|
Post by HoyaRejuveNation85 on May 27, 2020 17:00:18 GMT -5
There is a strong trend toward diversity and inclusion in the workplace and in schools. Articles are written to support this stance. I’m all for it, but recognize the placement of stories to go with the times. I’m of the opinion that doing away with SATs is lowering the bar. Didn’t mean to offend. Okay... the framing of that article is that what colleges really want is money, rather than either academic excellence *OR* diversity: That NYT Magazine piece isn't an argument for or against standardized tests per se, and is not centered on that topic anyway. Regardless, the fact that Trinity College's s Vice President for Enrollment and Student Success is named Angel Pérez is not an argument one way or the other. His background is certainly very different from that of the average/stereotypical Trinity student, and he is a big advocate of both increased diversity and test-optional admissions. At the same time, under his watch, the academic profile of Trinity's incoming class has only gone up: Elite schools of all stripes place much greater weight on high school grades, rigor of curriculum, and class rank or equivalent than they do on standardized tests, so it's not like this is a false increase induced by the removal of tests as a criteria. Georgetown's winkle to this is asking for more standardized tests, in the form of three SAT IIs, in order to reduce the weight of any one test, and in particular of the SAT I or ACT. "More data is better" is Charlie Deacon's stance. When I worked in undergraduate admissions at Georgetown in the mid to late 80s, I recall the holistic review that Russky describes and was proud Georgetown looked beyond the strict numbers. That said, standardized testing was an important metric and, at that time, the single best predictor of undergraduate success (assuming that only means GPA). Things may have changed but I remember it clearly.
|
|
RusskyHoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
In Soviet Russia, Hoya Blue Bleeds You!
Posts: 4,600
|
Post by RusskyHoya on May 31, 2020 12:16:53 GMT -5
One of the interesting wrinkles to all this is that Georgetown itself is home to one of the centers of research and thinking on the topic, the conclusions of which are... probably not ones that Charlie Deacon (or his successor) is going to rush to adopt.
Even if one is sympathetic to the overarching ideological and policy goals, there's a real first mover/collective action problem here. No one wants to go out on these kinds of limbs by themselves:
|
|
DFW HOYA
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 5,746
|
Post by DFW HOYA on May 31, 2020 13:11:36 GMT -5
One of the interesting wrinkles to all this is that Georgetown itself is home to one of the centers of research and thinking on the topic, the conclusions of which are... probably not ones that Charlie Deacon (or his successor) is going to rush to adopt. Thought: Legacy admissions is frowned upon by the public policy community when it is directed at private schools (who by definition can admit whomever they want), while it is largely ignored when discussing some state schools and HBCU's. Any idea why this is? Questions: 1. How is "Latino" defined by these educators? (Here in Texas, it's called Hispanic, but I digress.) A sixth generation Texan who doesn't know Spanish but who happens to have a Mexican surname is in the same crosstab as a migrant from Guatemala. 2. How is "class" defined? Net income?
|
|
RusskyHoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
In Soviet Russia, Hoya Blue Bleeds You!
Posts: 4,600
|
Post by RusskyHoya on Jul 3, 2020 13:09:51 GMT -5
[Thought: Legacy admissions is frowned upon by the public policy community when it is directed at private schools (who by definition can admit whomever they want), while it is largely ignored when discussing some state schools and HBCU's. Any idea why this is? Short answer: state schools and HBCUs are not seen seen as major drivers of opportunity hoarding in this country, since they serve much larger and more socioeconomically diverse/disadvantaged populations and do not confer the same sort of seal of approval that elite private institutions do. You do see this same critique applied to public law schools that are considered elite, like Boalt, but obviously that's a much more niche situation. Questions: 1. How is "Latino" defined by these educators? (Here in Texas, it's called Hispanic, but I digress.) A sixth generation Texan who doesn't know Spanish but who happens to have a Mexican surname is in the same crosstab as a migrant from Guatemala. Debates about Hispanic/Latino/Latinx identity are obviously long-standing and ongoing. In short, Hispanic is considered an ethnic identifier but not a racial one - you can be white and Hispanic (Spaniards), black and Hispanic (Dominicans), etc. Latino intersects these and is reflects the Mestizo character of much of Latin America (it would be irresponsible not to note that race is a cultural construct and is specific to the culture in which it is constructed - people considered 'obviously' Latino in the U.S. often self-define as white in their home countries, in contrast to their country(wo)men with African heritage, etc.). For the purposes of educational demographic reporting, Department of Education guidelines provide the relevant framework: www2.ed.gov/policy/rschstat/guid/raceethnicity/index.htmlTo go back to your hypothetical example: "A sixth generation Texan who doesn't know Spanish but who happens to have a Mexican surname" is welcome to self-identify as white, if that is how they identify. There is no Racial Definition Police enforcing what can only ever be inexact and somewhat arbitrary distinctions. A migrant from Guatamala would, unless they have U.S. citizenship, likely be considered an international student and thus not reported in any of these categories (this is one reason why many campuses have far more Asian students on campus than the demographics show, as the international component is oftentimes significantly Chinese and South Asian in origin). 2. How is "class" defined? Net income? Obviously, this too is a topic of never-ending debate, with no definitive definition possible. You will have seen that Georgetown often uses first-generation status (no parents completed college) as shorthand for this, as seen in the Georgetown Scholarship Program's focus. The most common objection to this is that there are plenty of (mostly white) blue-collar coded workers and small business owners who have lots more money than those with diplomas. That does not tend to be a demographic Georgetown draws from much, but it's a valid point. Income is not the same thing as wealth is not the same thing as class, though all are strongly correlated with one another. Seeking exact definitions seems like a distraction.
