|
Replies: 27
| visibility 1
|
Associate AD [810]
TigerPulse: 57%
Posts: 1555
Joined: 8/31/03
|
|
|
|
 |
All-In [26968]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 44823
Joined: 7/6/10
|
SOCON! SOCON! SOCON!***
Jul 30, 2014, 2:36 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4896]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 5278
Joined: 8/24/11
|
PC must be thrilled. Decent school but
Jul 30, 2014, 2:41 PM
|
|
That doesn't make sense
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3788]
TigerPulse: 99%
Posts: 9880
Joined: 11/2/08
|
They have a few solid programs
Jul 30, 2014, 2:55 PM
|
|
but as an overall school I don't see it. The average test scores of their incoming freshmen are significantly lower than Clemson's.
Maybe having a pharmacy school helps them?
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [64588]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 88994
Joined: 3/27/01
|
They lose a boat load of points just for being in Clinton.***
Jul 30, 2014, 2:58 PM
|
|
null
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commissioner [997]
TigerPulse: 63%
Posts: 959
Joined: 6/20/01
|
Those rankings aren't worth the frigging paper they're printed on! There is NO way that...
Jul 30, 2014, 3:04 PM
|
|
Any of those schools are better than Clemson. From facilities to name recognition to...pick your poisen. Sure, Furman and Wofford are nice little schools and they have great programs but it really is like comparing Apples to Oranges.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [26968]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 44823
Joined: 7/6/10
|
Neither facilities nor name recognition are
Jul 30, 2014, 3:12 PM
|
|
a part of it, so there you go.
Student Satisfaction (25%)
Post-Graduate Success (32.5%)
Student Debt (25%)
Graduation Rate (7.5%)
Academic Success (10%)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [3788]
TigerPulse: 99%
Posts: 9880
Joined: 11/2/08
|
The student debt piece is BS and kills public schools
Jul 30, 2014, 3:18 PM
|
|
Small private schools are always going to have a higher percentage of students graduating debt free because, to put it bluntly, lots of rich kids(with rich parents to foot the bill) go to small private schools.
Bigger, public schools will always have student bodies economically diverse, and thus end up with a higher percentage of students graduating with debt.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [26968]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 44823
Joined: 7/6/10
|
Anyone can discount any measure they want.
Jul 30, 2014, 3:21 PM
|
|
Facilities? What do facilities matter as long as you get a high-paying job?
Student satisfaction? What does that matter if the students coming in aren't cut out for college?
Etc, etc. None of this actually matters. Go to whatever school is best for you.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Freshman [-95]
TigerPulse: 67%
Posts: 572
Joined: 11/21/03
|
I am not rich, but I paid for first, going to pay for second
Jul 30, 2014, 11:29 PM
[ in reply to The student debt piece is BS and kills public schools ] |
|
First is an electrical engineer.
Second,do not know yet, going into 11 grade.
My argument, pay for college me, not paying for wedding.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4504]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 9112
Joined: 11/30/98
|
|
|
|
|
|
Associate AD [810]
TigerPulse: 57%
Posts: 1555
Joined: 8/31/03
|
Re: Student debt is a stupid factor in ranking schools. You
Jul 31, 2014, 6:43 AM
|
|
> pick a school due to other students having less
> debt?????
Forbes is taking into account the endowment of a school and the fact many schools use their endowment to subsidize a student's tuition, thereby reducing the total amount a student has to borrow. As an extreme example, Harvard's endowment is so large that every student could attend for free (if Harvard chose to completely subsidize everyone's tuition) and it would hardly make a dent in the school's endowment.
Most of the top school's on Forbes' list have very large endowments and the advertised cost for each of these schools is not what many kids are paying because the school itself gives significant money to the kid so they don't have to borrow.
You need to read Forbes' methodology before dismissing it's rankings like you have. I like the fact Forbes is giving significant consideration to the satisfaction of a school's graduates. US News puts a lot of weight into what other presidents and faculty think about other schools (peer reviews). Are these types of opinions more valuable than the opinions of the actual graduates?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Associate AD [810]
TigerPulse: 57%
Posts: 1555
Joined: 8/31/03
|
Re: The student debt piece is BS and kills public schools
Jul 31, 2014, 8:06 AM
[ in reply to The student debt piece is BS and kills public schools ] |
|
> Small private schools are always going to have a
> higher percentage of students graduating debt free
> because, to put it bluntly, lots of rich kids(with
> rich parents to foot the bill) go to small private
> schools.
