Tied with UCLA boooo

But looks like publics got a big boost based on updated methodology, and rightfully so imo.

https://www.usnews.com/best-colleges/rankings/national-universities

7 6 ACC schools in the top 25

A good portion of the top schools have opted out of the US News WR rankings due to crappy metrics. I'm surprised that Cal is still allowing its data to be reported.

Does this mean we now like USWNR?

Interesting to see UCD tie with UCSD for third in the UCs, and UCSB drops back down below UCI. Also lol at USC dropping back down below Florida. Guess their tactics for gaming the system have stopped being so effective.

pingpong2 said:

---

Does this mean we now like USWNR?

Interesting to see UCD tie with UCSD for third in the UCs, and UCSB drops back down below UCI. Also lol at USC dropping back down below Florida. Guess their tactics for gaming the system have stopped being so effective.

---

Nah. I only like accurate things, and in my opinion the accuracy of any college ranking is measured by how close Berkeley is to #1. So the most I'm willing to do is give props to US News for improving the accuracy of their methodology.

Not that it matters but their methodology is broken and they know it.
It favors privates using factors that have nothing to do with academics and are not ancillary to academic success whatsoever.
Such as…
Why are items like student/faculty ratio and high school class standing factored in addition to graduation rate and academic success?
Imho graduation rate is a function of student / faculty ratio, etc. meaning those items are being double counted.
Also, the measure they use for publications is seriously flawed towards privates.
Most privates specialize in liberal arts, philosophy, etc and we all know those mother****ers spam the **** out of journals with psych studies etc
Whereas if you want to publish in something like say ASCE or AJEV the process and burden of research is 1000x at least as one of the Phil type journals.
And on the flip side…
What does the number of Pell grants on campus have to do with academic performance? This is a measure of economic inequality / diversity of students not academic performance…

This ranking is more accurate: https://www.forbes.com/colleges/university-of-california-berkeley/?sh=c3061555bd4b

edwinbear said:

---

Tied with UCLA boooo

But looks like publics got a big boost based on updated methodology, and rightfully so imo.

https://www.usnews.com/best-colleges/rankings/national-universities

---

And UCLA is a perfect example that academics do not vary inversely with success of popular sports.

BearSD said:

---

7 ACC schools in the top 25

---

6, right?
Stanford, Duke, Berkeley, UNC, UVA, Notre Dame

GoCal80 said:

---

This ranking is more accurate: https://www.forbes.com/colleges/university-of-california-berkeley/?sh=c3061555bd4b

---

these are the most credible rankings in the biz

baytobreakers said:

---

BearSD said:

---

7 ACC schools in the top 25

---

6, right?
Stanford, Duke, Berkeley, UNC, UVA, Notre Dame

---

You're right, I scrolled down too far and counted Georgia Tech (#33).

Anyone know in what areas does UCLA score so well that they are tied with Berkeley? Virtually any hardcore major id imagine the Berkeley dept is far superior. What gives?

Econ141 said:

---

Anyone know in what areas does UCLA score so well that they are tied with Berkeley? Virtually any hardcore major id imagine the Berkeley dept is far superior. What gives?

---

Claimed methodology: https://www.usnews.com/education/best-colleges/articles/how-us-news-calculated-the-rankings

My apologies! I posted another thread on this, so…booth!! Have you seen the latest on the Light The Way? CAL has now raised more than 7 billion, 250 million just this past week. Wow!!

Econ141 said:

---

Anyone know in what areas does UCLA score so well that they are tied with Berkeley? Virtually any hardcore major id imagine the Berkeley dept is far superior. What gives?

---

USNWR report is weighing most heavily those factors that have to do with what they think is most important for the undergraduate experience. If you look at rankings that weigh research more heavily, Cal tends to do much better than UCLA.

