Good Things, Bad Things: Academy

This post is part of the Good Things, Bad Things list.

When we had just considered coming to the USA we were thinking about a good academic institution, which will help launch our careers in a new direction. We ended up in Cincinnati, mainly due to the fact that this is the only place where we could secure a good financial position. The academic level of the University of Cincinnati, albeit being rated in most fields amongst the top 100 in the US or 200 in the world, is certainly not even close to the academic level in the leading institutions. When I compare UC to the Technion, the level of studies that I had in my bachelors degree is much higher than the level of studies in the department here.

<---- A section here was harmonized ---->

One can simply argue that our findings should be limited to the specific university we're attending at the moment and that in other places the level is much higher. I agree with the logic, but we spoke with a girl we know that studies at a very good university, one of the Ivy League universities, and she said that the level of her studies is not so high as well. On the other hand, one of the professors at my department simply said that I expect too much, because I compare the Technion to UC, whereas I should compare the Technion to MIT. That's a very flattering way of putting it, but according to world universities rankings, the Technion is much closer to UC than it is to MIT. In fact, in most rankings American universities take 8 of the best 10 universities world wide. I wonder if they really are that good, or maybe the rankings are given by mostly American scholars, who get caught in the same trap most Americans are caught in: not realizing that there is a world outside the US, and that this world is just as smart and successful as they can be.

Another problem is that rating a university is almost an impossible task. Firstly, a university has many colleges and programs, and averaging the college of business with the college of arts is as relevant as averaging the size of elephants with the color of grass. Furthermore, even if you focus on the ranking of a particular college, department or program, there are still differences in the way each university is divided, and in many cases there are programs, e.g. aerospace engineering, which can be a separate department or a part of a department. Lastly, rankings - by definition - attribute a number to something. When it comes to a vague, and mostly non-numeric field as academic excellence, it is almost impossible to rate. So, several numerical factors are weighted to yield a ranking. However, who says that these are the right factors? For example, I saw in one ranking that the number of students is a factor. What does the number of students tell about the level of studies? If anything, it should be a curve with an optimum, while most universities are ranked by their ability to attract as many students as possible. And who decides on the weights of each factor? This is a completely subjective thing.

So, if rankings are useless we are back to the feeling of the student that takes the program. Currently, our feeling is that we should have been taking better programs.

Related links to university rankings:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Academic_Ranking_of_World_Universities
http://www.arwu.org/rank2008/EN2008.htm
http://www.arwu.org/rank2008/Top500_EN(by%20rank).pdf
http://www.webometrics.info/top6000.asp