>
> Bigger, public schools will always have student
> bodies economically diverse, and thus end up with a
> higher percentage of students graduating with debt.
Link below is a good, informative, short video on what a college expects a family to pay.....based on a family's income and assets. Note that the student from a middle class family can be better served by attending one of these private schools you think are just for rich kids.......the video says the "more prosperous" the school the more money the kid is likely to get in grants from the school (less debt). State schools, due to sheer size and smaller endowments, have less money to subsidize tuition and therefore the student will typically have to borrow a larger percentage of tuition.
http://www.forbes.com/video/2761451812001/
|
|
|
|
|
|
Associate AD [810]
TigerPulse: 57%
Posts: 1555
Joined: 8/31/03
|
Re: Those rankings aren't worth the frigging paper they're printed on! There is NO way that...
Jul 30, 2014, 6:54 PM
[ in reply to Those rankings aren't worth the frigging paper they're printed on! There is NO way that... ] |
|
> Any of those schools are better than Clemson. From
> facilities to name recognition to...pick your poisen.
> Sure, Furman and Wofford are nice little schools and
> d they have great programs but it really is like
> comparing Apples to Oranges.
Strange comment.....you do realize these rankings have nothing to do with "facilities"....are you thinking this has to do with a school's athletics?
Even if it did have to do with "facilities".....you know Wofford is the Panthers training camp location don't you? Richardson (Wofford grad) has sunk a bunch of money in there and the facilities are nothing to scoff at.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [36450]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 18324
Joined: 12/6/13
|
Midlands tech should be above SC.***
Jul 30, 2014, 3:24 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [26968]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 44823
Joined: 7/6/10
|
I know many people for whom Midlands Tech is a better
Jul 30, 2014, 3:28 PM
|
|
school than USC, or Clemson or Duke or Stanford, for that matter.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [16186]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 8524
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Distance and bias breeds ignorance?
Jul 30, 2014, 3:58 PM
|
|
Forbes has a methodology. But when the results are so screwed up, the methodology is bad.
Any reasonably knowledgeable observer who understands much about the schools in South Carolina knows the rank order produced by Forbes is bogus. The public/private, large/small bias here is obvious.
Clemson serves 3 times as many students as Wofford, Furman and PC combined. Clemson students come to school with better test scores than those 3 schools. Clemson students pay less, a lot less than the students who attend Wofford, Furman and PC.
We all know the ranking for our state is bogus. That makes me suspect the whole list of 650 is similarly screwed up.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [6937]
TigerPulse: 88%
Posts: 22594
Joined: 5/4/03
|
Re:Overall Clemson and SC waste a lot of money. A lot of
Jul 30, 2014, 4:01 PM
|
|
duplicity and not enough return on the money spent.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Associate AD [810]
TigerPulse: 57%
Posts: 1555
Joined: 8/31/03
|
Re: I know many people for whom Midlands Tech is a better
Jul 30, 2014, 8:18 PM
[ in reply to I know many people for whom Midlands Tech is a better ] |
|
> school than USC, or Clemson or Duke or Stanford, for
> that matter.
So much this!!!!!
How about a two year stint at Midlands Tech to get an HVAC or Nursing degree and spend a total of $10,000. Walk out with no debt and a $40,000 starting salary with medical benefits waiting on you.
Or go to Clemson or SC, spend $80,000 (if you make it out in 4), walk out $40,000 in debt and can't find a job with your sociology or marketing degree........so you wait tables and work retail after moving back in with your parents all the while making minimum payments on your student loan.
The scenario/comparison above is why I really like Forbes' emphasis on the "end results"......student satisfaction and post graduate success. There are lots of graduates of Clemson, USC, Coastal, College of Charleston, etc. who would have served themselves better by going the Midlands Tech route.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [16186]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 8524
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: I know many people for whom Midlands Tech is a better
Jul 30, 2014, 9:27 PM
|
|
Sludgemuffin, perhaps some of us understand these rankings fairly well.
The rating for South Carolina schools is bogus. Period.
Not everyone goes to college to get a job. Education has a value without regards to future employment. But if employment and earnings are what motivates a person, you cannot do much better with a BS degree than to attend Clemson, major in a technical field and then work hard. I'd guess the average starting salaries for Clemson graduates is higher than any remotely similar sized school in the state. Not sure what the numbers do if you graduate fewer than 250 students per year like PC does.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Associate AD [810]
TigerPulse: 57%
Posts: 1555
Joined: 8/31/03
|
Re: I know many people for whom Midlands Tech is a better
Jul 30, 2014, 11:23 PM
|
|
> Sludgemuffin, perhaps some of us understand these
> rankings fairly well.