For example:

https://www.shanghairanking.com/news/arwu/2023

HateRed said:

---

My apologies! I posted another thread on this, so…booth!! Have you seen the latest on the Light The Way? CAL has now raised more than 7 billion, 250 million just this past week. Wow!!

---

I wonder where this money is coming from. It's such an astronomical number it's hard to believe.

Cal alumni and friends of the university are wealthy and some are billionaires. A lot of people don't know that. Have you checked out the Light The Way website?

edwinbear said:

---

Tied with UCLA boooo

But looks like publics got a big boost based on updated methodology, and rightfully so imo.

https://www.usnews.com/best-colleges/rankings/national-universities

---

Haven't clicked the link yet, but I'm wondering how we can even be as high as 15th, when our only victories are North Texas and Idaho.

^^^ Kidding, but I also look forward to the day when our football team is ranked again. ^^^

Ok, BigC…

Econ141 said:

---

Anyone know in what areas does UCLA score so well that they are tied with Berkeley? Virtually any hardcore major id imagine the Berkeley dept is far superior. What gives?

---

UCLA shot up when the started to rank number of pell grants higher in the calculation. They gained three spots on us. They also have full housing for all students - that is probably the biggest issue with Cal's ranking.

USNWR is not an academic ranking. It is a ranking of how much you like your college. Forbes is a better ranking system which used actual verifiable data from federal stats - not just what joe in admissions reports to USNWR on a survey (so factors like how much did you pay, how much do you owe, how prestigious are the programs, how much did you make when you graduated - all based on standardized data sets by the department of ed). And the Times higher education world rankings are the gold standard of pure academic rankings (Cal is #8 in the world, UCLA #21).

Oski87 said:

---

Econ141 said:

---

Anyone know in what areas does UCLA score so well that they are tied with Berkeley? Virtually any hardcore major id imagine the Berkeley dept is far superior. What gives?

---

UCLA shot up when the started to rank number of pell grants higher in the calculation. They gained three spots on us. They also have full housing for all students - that is probably the biggest issue with Cal's ranking.

USNWR is not an academic ranking. It is a ranking of how much you like your college. Forbes is a better ranking system which used actual verifiable data from federal stats - not just what joe in admissions reports to USNWR on a survey (so factors like how much did you pay, how much do you owe, how prestigious are the programs, how much did you make when you graduated - all based on standardized data sets by the department of ed). And the Times higher education world rankings are the gold standard of pure academic rankings (Cal is #8 in the world, UCLA #21).

---

Thank you for that - now it makes sense. The undergrad experience is still very important (and part of the experience is rightfully housing, and rooting for winning athletic programs) - hopefully the admin comes to that realization before we fall behind UCLA in this widely used ranking system.

This must mean we are quite significantly behind them in pell grants and the housing situation for them to overcome the academic gap.

We need to market more the # of our programs in the top 10 (grad and under grad) to differentiate ourselves vs the mickey mouse campus.

What's even more extraordinary is that it only took Cal three years to raise + $7B! In comparison, it took U$C 8 years to raise $7B. This is very telling. There is so much potential out there for Cal Athletics. I don't know how we can change the narrative to make donating to Cal Athletics more attractive to wealthy alumni. I can only think of one way: consistent winning programs across the board. Sigh. I might as well wish to grow another four inches so I can be at my ideal height of 6'2".

HistoryBear said:

---

What's even more extraordinary is that it only took Cal three years to raise + $7B! In comparison, it took U$C 8 years to raise $7B. This is very telling. There is so much potential out there for Cal Athletics. I don't know how we can change the narrative to make donating to Cal Athletics more attractive to wealthy alumni. I can only think of one way: consistent winning programs across the board. Sigh. I might as well wish to grow another four inches so I can be at my ideal height of 6'2".

