how important is school ranking ...

[edk]

I applied to 4 Ph.D. engineering schools and was accepted into 3/4. The problem that I have is that the 1 that rejected me was my top choice/top 10 school and the others are between #40-#60 [according to usnews]... The reason I didn't apply to any other schools "in between", is because I really didn't want to move as I just bought a house and have family in the area. All the schools are in driving distance. I thought that I wouldn't have any problem getting into my first choice as it was my alma mater for undergrad and masters... I had a 3.8 gpa and 800 quant.

Now I'm kicking myself as I know that I could get into a "better" ranked school but does it really matter? I liked the schools that I got into and think that I would enjoy my time there. I don't really care that much about rankings, but I'm constantly fighting with my parents because they want me to go to a more highly ranked school and take a year off. I'm arguing that ranking isn't that big of a deal and my education/job opportunities will not suffer as a result of my going to a #40 school rather than a hypothetical #15 school 1 year later...

What would you do? Any advice? FYI, parents are really pissed [i believe half is because of their own selfish reasons, they want to say "my son went to blah blah school"]...

[iwantmyPhD]

It's your life, not your parent's. Also, if you just bought a house (within two years) and you sell for profit you're going to get hit with some nasty taxes. If you like the schools you got into and they are a good match for you (program, atmosphere, faculty) and you can see yourself being happy there- go.

And congrats on your acceptance!

[studentfromLA]

I'd be interested in hearing people's opinion on this topic as well. I'm admitted with funding in a field that is small -- like there are 30 programs in the country that are ranked in my field. I was admitted to the number 1 or 2 program, depending on which list you are looking at, without funding. And I was admitted to a program that is ranked 4th or 10th, depending on the ranking system you are looking at, but with full funding. I'm leaning toward the program with funding, for several reasons, the first of which is that they really seem interested in me as a candidate, whereas the top-ranked program has been much more lackidaisical re. arranging a visit, hasn't offered funding, etc. Both of the programs I've been admitted to have good placement -- indeed, recent grads from my lower-ranked program have been hired to teach at my higher ranked program in recent years, but more people from the higher ranked program seem to have placements than the one that offered me money.

Is it worth going into debt to go to a school that is ranked at the top of your field, or can you go just as far with a well-ranked school that is not at the top?

[mareserinitatis]

I was in a similar boat. I did my undergrad at my current school, and then switched to a different department to do my masters. I was planning on staying here for my PhD, but a friend (who is a professor at another school) pulled me aside and said I better get my head on straight. I decided to go to U of MN instead of stay at my current school because of the things he told me about the "inner workings of academia".

(FWIW, I'm guessing the reason you didn't get accepted for a PhD is because they wanted you to go elsewhere. It's pretty common for departments to want to "push you out of the nest".)

If you want to go into industry, rankings aren't quite as important. If you want to be a prof, they're pretty critical. If you come out of a program in the top twenty or thirty, your chances of getting a job elsewhere in academia are going to be much better.

I don't think it would hurt to take a year off to work (especially not in engineering...they might like that you get some practical experience) and then apply for other places the following year if you're planning on the academic route. I'd also encourage you to identify a potential advisor (read their papers!) and visit the places you're thinking about *before* you apply. It might sound strange, but they'll be more likely to remember you and take a closer look at your app. If you also take some time to look into literature pertaining to work you might like to do, you could potentially have a chunk of a lit search done before you go somewhere, so you'd really hit the ground running!

Good luck in your decisions.

[StarvingStudentYeah]

If you want to go into industry, rankings aren't quite as important. If you want to be a prof, they're pretty critical. If you come out of a program in the top twenty or thirty, your chances of getting a job elsewhere in academia are going to be much better.

In my experience the inverse of this statement is actually far more correct. In academia, traditional ratings are so unimportant as to almost be completely irrelevant. It is the non-academic world where rankings pull weight.

Here's why:

There are various sources of ratings, but among the most common are US News and World Reports, and other publications of a similar ilk. The rankings are based on things that IN NO WAY quantify the actual academic prowess of the department or individuals therein. For instance, these rankings are based on things like 1) How many applicants were there, from the aggregate how many were accepted, from the accepted how many enrolled. This can be somewhat of a measure of general desirability, but certainly fails to speak to quality in ANY quantifiable way. Another measure is the number of publications and presentations (posters, symposia, etc) produced by faculty/students in a given dept. Unfortunately, this is often done one aggregate rather than mean per person. Obviously, this places MIT, OSU, and other schools at an advantage over a school like say William and Mary.