|
|
|
Post by happyhoya1979 on Sept 13, 2020 19:19:30 GMT -5
On the eve of the 2021 rankings, Georgetown, as always and given that we can't change certain financial metrics, has three basic objectives-
1) maintain a top 25 overall ranking 2) be ranked ahead of all state universities. Being lower ranked than Rice, Wash U or Northwestern is inconsequential and does not hurt us at all. Being lower ranked than a UCLA hurts a lot. 3) stay three to five places away from Notre Dame. Being 24th when UND is something like 19th is inconsequential and doesn't hurt us at all. Being 24th with Notre Dame ranked say 15th does.
Will be interesting to see.
|
|
|
Post by happyhoya1979 on Sept 13, 2020 19:41:36 GMT -5
Just went to US News website. Georgetown moves up to Number 23, UND falls to number 19 and only state schools ahead of us are Cal (only one place) and UCLA.
A really good day for us.
|
|
|
Post by happyhoya1979 on Sept 13, 2020 19:48:36 GMT -5
The Big general news is Columbia now a clean number 3 breaking away from Yale and MIT.
|
|
DFW HOYA
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 5,746
|
Post by DFW HOYA on Sept 13, 2020 21:29:40 GMT -5
Good news for Georgetown--there was some chatter suggesting it was at risk of falling just short of the Top 25.
There is a lot of politics around this list, and in some ways that's why the list changes so infrequently. The original list in 1983 used a different methodology (100% peer reputation) and Georgetown wasn't ranked. The peer group favored more AAU-styled universities, which provided this initial top 15:
1 Stanford 2. Harvard 3. Yale 4. Princeton 5. California 6. Chicago 7. Michigan 8. Cornell 9. Illinois 10. Dartmouth 11. MIT 12. CalTech 13. Carnegie-Mellon 14. Wisconsin 15. Indiana 15. North Carolina 15. Rice 15. Brown 15. Columbia
The expectations game is now such that if anyone other than H-Y-P (Harvard, Yale, Princeton) is #1, the veracity of the ranking would be called into question. And while it's a valid criticism to ask if Virginia or North Carolina should be out of the top 25 behind Washington (MO) or Emory, it hasn't moved the ranking enough to resettle them.
The three universities which have really moved up this ladder are the following:
1. USC (now a legitimate top 25 school aside Stanford, Berkeley and UCLA); 2. Florida (now #30) 3. Villanova, which was once classified as a regional school, moved into the national rankings in 2016 and has moved as high as #46 in 2019, now #53. But that's still ahead of Maryland (#58), Penn State (#63), and GW (#66).
|
|
|
Post by reformation on Sept 14, 2020 11:35:11 GMT -5
Good news. Also feels good to avoid potential damaging exit from top 25. Has anyone analyzed why we moved up from last yr.
|
|
|
Post by happyhoya1979 on Sept 15, 2020 6:46:12 GMT -5
1. USC (now a legitimate top 25 school aside Stanford, Berkeley and UCLA); having had a consistent top 10 Football team that won National Championships is important2. Florida (now #30). h aving had a top 10 basketball team that won consecutive National Championships is important3. Villanova, which was once classified as a regional school, moved into the national rankings in 2016 and has moved as high as #46 in 2019, now #53. But that's still ahead of Maryland (#58), Penn State (#63), and GW (#66). having had a top 10 basketball team that won National Championships is importantNoticing a pattern
|
|
|
Post by happyhoya1979 on Sept 15, 2020 6:49:44 GMT -5
1. USC (now a legitimate top 25 school aside Stanford, Berkeley and UCLA); having had a consistent top 10 Football team that won National Championships is important2. Florida (now #30). h aving had a top 10 basketball team that won consecutive National Championships is important3. Villanova, which was once classified as a regional school, moved into the national rankings in 2016 and has moved as high as #46 in 2019, now #53. But that's still ahead of Maryland (#58), Penn State (#63), and GW (#66). having had a top 10 basketball team that won National Championships is importantNoticing a pattern As to Columbia's rise, apparently winning national championships in fencing is important.
|
|
SSHoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
"Forget it Jake, it's Chinatown."