---

Yes we must change the narrative. Case in point, see the print in the upper-left corner:

📊Oppenent Adjusted EPA/play - Wk 3

▫️Shaping up to be an incredible, off-script, year
▫️Note: Texas is AP #3. PSU is AP#7
▫️Why is OU flying under the radar?
▫️The Buffs are fun (they're not THAT fun)
▫️2023 is going to be a tremendous send off for the PAC12

data: @CFB_Data pic.twitter.com/6QW0XXu9cK

— Joshua "Bud" Davis, PhD (@JBudDavis) September 18, 2023

Oski87 said:

---

Econ141 said:

---

Anyone know in what areas does UCLA score so well that they are tied with Berkeley? Virtually any hardcore major id imagine the Berkeley dept is far superior. What gives?

---

UCLA shot up when the started to rank number of pell grants higher in the calculation. They gained three spots on us. They also have full housing for all students - that is probably the biggest issue with Cal's ranking.

USNWR is not an academic ranking. It is a ranking of how much you like your college. Forbes is a better ranking system which used actual verifiable data from federal stats - not just what joe in admissions reports to USNWR on a survey (so factors like how much did you pay, how much do you owe, how prestigious are the programs, how much did you make when you graduated - all based on standardized data sets by the department of ed). And the Times higher education world rankings are the gold standard of pure academic rankings (Cal is #8 in the world, UCLA #21).

---

Agree. As an aside, Ga Tech grads will tell you that USNWR consistently under ranks Tech due to the fact that its student are famously unhappy and struggle to get through engineering at the Institute - hence the low student feedback. Student don't graduate from Ma Tech they "get out."

I got a survey from Cal about donations

Only some of the questions had Cal Athletics as a choice, so I had to choose "other" and write it in

Isn't that crazy?

Anyone else get this survey?

HistoryBear said:

---

What's even more extraordinary is that it only took Cal three years to raise + $7B! In comparison, it took U$C 8 years to raise $7B. This is very telling. There is so much potential out there for Cal Athletics. I don't know how we can change the narrative to make donating to Cal Athletics more attractive to wealthy alumni. I can only think of one way: consistent winning programs across the board. Sigh. I might as well wish to grow another four inches so I can be at my ideal height of 6'2".

---

Econ141 said:

---

Oski87 said:

---

Econ141 said:

---

Anyone know in what areas does UCLA score so well that they are tied with Berkeley? Virtually any hardcore major id imagine the Berkeley dept is far superior. What gives?

---

UCLA shot up when the started to rank number of pell grants higher in the calculation. They gained three spots on us. They also have full housing for all students - that is probably the biggest issue with Cal's ranking.

USNWR is not an academic ranking. It is a ranking of how much you like your college. Forbes is a better ranking system which used actual verifiable data from federal stats - not just what joe in admissions reports to USNWR on a survey (so factors like how much did you pay, how much do you owe, how prestigious are the programs, how much did you make when you graduated - all based on standardized data sets by the department of ed). And the Times higher education world rankings are the gold standard of pure academic rankings (Cal is #8 in the world, UCLA #21).

---

Thank you for that - now it makes sense. The undergrad experience is still very important (and part of the experience is rightfully housing, and rooting for winning athletic programs) - hopefully the admin comes to that realization before we fall behind UCLA in this widely used ranking system.

This must mean we are quite significantly behind them in pell grants and the housing situation for them to overcome the academic gap.

We need to market more the # of our programs in the top 10 (grad and under grad) to differentiate ourselves vs the mickey mouse campus.

---

First of all, the best ranking is to ask elite high school students. Believe me. They know. And I haven't seen a published ranking that doesn't have some obviously ridiculous results.

UCLA is an elite school. If you look at most academic rankings by department, they are almost universally behind us, but only by a little. Frankly, there is little difference in your educational experience if you are in a top 5 department or a top 10. At that point, getting the right or wrong professors or ones who speak to you swing that ranking for you. UCLA has also worked on some quality of life issues that Cal has lagged at. They've taken care of the housing issue where Cal still has a terrible problem. UCLA's food was rated #1. I think they are just more supportive of the student body than Berkeley is, with Berkeley still trying to get over the sink or swim mentality that doesn't fly anymore. Honestly, UCLA is not good in football and if you look at their student section, I really don't think sports is a significant draw.