Academics are smart people, and they know how to be true consumers of information and judge objectively what is, and is not of value. Notice this primary argument has not even touched the obvious fallacy of reliance on rankings based on individual differences in people, which assumable academics have learned at some point. ROFL.

On the other hand, someone from a non-academic field will OFTEN be more impressed by a Yale than a Simmons. A non-academic may think a M.S.W from Pepperdine is preferred to a M.S.W from Bryn Mawr - even though BM is far superior in that specific field.

As a result, the institutions you attended will impact the lay person more than the academic who knows better.

I can personally corroborate this as the majority of my family are, in fact, academics and feel this way and report that their colleagues feel the same. Another source of corroboration can be found on the faculty web pages and CV's of "elite" universities - they are full of professors from "lesser" schools. That should tell you something.

In summation, the reputation or ranking of a school will have far less impact on your future opportunities than will interpersonal factors such as your passion, your output, your ability to do effective research, your ability to effectively network with your peers.

This is pretty simple folks, Harvard produces some bums, while WVU produces some presidents of MIT. Go where you will be happy, you will be valued, and where you will thrive.

[maa]

I think similar topic is running in political science forum. You can have a look at it.

http://forum.thegradcafe.com/viewtopic.php?f=48&t=13311

[mareserinitatis]

So...what I said, basically.

I've actually been looking in my area of interest, and I can tell you that most of the places that have the degree I'm looking for have their profs come from places like MIT, Stanford, Caltech. There are profs from other schools, too, but they are greatly in the minority. Furthermore, I can tell you that at my current school, there are not a lot of people from big name schools...and there is a good reason. People from those schools can get better deals someplace else, they don't like the climate, and the working conditions (even for the profs) is less than desirable.

So if you don't want to end up in a faculty position for which you can't find qualified grad students and are spending all of your time teaching such that you fear not getting tenure for lack of time to do research, I suggest you look really hard at that big name school. This is not my opinion...this is what my friends who are working professors are telling me. Yeah...the same ones who are doing the hiring for their own departments. :wink:

[iwantmyPhD]

I don't think rankings are the only thing to consider. I think it is more important that the school you choose has faculty that specialize in the area that YOU want to specialize in because they will be able to help you make connections and expand your network in a way that is meaningful to YOU. Being in contact with a bunch of people who don't give a hoot about your research interests isn't of much use to you. Keep in mind this is coming from someone who is in the social sciences- I'm not sure if engineering is quite the same.

So...what I said, basically.

I've actually been looking in my area of interest, and I can tell you that most of the places that have the degree I'm looking for have their profs come from places like MIT, Stanford, Caltech. There are profs from other schools, too, but they are greatly in the minority. Furthermore, I can tell you that at my current school, there are not a lot of people from big name schools...and there is a good reason. People from those schools can get better deals someplace else, they don't like the climate, and the working conditions (even for the profs) is less than desirable.

So if you don't want to end up in a faculty position for which you can't find qualified grad students and are spending all of your time teaching such that you fear not getting tenure for lack of time to do research, I suggest you look really hard at that big name school. This is not my opinion...this is what my friends who are working professors are telling me. Yeah...the same ones who are doing the hiring for their own departments. :wink:

mareserinitatis, if you were referring to what starving student was saying, I think you might be confused. Starvingstudent is saying the opposite of what you were saying. If you were referring to the other thread, well I apologize- I haven't read that thread yet.

[mareserinitatis]

Yes, I was referring to what the prof posted in the other thread.

I do completely agree that where you go should be determined by your interests. If you can't be at a good school where your chances of getting a job are better, it may not be worth the time as you won't be doing what you want in the long run. Better to start a career. (I will say that, for engineering, a master's is probably all the further you want to go. *Most* places won't care about a PhD.)

There is an exception, though. There are those excellent researchers who are at smaller schools. In those cases, you may be able to run off the reputation of your advisor rather than the school.

But still...it's a crapshoot.

[santana]

Ranking is very important. No, make it extremely important.

It is like born in a wealthy family as opposed to be born in a project.

At least in the US, it is a very strong class and hierarchical society you can rarely break sometimes but it is very foolish to try swim against the tide. Unless the ranking is close you should never choose a weaker school if you have an option to go to a "better" i.e. ranked higher.

[StarvingStudentYeah]

The simple fact is that there are people peddling irresponsible and uninformed information on this board.

Ranking is a SMALL piece of a very LARGE and complex puzzle. In the end, you are better off at a place where you are a good fit with the faculty, and where you can be the most productive version of yourself that you can possibly be. There is a vast array of examples of people who go on to Ivy and otherwise esteemed faculty careers having come from schools with lower rankings. On the flip side, there are large numbers of folks from top 10 schools who fail to produce any meaningful research of their own and end up at SW Missouri State.

