4 ms·
But reputations are what they are, and you can't dispute that those four unis are top drawer by that "measure" if we can even call it that. Regardless of what
by lordnacho 2y ago
But reputations are what they are, and you can't dispute that those four unis are top drawer by that "measure" if we can even call it that.
Regardless of what you think of QS. I also think it's silly to have uni rankings, but the way to think about them is that they simply construct a ranking that shows what people expect based on reputation. If you don't have Harvard and Cambridge in your top tier, your ranking is wrong.
- SeanLuke 2y ago> But reputations are what they are, and you can't dispute that those four unis are top drawer by that "measure" if we can even call it that. But reputation is not a just measure of quality. It's mostly a measure of whether someone has heard of the institution at all, or knows anything about them. Similarly, US News has reputation survey based measures for its terrible rankings, and is roundly criticized for them, as they largely shut out better but newer but less well known institutions.
- lordnacho 2y agoI don't disagree, that is basically what it is. I suspect the same thing goes for the corruption perceptions index. People conveniently drop the perceptions part, and they get their corruption reputation from last year's headline.