I think you will find that kids who only want to go to the best academic school will still choose Cal. Personally, I think it is better to go to your best match than necessarily the best school. Overall, though, between Berkeley and UCLA, UCLA gets more applicants because LA is a bigger population center and kids still tend to want to stay home. If I were advising a kid picking between the two (and very few are lucky enough to have that choice) I would tell them to go to the environment that makes them more comfortable, (depending of course on department, engineering should clearly go to Berkeley. Arts should clearly go to UCLA unless you really have a strong preference for the other) and overall, a tie goes to Berkeley.

BearlyCareAnymore said:

---

Econ141 said:

---

Oski87 said:

---

---

---

UCLA is an elite school. If you look at most academic rankings by department, they are almost universally behind us, but only by a little. Frankly, there is little difference in your educational experience if you are in a top 5 department or a top 10. At that point, getting the right or wrong professors or ones who speak to you swing that ranking for you. UCLA has also worked on some quality of life issues that Cal has lagged at. They've taken care of the housing issue where Cal still has a terrible problem. UCLA's food was rated #1. I think they are just more supportive of the student body than Berkeley is, with Berkeley still trying to get over the sink or swim mentality that doesn't fly anymore. Honestly, UCLA is not good in football and if you look at their student section, I really don't think sports is a significant draw.

---

Yes.

In the 1990s, my HS classmates who went to UCLA grumbled about living in a small rundown apartment several miles from campus and hunting for parking on campus. It was a daily hassle for them. My living situation was better because my small rundown apartment on southside was a 5 minute walk from Sproul Plaza.

UCLA offering undergrads housing for all 4 years and, as you mentioned, good campus food, is a big deal for students even if "we" think those things shouldn't matter so much.

HoopDreams said:

---

I got a survey from Cal about donations

Only some of the questions had Cal Athletics as a choice, so I had to choose "other" and write it in

Isn't that crazy?

Anyone else get this survey?

HistoryBear said:

---

What's even more extraordinary is that it only took Cal three years to raise + $7B! In comparison, it took U$C 8 years to raise $7B. This is very telling. There is so much potential out there for Cal Athletics. I don't know how we can change the narrative to make donating to Cal Athletics more attractive to wealthy alumni. I can only think of one way: consistent winning programs across the board. Sigh. I might as well wish to grow another four inches so I can be at my ideal height of 6'2".

---

---

I did the same thing on almost every question.

BearlyCareAnymore said:

---

Econ141 said:

---

Oski87 said:

---

Econ141 said:

---

Anyone know in what areas does UCLA score so well that they are tied with Berkeley? Virtually any hardcore major id imagine the Berkeley dept is far superior. What gives?

---

UCLA shot up when the started to rank number of pell grants higher in the calculation. They gained three spots on us. They also have full housing for all students - that is probably the biggest issue with Cal's ranking.

USNWR is not an academic ranking. It is a ranking of how much you like your college. Forbes is a better ranking system which used actual verifiable data from federal stats - not just what joe in admissions reports to USNWR on a survey (so factors like how much did you pay, how much do you owe, how prestigious are the programs, how much did you make when you graduated - all based on standardized data sets by the department of ed). And the Times higher education world rankings are the gold standard of pure academic rankings (Cal is #8 in the world, UCLA #21).

---

Thank you for that - now it makes sense. The undergrad experience is still very important (and part of the experience is rightfully housing, and rooting for winning athletic programs) - hopefully the admin comes to that realization before we fall behind UCLA in this widely used ranking system.

This must mean we are quite significantly behind them in pell grants and the housing situation for them to overcome the academic gap.

We need to market more the # of our programs in the top 10 (grad and under grad) to differentiate ourselves vs the mickey mouse campus.