People on here are very willing to give you "hard and fast" answers to serious questions which are not truly answerable in such a cavalier fashion. Frankly, I find it offensive in the extreme at the suggestion that academia is unaware, myopic, and near-sighted segment of society, Rather, my opinion of academia is that it's a rich and varied sector aware that any construct or two-part logic system is deficient in the extreme.

Rest assured, if you are an intelligent person of vibrant intellect you will not be black-balled regardless of where you completed your dissertation. To wit, the substance of the dissertation and the originality of your work will determine your station in the great land of academia. Academia is by no means a land of rigid rules ruled by hard-seated rules from people saying, "him not Harvard, him only top 25 school - him not worthy."

When picking a school, look at the entire problem holistically and intelligently. Look at your fit, then look at the fit, and then the fit again. Then, look at finding, location, climate, urban/rural, your specific advisor, alumni profiles, discussions with current grad students in your program, etc. For people to come on here and say that the one over-riding consideration should be ranking is just wrong and again, irresponsible.

Ranking is a piece, but only a piece of the deliberation process of true academics.

[iwantmyPhD]

The simple fact is that there are people peddling irresponsible and uninformed information on this board.

Ranking is a SMALL piece of a very LARGE and complex puzzle. In the end, you are better off at a place where you are a good fit with the faculty, and where you can be the most productive version of yourself that you can possibly be. There is a vast array of examples of people who go on to Ivy and otherwise esteemed faculty careers having come from schools with lower rankings. On the flip side, there are large numbers of folks from top 10 schools who fail to produce any meaningful research of their own and end up at SW Missouri State.

People on here are very willing to give you "hard and fast" answers to serious questions which are not truly answerable in such a cavalier fashion. Frankly, I find it offensive in the extreme at the suggestion that academia is unaware, myopic, and near-sighted segment of society, Rather, my opinion of academia is that it's a rich and varied sector aware that any construct or two-part logic system is deficient in the extreme.

Rest assured, if you are an intelligent person of vibrant intellect you will not be black-balled regardless of where you completed your dissertation. To wit, the substance of the dissertation and the originality of your work will determine your station in the great land of academia. Academia is by no means a land of rigid rules ruled by hard-seated rules from people saying, "him not Harvard, him only top 25 school - him not worthy."

When picking a school, look at the entire problem holistically and intelligently. Look at your fit, then look at the fit, and then the fit again. Then, look at finding, location, climate, urban/rural, your specific advisor, alumni profiles, discussions with current grad students in your program, etc. For people to come on here and say that the one over-riding consideration should be ranking is just wrong and again, irresponsible.

Ranking is a piece, but only a piece of the deliberation process of true academics.

two thumbs up!!

[Minnesotan]

The simple fact is that there are people peddling irresponsible and uninformed information on this board.

Ranking is a SMALL piece of a very LARGE and complex puzzle. In the end, you are better off at a place where you are a good fit with the faculty, and where you can be the most productive version of yourself that you can possibly be. There is a vast array of examples of people who go on to Ivy and otherwise esteemed faculty careers having come from schools with lower rankings. On the flip side, there are large numbers of folks from top 10 schools who fail to produce any meaningful research of their own and end up at SW Missouri State.

People on here are very willing to give you "hard and fast" answers to serious questions which are not truly answerable in such a cavalier fashion. Frankly, I find it offensive in the extreme at the suggestion that academia is unaware, myopic, and near-sighted segment of society, Rather, my opinion of academia is that it's a rich and varied sector aware that any construct or two-part logic system is deficient in the extreme.

Rest assured, if you are an intelligent person of vibrant intellect you will not be black-balled regardless of where you completed your dissertation. To wit, the substance of the dissertation and the originality of your work will determine your station in the great land of academia. Academia is by no means a land of rigid rules ruled by hard-seated rules from people saying, "him not Harvard, him only top 25 school - him not worthy."

When picking a school, look at the entire problem holistically and intelligently. Look at your fit, then look at the fit, and then the fit again. Then, look at finding, location, climate, urban/rural, your specific advisor, alumni profiles, discussions with current grad students in your program, etc. For people to come on here and say that the one over-riding consideration should be ranking is just wrong and again, irresponsible.

Ranking is a piece, but only a piece of the deliberation process of true academics.

While this is true, one has to consider the placement records of potential programs among the more important pieces of the puzzle. Sure, there's likely very little difference between a top 5 and a top 20 school in that regard, but when you start to consider a top 20 versus a top 50, some investigative work is necessary. Do the people at the top 20 school get a leg up on the competition? Possibly. Is this everything? Of course not! Either way, one must be a productive, well-rounded job candidate to find placement, but if we take (for argument's sake -- I realize people will object to the idea of similarity) two people with otherwise equal resumes who attended schools of vastly different rankings, I would be willing to bet that the person from the more prestigious program will have the advantage.