Posts: 18,298
|
Post by SSHoya on Sept 15, 2020 7:30:38 GMT -5
Sailing doesn't count??? (Plus NCAA soccer Champions, 2019) The sailing team competes in the Middle Atlantic Intercollegiate Sailing Association (MAISA) of the Inter-Collegiate Sailing Association (ICSA). Under coach Mike Callahan has been ranked number 1 nationally in the ICSA Sailing World College Rankings on multiple occasions.[55] The team sails from the Washington Sailing Marina [56] Andrew Campbell was named U.S. Olympic Committee (USOC) Male Sailing Athlete of the Year in 2002 and 2005,[57] and ICSA College Sailor of the Year in 2006. He is one of the six team members awarded as College Sailors of the Year on seven occasions, as Nevin Snow has taken the prize twice, in 2015 and 2016. Campbell helped lead the team to the first of their 14 Inter-Collegiate Sailing Association National Championships since 2001, and are the reigning national co-ed champions as of 2016.[58][59][60] During this time the team also won seven MAISA conference championships, known as the America Trophy.[61] After the team's 2013 national championship, they were invited to participate in the 2014 World University Match Racing Championships in Trentino, Italy, on Lago di Ledro, which they won 7–1, besting nineteen teams from fourteen countries.[62] The Hoyas won the Leonard M. Fowle Trophy to the best overall collegiate team in 2006. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgetown_Hoyas#Sailing
|
|
|
Post by happyhoya1979 on Sept 15, 2020 8:45:37 GMT -5
Sailing doesn't count??? (Plus NCAA soccer Champions, 2019) The sailing team competes in the Middle Atlantic Intercollegiate Sailing Association (MAISA) of the Inter-Collegiate Sailing Association (ICSA). Under coach Mike Callahan has been ranked number 1 nationally in the ICSA Sailing World College Rankings on multiple occasions.[55] The team sails from the Washington Sailing Marina [56] Andrew Campbell was named U.S. Olympic Committee (USOC) Male Sailing Athlete of the Year in 2002 and 2005,[57] and ICSA College Sailor of the Year in 2006. He is one of the six team members awarded as College Sailors of the Year on seven occasions, as Nevin Snow has taken the prize twice, in 2015 and 2016. Campbell helped lead the team to the first of their 14 Inter-Collegiate Sailing Association National Championships since 2001, and are the reigning national co-ed champions as of 2016.[58][59][60] During this time the team also won seven MAISA conference championships, known as the America Trophy.[61] After the team's 2013 national championship, they were invited to participate in the 2014 World University Match Racing Championships in Trentino, Italy, on Lago di Ledro, which they won 7–1, besting nineteen teams from fourteen countries.[62] The Hoyas won the Leonard M. Fowle Trophy to the best overall collegiate team in 2006. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgetown_Hoyas#SailingYour right! The soccer championship was our ticket to #23 from # 24. And Sailing put the wind at our back as well.
|
|
hoya9797
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 4,204
|
Post by hoya9797 on Sept 15, 2020 8:49:17 GMT -5
1. USC (now a legitimate top 25 school aside Stanford, Berkeley and UCLA); having had a consistent top 10 Football team that won National Championships is important2. Florida (now #30). h aving had a top 10 basketball team that won consecutive National Championships is important3. Villanova, which was once classified as a regional school, moved into the national rankings in 2016 and has moved as high as #46 in 2019, now #53. But that's still ahead of Maryland (#58), Penn State (#63), and GW (#66). having had a top 10 basketball team that won National Championships is importantNoticing a pattern You’ve got to go back awhile before USC was consistently in the top 10 and winning championships. Same for Florida basketball.
|
|
|
Post by happyhoya1979 on Sept 15, 2020 8:54:52 GMT -5
I wonder where all 3 schools were in say 2003 in the rankings versus now. Pretty sure it was much lower for all 3. Villanova wasn't even in the game and was a regional I remember.
I guess the key takeaway is that you need to have people who sweat and do it well, (even in the Ivy League if we look at Columbia).
|
|
Bigs"R"Us
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,642
|
Post by Bigs"R"Us on Sept 15, 2020 17:15:09 GMT -5
#23 is certainly an acceptable ranking. I know for a fact that other schools worship these rankings and game them in every way possible. My colleague sits on the board of a peer institution ranked above us. What would it take to get us in the top-20, short of changes to the methodology?
|
|
SSHoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
"Forget it Jake, it's Chinatown."
