toolshed wrote:PDaddy wrote:Always Credited wrote:Also, to add to the argument on the previous page....
UM is a shithole. Those uberawesomerichashell lawyers from UM that were mentioned? They probably graduated before it became a shithole.
Just sayin'. FSU and UF are both credited for Florida, though.
Nope. Like I said. If USNWR decided to change its methodology, and the resulting rankings of the schools by extension, the job prospects of the schools would immediately re-adjust to line up with the rankings. Except for the obviously esteemed schools, i.e. HYS CC plus Nu, Mich, UVA, Berkeley, Penn, Cornell, GULC and a few others with long standing traditions of excellence, the USNWR rankings has to a degree, "caused" the job prospects at certain schools to be what they are.
Despite having only superficially researched the issue, I'm confident that there is data to back this up. NYU wasn't always a top-5 school, so it could provide some evidence, as could WUSTL, which jumped in rankings suddenly around late 1990's or 2000. If the improved job prospects at such schools appears to follow but mirror their rise in the rankings, we have some pedagogical evidence that schools' job offerings do not infer relative quality.
Nope. They may change over time, but they wouldn't change overnight. Firms hire from schools that produce a "known" type of graduate. If Miami became a top 20 school overnight, certain firms that were comfortable hiring in that range wouldn't swoop in and start hiring 50% deep in that class. Like everything else in the industry, slow change is the only effective change.
I'll concede that "immediately" is a reach. But you get my correlation and causation argument. Both are evident here. And you obviously get the gist of what I am saying: there would be a shift in public perception and employer behavior. The tail wags the dog. The immediacy of the shift would depend, in large part, on the severity of the change(s) in schools' ranking(s).