There are, as has been said earlier in this thread, two types of prestige, though. The first is of the more general sort. We'll call it university prestige. University prestige is meaningful if one is planning to head into the public sector, but it means very little indeed if one stays in academia. If Harvard has a horrible program in underwater basket weaving, then you would be poorly served by completing your degree there, if you plan to profess.

Department prestige (my second category of prestige), on the other hand, works in the opposite fashion. If someone in the public sector hears that you went to Southern Podunk State University for your degree, they will hardly be impressed. However, if everyone in your academic field realizes that SPSU has one of the top programs in underwater basket weaving, and you want a job teaching underwater basket weaving in academia, then you will probably receive more careful consideration when you apply.

My point made brief: I would replace concerns about ranking with concerns about placement records. Yes, prestige is something to keep in mind, but it is not a universal desideratum. Or, at least, it is not equally applicable in the job-seeking process; you need to consider the perspectives of the people whom you want to impress.

[StarvingStudentYeah]

I agree with the balance of that Minnesotan. Additionally, I respect the fact that you are providing well thought out and reasoned information to those who ask for it.

[santana]

Ranking is extremely important. Of course first you look at the program ranking then overall school ranking. Unless you are a genius like Ramanujan or Einstein in which case it really doesn't matter what school you attended, ranking of schools you attended will play extraordinary role in your career.

If you do not believe me take a look at any department of any major university and see which schools their faculty came from. In my experience, search committees' first discrimination in hiring process will go by the reputation of one's diploma i.e. school. You can idealize personal qualities as much as you like but the reality will show you that doesn't matter much. Again, unless you are Ramanujan which most of us are not. Top schools produce a lot of mediocre scientists but these people will reap most of the top jobs out there. The rest will get crumbs.

By the way, most of the fokls here know that well already - that is why they bragg about admissions.

[engguy]

santana, i haven't agreed with a damn thing you've written on this forum, and the only difference now is that it's not just your usual blowhardiness but it's potentially scaring lots of people who are in the midst of making painful and difficult decisions. On a different thread, you whined that over-35 folks (of which I'm also one) would be discriminated against in this process -- how did that one work out? (I mean for you, as well as for me.)

Listen folks, ranking is important, placement is important, these are not things that should be overlooked. But the attitude of "go to the highest ranked school that accepts you -- period" is so mercenary and cynical that to me it defeats the whole purpose of pursuing a higher education. Make a list, rank items according to importance for you, personally, go down the list and score your choices and make a decision as best you can. To go solely or even primarily by ranking is to admit that you are already one of those soulless individuals who haunt all too many halls of academia.

And good night. :twisted:

[Minnesotan]

By the way, most of the fokls here know that well already - that is why they bragg about admissions.

I thought it was because academia breeds pompous windbags. =)

[iwantmyPhD]

Personally, I wouldn't take advice from someone who can't even spell brag properly.

[StarvingStudentYeah]

santana, i haven't agreed with a damn thing you've written on this forum, and the only difference now is that it's not just your usual blowhardiness but it's potentially scaring lots of people who are in the midst of making painful and difficult decisions. On a different thread, you whined that over-35 folks (of which I'm also one) would be discriminated against in this process -- how did that one work out? (I mean for you, as well as for me.)

Listen folks, ranking is important, placement is important, these are not things that should be overlooked. But the attitude of "go to the highest ranked school that accepts you -- period" is so mercenary and cynical that to me it defeats the whole purpose of pursuing a higher education. Make a list, rank items according to importance for you, personally, go down the list and score your choices and make a decision as best you can. To go solely or even primarily by ranking is to admit that you are already one of those soulless individuals who haunt all too many halls of academia.

And good night. :twisted:

Well said!

[mareserinitatis]

Frankly, I find it offensive in the extreme at the suggestion that academia is unaware, myopic, and near-sighted segment of society

Uh...in my experience, that's the way it is exactly. Profs don't always see much outside of their careers. Being well-rounded will not impress them, nor will it get you a job.

And if you've ever sat on a search committee, you'd know this. As Minnesotan said, you can take two people with exactly the same qualifications and the determining factor will be where they went to school. Those people from "average" schools will not be thrown out, but the people from good schools get bumped up in the stack.

Most departments view hires from the top ten or 20 programs in their field as adding prestige to their department. This will make it easier to attract students (which is hard when so many of them want to go into academia...and there are not enough jobs for them all). It will also increase their own reputation.