Posts: 18,298
|
Post by SSHoya on Sept 15, 2020 17:37:49 GMT -5
#23 is certainly an acceptable ranking. I know for a fact that other schools worship these rankings and game them in every way possible. My colleague sits on the board of a peer institution ranked above us. What would it take to get us in the top-20, short of changes to the methodology? My WAG is we need a bigger endowment. I think GU is about $1.8 billion and that's barely ahead of Liberty University at around $1.6 billion.
|
|
DFW HOYA
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 5,746
|
Post by DFW HOYA on Sept 15, 2020 18:13:14 GMT -5
#23 is certainly an acceptable ranking. I know for a fact that other schools worship these rankings and game them in every way possible. My colleague sits on the board of a peer institution ranked above us. What would it take to get us in the top-20, short of changes to the methodology? Great question, but not an easy answer. Here are the ranking factors in play--we don't have the exact metrics for Georgetown but we can discuss it in general: Graduation Rates (22% of total)Average six year Graduation rate : Very good--95%. Average first year retention rate: Very strong--96%. The national average is 68%. Social Mobility (5% of total)Pell Grant graduation rates and performance: GU doesn't have as many Pell Grant recipients (~13 percent) as public colleges (e.g., UCLA 34%, Berkeley 29%) and it's on the lower end of the top 25. Graduation Rate Performance (8% of total)This is the measure of graduation rates between those with Pell Grants vs. those without them, to which Georgetown is fairly strong, somewhere around 95% vs. 90%. Undergraduate Academic Reputation (20% of total) This is the "peer assessment" portion of the total and one where Georgetown takes a back seat in many cases. I think this is one of those areas where a liberal arts background tends to register a mildly negative bias--Georgetown is one of only two top 25 schools without engineering or the applied sciences. Short of Amazon footing that bill (and they've already aligned with Virginia Tech), I don't see that changing in the forseeable future. Faculty Resources (20% of total) One of those areas where GU probably loses on the margin in compensation and "percentage of faculty with terminal degree in their field" aka adjuncts--but to be fair, an adjunct in Washington DC is a different character than an adjunct at Ohio State; no matter, that's 3% of the total and probably a ding there. Student-faculty ratio (11:1) is strong. Alumni Giving Rate (3% of total) The percentage has been reduced in the formula over the years but Georgetown has made considerable strides in the last 15 years, from roughly 24% to 37%. Princeton (62%) and Notre Dame (50%) are the outliers but 37% is probably in the median of the top 25. Graduate Indebtedness (5% of total) Georgetown ($1.7B) has the lowest endowment of a Top 25 institution. The next closest (Berkeley) is at $2B, UCLa at $2.7B and Brown at $4B, More endowment, potentially less indebtedness. Student Selectivity (7% of total) Very strong, and not compromised by the dubious nature of Common Application and resultant accept rates in the 3-6% range. Financial Resources Per Student (10% of total) See above. When liberal arts colleges are included, Georgetown is approx. 123rd nationally in this figure, but certainly 25th of 25. I posted on this a few days ago--this number can't jump given the kind of alumni Georgetown produces in terms of income potential. The next Sergey Brin (Google, Stanford), Nathan Blecharczyk (Airbnb, Harvard) or Bobby Murphy (Snapchat, Stanford) aren't coming to GU to take IR or public health. In short, #23 is very, very good. I don't think Georgetown can leverage the metrics to get to the top 15, but would have to leapfrog past Cal, UCLA and Emory to be a candidate for the top 20. Better yet, it has to leapfrog Notre Dame, but that's an endowment play.
|
|
Bigs"R"Us
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,642
|
Post by Bigs"R"Us on Sept 17, 2021 7:35:55 GMT -5
#23
|
|
|
Post by reformation on Sept 18, 2021 17:48:55 GMT -5
Rating is ok--to improve it somewhat materially without somebody handing us a pile of money I guess one could do the following--based on DFW's detail from last year:
Resources per student: Gtwn has a lot of students in academically marginal masters programs--I get that the univ does most MA programs to make money but at some level it takes away from undergrad resources and probably hurts our ratings somewhat--some type of more sophisticated cost benefit analysis should be applied to the masters programs. I get that a few like the security studies programs are very good--most are marginal
Academic reputation: The level of teaching in a lot of our masters programs is what one would get at the advanced undergrad programs in most top colleges. Top colleges know that in a lot of subjects gtwn undergrad from pure acdemic perspective could use an upgrade--This is somewhat within our control. I think a lot of gtwn people may think its just some residual anti catholic thing or the fact that we're not affiliated with an elite acaddemic conf is the cause of our lower than expected academic reputation rating--there's maybe a little truth to the complaint but also a some justification for the lower score based on the actual quality of the programs.
If we hire somebody from an elite institution to replace DeGioia when he retires I suspect the above issues willbe addressed and for better or worse focus more on the ratings--if we go with an internal or random jesuit i suspect that it will be status quo
|
|