent them from saying anything - those are unfortunate, uncivil and need to be addressed.

And bluntly, someone shouting someone else down (as long as its not the university itself), is someone using their free speech in response to someone else's free speech.  It is uncivil but it is still a form of free speech.

[Pakuni]

Uh huh.

"The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression is funded by donations from individuals, foundations, and businesses. While FIRE does not disclose its donors, tax filings confirm donations from the John Templeton Foundation ($2.5 million in 2016), 8 the J. P. Humphreys Foundation ($1.15 million in 2019), 9 and the Charles Koch Foundation ($1 million in 2019)."

https://www.influencewatch.org/non-profit/foundation-for-individual-rights-and-expression-fire/

I'm less concerned with FIRE's donors than the methodology of this "study."
How much stock ought we put in a study based on the results of a self-selecting online poll?

[Heisenberg v2.0]

And bluntly, someone shouting someone else down (as long as its not the university itself), is someone using their free speech in response to someone else's free speech.  It is uncivil but it is still a form of free speech.

Shouting down speakers is mob censorship: Part 14 of answers to arguments against free speech from Nadine Strossen and Greg Lukianoff
https://www.thefire.org/news/blogs/eternally-radical-idea/shouting-down-speakers-mob-censorship-part-14-answers-arguments

Shouting down a speaker to stop an event from proceeding is mob censorship, full stop. It gives the shouters the power to dictate what anyone else is able to say or to hear. The idea that a group — or even a single individual pulling a fire alarm or banging a cowbell — can decide what others can and cannot listen to is incompatible with pluralism. It replaces the free exchange of ideas with a system of “might makes right,” and it is especially egregious for this to happen in the university context where the free exchange of ideas and the freedom to seek out any information is most important.

This is so obvious that, I believe, those who make this argument either do so in bad faith, or have not thought through the implications of this position. For example, no one would argue that one has a right to go to a university orchestra concert and play electric guitar from their seat. It is equally hard to imagine that those sympathetic to shout-downs at Yale and Hastings would make the same argument if, for example, a pro-choice speaker was shut down by rowdy pro-life protestors, or if a student shouted down his professor for the duration of class. And yet all of these examples logically follow from the asserted free speech “right” for some audience members to take over an event.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

Shouting down speakers is mob censorship: Part 14 of answers to arguments against free speech from Nadine Strossen and Greg Lukianoff
https://www.thefire.org/news/blogs/eternally-radical-idea/shouting-down-speakers-mob-censorship-part-14-answers-arguments

Shouting down a speaker to stop an event from proceeding is mob censorship, full stop. It gives the shouters the power to dictate what anyone else is able to say or to hear. The idea that a group — or even a single individual pulling a fire alarm or banging a cowbell — can decide what others can and cannot listen to is incompatible with pluralism. It replaces the free exchange of ideas with a system of “might makes right,” and it is especially egregious for this to happen in the university context where the free exchange of ideas and the freedom to seek out any information is most important.

This is so obvious that, I believe, those who make this argument either do so in bad faith, or have not thought through the implications of this position. For example, no one would argue that one has a right to go to a university orchestra concert and play electric guitar from their seat. It is equally hard to imagine that those sympathetic to shout-downs at Yale and Hastings would make the same argument if, for example, a pro-choice speaker was shut down by rowdy pro-life protestors, or if a student shouted down his professor for the duration of class. And yet all of these examples logically follow from the asserted free speech “right” for some audience members to take over an event.

Time and place, dear Heisey. If someone is disrupting a scheduled event in a controlled space (like an orchestra concert or a professor teaching a class), they can and should be removed. If someone is saying something or an event is taking place in a public space, those around have every right to use their free speech to respond. FIRE knows this, and claims to support free speech, but they use ridiculous comparisons like playing over an orchestra or shouting during class time to try to use false parallels to push a certain agenda.

And I resent the assertion that I wouldn't make the same argument if a pro-choice speaker was being shouted down by an anti-abortion speaker in a public space. I would commend them for using their free speech to respond to free speech.

[The Sultan of Semantics]

Time and place, dear Heisey. If someone is disrupting a scheduled event in a controlled space (like an orchestra concert or a professor teaching a class), they can and should be removed.

And that's the type of shouting down I was talking about.

[Heisenberg v2.0]

Time and place, dear Heisey. If someone is disrupting a scheduled event in a controlled space (like an orchestra concert or a professor teaching a class), they can and should be removed. If someone is saying something or an event is taking place in a public space, those around have every right to use their free speech to respond. FIRE knows this, and claims to support free speech, but they use ridiculous comparisons like playing over an orchestra or shouting during class time to try to use false parallels to push a certain agenda.

And I resent the assertion that I wouldn't make the same argument if a pro-choice speaker was being shouted down by an anti-abortion speaker in a public space. I would commend them for using their free speech to respond to free speech.

Orchestra concerts or a professor teaching classes are in public spaces (assuming a public university).  So, why can't they be shouted down?

A political candidate in a concert hall that requires a ticket to get into is also a public space. In other words, the same place and entry method (valid ticket) as the orchestra concert. But in this circumstance, it is allowable to shout them down.

So, yes, I need more explanation.

[WhiteTrash]

So, MU is better than UW-Madison. Discuss. 

[The Sultan of Semantics]

Orchestra concerts or a professor teaching classes are in public spaces (assuming a public university).  So, why can't they be shouted down?

A political candidate in a concert hall that requires a ticket to get into is also a public space. In other words, the same place and entry method (valid ticket) as the orchestra concert. But in this circumstance, it is allowable to shout them down.

So, yes, I need more explanation.

There is a difference between a "public space" that is accessible to the public with little or no regulation involved, and a government-owned space.

Here is a good summary

https://www.dmlp.org/legal-guide/access-public-property