So yeah, the whole thing is self-centered and myopic...but that's the way academia works right now. I'm hoping that within the next generation or two, the whole thing will be thrown out. But until all the old guys retire, this is where we're stuck.

And frankly, we have a better chance of getting it thrown out if a whole bunch of open-minded folks like yourself get into big schools and then remember the attitude that "school is not important" once they get out and become faculty themselves. I'm guessing a lot of people get that attitude beat out of them once they get into those big grad schools.

[aevertts]

It's probably best to use rankings only when getting a rough idea of what schools you'd like to apply to. A better idea is of course to ask professors/friends/colleagues about the schools they deem best in your academic area. If you've been lucky enough to visit the schools you're considering, the "quality" of the program should be apparent after the visit. Use that judgment of quality rather than some poorly designed rankings from US news. The rest of the factors in choosing a program - research interests, placement, school location - can all be considered along side.

[ukiitm]

Personally, I wouldn't take advice from someone who can't even spell brag properly.

So you wouldn't take advice from those whose first language you know might not be English? That's very open-minded of you. Judge the substance, not the packaging.

And I don't completely agree with santana either.

[StarvingStudentYeah]

Uh...in my experience, that's the way it is exactly. Profs don't always see much outside of their careers. Being well-rounded will not impress them, nor will it get you a job.

And if you've ever sat on a search committee, you'd know this. As Minnesotan said, you can take two people with exactly the same qualifications and the determining factor will be where they went to school. Those people from "average" schools will not be thrown out, but the people from good schools get bumped up in the stack.

Most departments view hires from the top ten or 20 programs in their field as adding prestige to their department. This will make it easier to attract students (which is hard when so many of them want to go into academia...and there are not enough jobs for them all). It will also increase their own reputation.

So yeah, the whole thing is self-centered and myopic...but that's the way academia works right now. I'm hoping that within the next generation or two, the whole thing will be thrown out. But until all the old guys retire, this is where we're stuck.

And frankly, we have a better chance of getting it thrown out if a whole bunch of open-minded folks like yourself get into big schools and then remember the attitude that "school is not important" once they get out and become faculty themselves. I'm guessing a lot of people get that attitude beat out of them once they get into those big grad schools.

I'm sorry you've had such a resoundingly negative experience with academics and academia. In fact, I was student rep on the search committee for a new president of my school as a Soph - and no, I did not learn to over-generalize professors and academics as a myopic bunch of boors. Just last year I had intimate knowledge of a search committee that I did not set on, but had first hand information regarding. This was for a literature position - an early americanist to be specific. One candidate had both a B.A. from an elite "prestige" school, and a PhD from a top 5 dept, along with a person recommendation and phone call to the chair from Billy Connelly, former poet laureate of the US. This candidate lost out to a person who in the words of the committee members, "had an intellectual curiosity and flare you cannot find on paper."

Not to mention that, as I said earlier, much of my family is in academia and I have yet to hear them profess to preferring a power CV over a dynamic person.

As I say though, I'm sorry you have had such a poor experience with academia. It is obvious that you have become cynical, bitter, and that you have some sort of agenda here. I submit to you that, perhaps, this is not the proper forum for disparaging the academe to those of us who still hold it in at least some positive regard.

I promise you, for ever cynical faux-elitist there is a true renaissance intellectual.

I wish you luck and better returns on your academic investment and bid you that I will not say another word on the matter here as I fear this may devolve into a morass of arguments soon if we keep up the pace, which will likely not lead to any of us changing our opinions in any significant way.

At least now the people with questions about this have ample material from both sides of the matter.

[Minnesotan]

I fear this may devolve into a morass of arguments soon if we keep up the pace

I think we passed the point of no return long ago.

[shima]

I think and hear that RANK is not as important as we ( international students ) believe. Americans pay attention to your resume for having a job.

Personally, I think that most of us are in youth and the best period of our lives. So, if we spend this period in a unpleasant place we will have regret. I am in a similar situation. I have been accepted by Umich and Columbia U. although UM has a higher rank, but ann arbor is a small town and very quiet. It is boring for me. I searched a lot and I got that living in ann arbor is not interesting for me at all. So, I will choose Columbia U with a lower rank but a nicer city (NY). I thought that if I choose Columbia U, my job oppertunitie will dicrease a little but I can make it up by having a good resume. And if I go to Um, my job oppertunities will increase but i will miss my youth and i will wait this 5 years to phd in UM finish early. My youth will not be made up by any thing. I am from a big City and I will be depressed in a small town. So why should I choose a high rank university with it's difficulties?

So, study in order to live better, not live in order to study....