553
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 51:
Line 51: + +
→Academic boosterism
:I agree -- these ratings are generally worthless, and how we came to a world where a single newsmagazine's ratings of colleges are worth regarding as "truth" is a puzzle. Let's just be consistent and not give such information for any school. Some, like Bob Jones University, might thank us! ;-> (just kidding, infact BJU, for whom I've worked in the past as a homsechool tester, is not rated because it is not accredited). [[User:Boethius|Boethius]]
:I agree -- these ratings are generally worthless, and how we came to a world where a single newsmagazine's ratings of colleges are worth regarding as "truth" is a puzzle. Let's just be consistent and not give such information for any school. Some, like Bob Jones University, might thank us! ;-> (just kidding, infact BJU, for whom I've worked in the past as a homsechool tester, is not rated because it is not accredited). [[User:Boethius|Boethius]]
:I’m no fan of these rankings, but they are motivating factors in both what school many students choose to attend and what decisions are made by the administrations of many schools. Since they are a reality, and a reality that motivates how people actually behave, shouldn’t they be included in the article? That is not to say that the ranking that is assigned to any given school actually reflects that school’s quality (though I suspect it is an adequate rough guide) – but that the rankings are not accurate representations does not mean they are not used and that they are not important. I would, therefore, argue in favor of including them.--[[User:Reginod|Reginod]] 13:43, 28 March 2007 (EDT)