Hopelessly_Neurotic Posted January 30, 2009 Posted January 30, 2009 For those of you who admit that the ranking of a program will be a factor in your decision process, what will you consider more, the ranking of the department or the ranking of your subarea? Sometimes the overall department is rated high, but the subarea is not, and then sometimes it's the other way around. All else being equal, which would you prefer and why?
t_ruth Posted January 30, 2009 Posted January 30, 2009 I'm facing this same dilemma. It's strange because my subarea, Educational Psychology, is sometimes in the College of Education and sometimes in Psychology Departments. Also, there are programs in places like Duke, which is ranked as a psych program, but not on the listings as Ed. Psych or Education. And even though we've been advised against it, I think that sometimes undergrad rep matters too. Take Duke as an example here too...because of the undergrad rep., the department rep. may have more staying power over the years so that although it is #28 Psych program, it might be preferable to some of the higher ranked state schools that may fluctuate more... Not that this particular example matters much as I don't think I got in there, but I hope you can follow my reasoning. I wish I had a current connection to academia to guide me through this.
socialpsych Posted January 30, 2009 Posted January 30, 2009 Ranking of subarea. For the same reason I would consider the ranking of the department over the ranking of the entire school! The subarea is where I'm going to be spending my time and where my degree will come from, and if I'm looking for an academic job in the same field, my sense is that's what people will judge me by.
Hopelessly_Neurotic Posted January 30, 2009 Author Posted January 30, 2009 I tend to agree re: prioritizing subarea over department ranking. Which source do you think is most reliable? US News & World? The problem is that the subarea rankings only list the top ten. What if a program you are interested in is 11th? Hmmm, maybe if I pay for a subscription or something they'll let me see the whole list.. I found the Gourman rankings to be a little off and quite different from some of the other sources. The NRC ranking seems reliable but it's from more than 10 years ago... I tend to give the most weight to the US News & World rankings.
t_ruth Posted January 30, 2009 Posted January 30, 2009 Do you have a link to any of the other rankings (outside of US News...)? I bought the subscription and it only gets you the top 20 in subareas. The thing is, with some programs there is a lot of overlap. For example, if I went to an Ed. Psych program in a psychology department I'd be working with developmental, cognitive, and social psych groups and probably also some with college of ed. people.
Hopelessly_Neurotic Posted January 30, 2009 Author Posted January 30, 2009 Yep, here are the NRC and Gourman rankings: http://www.socialpsychology.org/ranking.htm How much was the subscription?? I only know about the top ten in my subarea..kinda curious to know what the next ten are!!
t_ruth Posted January 30, 2009 Posted January 30, 2009 $15. And some areas don't even have 20, but there are more than 10 at least... ETA: thanks for the link. They don't have Ed. Psych though
Hopelessly_Neurotic Posted January 30, 2009 Author Posted January 30, 2009 What area is educational psych most related to? Developmental?
t_ruth Posted January 30, 2009 Posted January 30, 2009 What area is educational psych most related to? Developmental? Yes and no. Depends on the area and specific program...
socialpsych Posted January 30, 2009 Posted January 30, 2009 Which source do you think is most reliable? US News & World? If at all possible, ask profs or even grad students in your field rather than relying on these published rankings. I have been told that the rankings are notoriously bad and behind the times.
t_ruth Posted January 30, 2009 Posted January 30, 2009 If at all possible, ask profs or even grad students in your field rather than relying on these published rankings. I have been told that the rankings are notoriously bad and behind the times. I wish I had someone to ask. It would be great to have an unbiased opinion from someone in the field!
