Big East Academics

[FenwayFriar]

Creighton has been #1 for the last 14 years, I hope one day we make the jump like Nova did to the national ranking.

Nova had kept PC at the #2 spot for many many years. So it was a win-win when Nova made the jump to national. PC got the #1 spot and Nova got a great national ranking.

[FriarJ]

Put JTIII in charge of admissions at Georgetown and watch what happens to their ranking!



I'M JOKING!!!

[jfan]

Does that mean the PhD I got from Creighton is actually a Master's?

Science, yes, you now have a PhM! Doesn't sound nearly as good!

[marquette]

Fenway, do you know why a school is ranked as a Regional vs a National? Always been curious about that.

First of all, let's acknowledge that the US News rankings are not a serious effort to tell us what colleges do. They are a vehicle to sell magazines and thereby make money.

To your question, the Carnegie Foundation for Higher Education in 1970 established a framework for classifying colleges and universities by category. Their goal was primarily so that the government could have some objective standard to decide where to invest research dollars.

"National Universities" is simply US News' euphemism for Carnefie's "research universities" (doctoral level schools). Originally Carnegie broke the research universities into 2 categories, based on the level of dollars spent on research

The US News' euphemism of "regional universities" refers to Carnegie's master's level colleges and the "national liberal arts colleges" to highly competitive Bachelor's level colleges with less competitive schools relegated to their "regional liberal arts" category.

I believe it's a little less clear cut than doctoral vs masters level. You can offer doctoral degrees and be regional, it is more dependent on the number of doctorates and the amount of research being done by the school.

[Bill Marsh]

Fenway, do you know why a school is ranked as a Regional vs a National? Always been curious about that.

First of all, let's acknowledge that the US News rankings are not a serious effort to tell us what colleges do. They are a vehicle to sell magazines and thereby make money.

To your question, the Carnegie Foundation for Higher Education in 1970 established a framework for classifying colleges and universities by category. Their goal was primarily so that the government could have some objective standard to decide where to invest research dollars.

"National Universities" is simply US News' euphemism for Carnefie's "research universities" (doctoral level schools). Originally Carnegie broke the research universities into 2 categories, based on the level of dollars spent on research

The US News' euphemism of "regional universities" refers to Carnegie's master's level colleges and the "national liberal arts colleges" to highly competitive Bachelor's level colleges with less competitive schools relegated to their "regional liberal arts" category.

I believe it's a little less clear cut than doctoral vs masters level. You can offer doctoral universities and be regional, it is more dependent on the number of doctorates and the amount of research being done by the school.

True. For Carnegie, it's really the level of research dollars.

[Bill Marsh]

Does that mean the PhD I got from Creighton is actually a Master's?

We have a doctor in the house!

Congratulations.

[TBC Alum]

They call me Dr. Love

Yup. CU grad

[Bill Marsh]

They call me Dr. Love

Yup. CU grad

[Sactowndog]

Fenway, do you know why a school is ranked as a Regional vs a National? Always been curious about that.

First of all, let's acknowledge that the US News rankings are not a serious effort to tell us what colleges do. They are a vehicle to sell magazines and thereby make money.

To your question, the Carnegie Foundation for Higher Education in 1970 established a framework for classifying colleges and universities by category. Their goal was primarily so that the government could have some objective standard to decide where to invest research dollars.

"National Universities" is simply US News' euphemism for Carnefie's "research universities" (doctoral level schools). Originally Carnegie broke the research universities into 2 categories, based on the level of dollars spent on research

The US News' euphemism of "regional universities" refers to Carnegie's master's level colleges and the "national liberal arts colleges" to highly competitive Bachelor's level colleges with less competitive schools relegated to their "regional liberal arts" category.

I believe it's a little less clear cut than doctoral vs masters level. You can offer doctoral degrees and be regional, it is more dependent on the number of doctorates and the amount of research being done by the school.

Here is their flow chart...
http://carnegieclassifications.iu.edu/d ... 1Feb16.pdf

[gosports1]

to put it simply regional universities in this case focus primarily on undergraduate offer masters programs but limited focus on doctorates.
national universities have more extensive doctoral programs and conduct more research projects at a higher level. in this case, it is difficult to compare schools such as Providence and Creighton with Stanford and Princeton since they have different agendas. I think there is an organization that ranks/compares schools just on the undergraduate level but I don't remember the name