---

First of all, the best ranking is to ask elite high school students. Believe me. They know.

---

Elite high school students end up overvaluing academic rankings because they think it actually matters. The reality is that none of the top 30 nationally ranked schools are very different in early career potential and it's largely based on where in the country you want to live and start your career.

Econ141 said:

---

HistoryBear said:

---

What's even more extraordinary is that it only took Cal three years to raise + $7B! In comparison, it took U$C 8 years to raise $7B. This is very telling. There is so much potential out there for Cal Athletics. I don't know how we can change the narrative to make donating to Cal Athletics more attractive to wealthy alumni. I can only think of one way: consistent winning programs across the board. Sigh. I might as well wish to grow another four inches so I can be at my ideal height of 6'2".

---

Yes we must change the narrative. Case in point, see the print in the upper-left corner:

📊Oppenent Adjusted EPA/play - Wk 3

▫️Shaping up to be an incredible, off-script, year
▫️Note: Texas is AP #3. PSU is AP#7
▫️Why is OU flying under the radar?
▫️The Buffs are fun (they're not THAT fun)
▫️2023 is going to be a tremendous send off for the PAC12

data: @CFB_Data pic.twitter.com/6QW0XXu9cK

— Joshua "Bud" Davis, PhD (@JBudDavis) September 18, 2023

---

On the graphic, this dude went with Cal-Berkeley and he spelled Berkeley wrong.

HoopDreams said:

---

I got a survey from Cal about donations

Only some of the questions had Cal Athletics as a choice, so I had to choose "other" and write it in

Isn't that crazy?

Anyone else get this survey?

HistoryBear said:

---

What's even more extraordinary is that it only took Cal three years to raise + $7B! In comparison, it took U$C 8 years to raise $7B. This is very telling. There is so much potential out there for Cal Athletics. I don't know how we can change the narrative to make donating to Cal Athletics more attractive to wealthy alumni. I can only think of one way: consistent winning programs across the board. Sigh. I might as well wish to grow another four inches so I can be at my ideal height of 6'2".

---

---

Yes, I chose to claim how disconnected I felt because the University does not give parity to excellence in popular sports. I'm sure I will have caused a complete shift of culture and priorities.

These rankings are still a joke. At this point the biggest problem with college is the runaway cost increases contributing to the affordability crisis.

USNWR should bring cost prominently into its rankings. If schools want to get to the top they should find ways to affordably provide an education rather than an arms race to raise billions for unnecessary capex which just increases opex.

When I look back at my fondest experiences from school, very little has to do with how nice the buildings were (or weren't). Yet that seems to be where a disproportionate amount of money goes.

Unit2Sucks said:

---

These rankings are still a joke. At this point the biggest problem with college is the runaway cost increases contributing to the affordability crisis.

USNWR should bring cost prominently into its rankings. If schools want to get to the top they should find ways to affordably provide an education rather than an arms race to raise billions for unnecessary capex which just increases opex.

When I look back at my fondest experiences from school, very little has to do with how nice the buildings were (or weren't). Yet that seems to be where a disproportionate amount of money goes.

---

Says Unit2sucks. Lol. I mean, you gotta admit that some pretty good self ownage there.

bearsandgiants said:

---

Unit2Sucks said:

---

These rankings are still a joke. At this point the biggest problem with college is the runaway cost increases contributing to the affordability crisis.

USNWR should bring cost prominently into its rankings. If schools want to get to the top they should find ways to affordably provide an education rather than an arms race to raise billions for unnecessary capex which just increases opex.

When I look back at my fondest experiences from school, very little has to do with how nice the buildings were (or weren't). Yet that seems to be where a disproportionate amount of money goes.

---

Says Unit2sucks. Lol. I mean, you gotta admit that some pretty good self ownage there.

---

Thank you for noticing! The fact that I'm here after having lived in Unit 2 should speak volumes.