The Big Ten and academics

Almost any school out there quantifies applicants. At my alma mater, a cumulative GPA was forecasted for every applicant. Then it was simply a matter of setting the cutoff. Now we all know that scholarship athletes, especially in the prime-time sports, do not go through a similar admissions process. I have long argued, however, that if you really want to see hypocrisy at work, look at the divergence in "scores" between the showplace athletes and the student body in general at your more prestigious institutions. I'd bet folding money that some of the ugliest mismatches in this regard are in top-flight places like Duke and UNC in basketball or Southern Cal in football.

 

Graduation rates, as that Ann Arbor series so astutely pointed out, can be very misleading. Send 'em through the general studies program with the helpful professor and they'll all graduate.

 

Nobody intelligent would rank MSU on a plane with IU and Iowa. Try about 50 slots lower.

 

Sorry, but in my line of work Michigan State's right at (if not at) the top. I made the short-list for a search there when I was a freshly minted PhD ... didn't get the gig, but a decade later it still feels good that I was even in the running.

 

That IU is that low somewhat surprises me, but IU (and Purdue) have a more limited academic offering, because IU only offers liberal arts & business programs and Purdue is mostly a nerd (/iugradslip) ... I mean, sci-ag-tech school.

 

Seems like you might blame oversigning more than academics, if you're going to blame anything:

 

How hard are the relative academic standards of a school?

How about looking at what the entrance criteria is for the incoming freshmen and the JUCO transfers?

Graduation rates are nice, but if the school is easy to get in and the degree was easy, does not really tell you much.

I can tell you that comparing a gen.ed./phys. ed. degree to a degree in electrical engineering is ridiculous.

 

I'd say it's more geography than academics.

 

For private schools, Duke (or should I say North Carolina Central? If you can shoot the J, it's the same school) is right up at the top.

 

Big Ten schools just don't have the speed recruits in the region. That is the demographical reality.

Also, if you are a 5-star speed recruit, why would you pass up SEC, Texas, Oklahoma or USC? Their games are bigger, programs are pipelines to the NFL and the baby dolls are hotter.

The distinction is in the crowd. Big Ten crowds tend to be very upscale. Outside of the student bodies, the fans are 56-year-old WASPs with lots of disposable income. Bluebloods.

When I've been at SEC games, it is a very different vibe. Not so much alums as they are fans. Loud, mouthy but a ton more passionate than the Judge Smails-types who make up the 50-yard line seats crowd in the Big Ten.

 

Who gives a fuck about academics? I just want to know who the legends and leaders are.

 

Graduation rates are often skewed due to transfers.

Sans a link in the original post, I'll assume those are the U.S. News and World Report rankings that take items like alumni giving, overall endowment, level of student aid and retention, etc. into account for their university rankings.

http://www.usnews.com/rankings

http://www.usnews.com/articles/education/best-colleges/2010/08/17/methodology-undergraduate-ranking-criteria-and-weights-2011.html

http://www.usnews.com/articles/education/best-colleges/2010/08/17/how-us-news-calculates-the-college-rankings.html