doctoraldude Posted January 30, 2009 Posted January 30, 2009 i'll be facing a similar dilemma (IF i hear from anywhere) ... one particular school for example is ranked 3rd in my area of interest (USNews) but disappears from the overall depatment ranking (i.e. below 30) ! i'd still pick it over the better known departments though :roll:
Hopelessly_Neurotic Posted January 30, 2009 Author Posted January 30, 2009 I agree, getting professors' opinions about reputable programs is another great way to evaluate the quality of a program. But I wouldn't disregard the rankings completely -- the programs sure don't. When they are highly ranked on US News they sure don't miss the opportunity to toot their horn!! Anyway, that particular ranking is thought to be highly reliable because it is based on programs' perceptions concerning the quality of other programs. And it's recent (2009). That said, there is a certain school that is highly ranked for a particular subarea, but I know for a fact that they rarely offer funding to incoming students! The department itself is ranked much lower (in the 30s). Not sure if I would attend that one if given the choice between it and another one with a lower ranked subarea but higher ranked program... Another thing to keep in mind with the rankings is whether a program is consistently ranked across sources (US New and NRC, for example). Also, is it consistently ranked, year after year? There are ways to find that out (lots of google searches..) Word of mouth is also a good indicator (e.g., what students in your field are saying)
timuralp Posted January 30, 2009 Posted January 30, 2009 I'll only say to be slightly wary of those. For instance, a school to remain unnamed was consistently ranked highly in a subfield, even though they had only one faculty member working in it, but it had a big name. A not as well known school was ranked a bit lower, but actually did more research in the area Anyway, I just grabbed the top-20 rankings, that are not actually published (a prof gave them to me from a recent survey within the discipline), took them to 3 professors, and had them tell me where to apply. To answer the original question, the subfield rankings are the ones that matter. No one cares if your school doesn't have a big name, because your subfield is small and everyone knows each other, anyway. You should go wherever your research potential will be realized fullest and subfield rankings are a better indicator.
rising_star Posted January 31, 2009 Posted January 31, 2009 I pay no attention to rankings because they are hopelessly outdated in my discipline.
plisar Posted January 31, 2009 Posted January 31, 2009 I pay no attention to rankings because they are hopelessly outdated in my discipline. How about perception of the department by your advisors? Those are extremely important.
rising_star Posted February 1, 2009 Posted February 1, 2009 My field is broad and so departments that are great in one specialty can be awful another. And I've found that every one has different opinions of different programs. Like a few people were surprised that I picked the dept I'm in now *until* I told them who I'd be working with. So that's more about the advisor than it is about the department. *shrug* Take that for what it is. Personally, and yes I plan on working in academia, I didn't give a flying flip about rankings. What I did care about is finding an advisor that works with students on publications (including helping the students get single-authored pubs out), is available as a mentor, willing to work with drafts and make things better, and whose students are successful at getting dissertation funding. Oh, and I picked someone I liked and got along well with. A bigger factor for me was the grad students, dept culture, and location. There's no sense in going to a top-rated department if the people make you miserable, the location makes you miserable, or the dept atmosphere is toxic.
Minnesotan Posted February 1, 2009 Posted February 1, 2009 My field is broad and so departments that are great in one specialty can be awful another. And I've found that every one has different opinions of different programs. Like a few people were surprised that I picked the dept I'm in now *until* I told them who I'd be working with. So that's more about the advisor than it is about the department. *shrug* Take that for what it is. Personally, and yes I plan on working in academia, I didn't give a flying flip about rankings. What I did care about is finding an advisor that works with students on publications (including helping the students get single-authored pubs out), is available as a mentor, willing to work with drafts and make things better, and whose students are successful at getting dissertation funding. Oh, and I picked someone I liked and got along well with. A bigger factor for me was the grad students, dept culture, and location. There's no sense in going to a top-rated department if the people make you miserable, the location makes you miserable, or the dept atmosphere is toxic. Same with me. I went to the middle-tier school with the awesome advisor over the snooty school that paid a whole lot of lip service to advising, but whose current students told a different story.
ebee Posted February 3, 2009 Posted February 3, 2009 Rankings are pretty outdated in public policy and public admin. I did look at them, but I put just as much if not more value on where faculty earned their degrees.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now