>
> The rating for South Carolina schools is bogus.
> Period.
>
> Not everyone goes to college to get a job. Education
> has a value without regards to future employment.
> But if employment and earnings are what motivates a
> a person, you cannot do much better with a BS degree
> than to attend Clemson, major in a technical field
> and then work hard. I'd guess the average starting
> salaries for Clemson graduates is higher than any
> remotely similar sized school in the state. Not sure
> what the numbers do if you graduate fewer than 250
> students per year like PC does.
I'm lost on your argument.
Take US News's ranking of the National Liberal Arts Universities and combine it with their National University rankings and you'll find Furman and Wofford will fall pretty high on the combined list, likely above Clemson......nothing weird about that, Forbes's #1 school overall isn't even on US News National University list.
I'm sure you've put as much research into your opinion as Forbes's so I guess you have some stats to back up the "bogus ness" of Forbes's rankings. And since you apparently think Forbes is "bogus", what does that say of US News who has Clemson in 30th percentile while the bogus ranking has Clemson in the 25h percentile.
And finally, to add to my confusion, you're implying people go to college to get an "education" and getting a job is an afterthought.....that's a noble idea, incorrect, but noble. You also add if one IS concerned about employment then get an engineering degree from Clemson and one will do fine. Well sure, that particular profession will do just fine, but ask non-engineering grads who are looking for work what they think about your comments.
Have you not been following the "trillion dollar problem" which is student loan debt? That is the point of mine and the other poster's comment that many would do much better if they went to Midlands Tech instead of Clemson or SC.......most people don't just attend college to get a classical education......they go to college to get a degree to help them get a good job.
It's nice to have grown as a person at a 4 year university and be more educated in a variety of areas because of it.......but lots of grads will tell you they wish they would have gone to a tech school so they would have a good paying job and not be tens of thousands in debt.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4504]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 9112
Joined: 11/30/98
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [93667]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 95415
Joined: 12/25/09
|
What does Forbes know about football?
Jul 30, 2014, 4:03 PM
|
|
Wolford, Furman and Presbyterian ranked ahead of us? ###.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1198]
TigerPulse: 94%
Posts: 1876
Joined: 6/13/99
|
Re: Forbes out with new college rankings
Jul 30, 2014, 7:49 PM
|
|
Forbes rankings are way off base, in my opinion. They is the same bunch that put Georgia way ahead of Georgia Tech. Think about that for a minute. They're biased in favor of small liberal arts schools.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Associate AD [810]
TigerPulse: 57%
Posts: 1555
Joined: 8/31/03
|
Re: Forbes out with new college rankings
Jul 31, 2014, 8:11 AM
|
|
> Forbes rankings are way off base, in my opinion.
> They is the same bunch that put Georgia way ahead of
> f Georgia Tech. Think about that for a minute.
> They're biased in favor of small liberal arts
> s schools.
GT is ranked above UGA in their list.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Associate AD [810]
TigerPulse: 57%
Posts: 1555
Joined: 8/31/03
|
Re: Forbes out with new college rankings
Jul 30, 2014, 7:57 PM
|
|
From 2013 to 2014:
Clemson dropped 10 spots from.....153 to 163.
SCAR moved up 4 spots......190 to 186.
Wofford made a huge move up 34 spots......119 to 85.
Those concerned about Clemson's ranking need to realize that US News categorizes colleges into different rankings and has a total list of only 201 in their National Universities; Clemson is ranked 62.....that is the 30th percentile.
Forbes puts all schools into the same ranking; the national liberal arts schools that US News puts into a different category are included in their total list of 650. Clemson's rank of 163 on Forbes list of 650 puts Clemson at 25th percentile.
It can be argued that Forbes actually has Clemson ranked higher than US News does, 25th percentile vs 30th percentile.......it just doesn't seem like it because a lot of y'all don't realize there are tons of liberal arts schools not included in US News's National University category. School's like Wofford which has a student faculty ratio of 11:1 compared to Clemson's 18:1.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Heisman Winner [108390]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 64974
Joined: 2/25/06
|
^^^ . one of the brightest "answers" i've seen on the
Jul 31, 2014, 8:10 AM
|
|
subject.
top 20 public university rankings are nice, but they're far from the "whole story".
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1250]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 2645
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Forbes is now owned by the Communist Chinese
Jul 30, 2014, 10:11 PM
|
|
These rankings reflect the new ownership.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 27
| visibility 1
|
|
|
50
