Where does Nebraska rank academically in the Big 10

[VA Husker Fan]

As an academician (professor)of 25+ years I have some thoughts and a few points to make that some of you might not have thought of (in fact, you would have had little reason to consider such things). But... academic rankings... the likes of which are commonly cited for major universities are usually predicated upon perceptions of excellence in three main categories, in no particular order --- 1) research productivity among the faculty (grants applied for, grants received, research equipment on campus, # of PhD students, postdoctoral appointments, publications, presentations, journal editorships resident, etc.), 2) entrance ACT and/or SAT averages coupled with acceptance rates for incoming students, and 3) opinion of polled professionals who "rank" the prestige of the institution in a subjective manner.

 

Consider that for any of these schools, between 85% and 90% of all students enrolled will be undergraduates. Now... these rankings essentially have NO BEARING on the quality of an undergraduate students education at that school relative to an undergraduate student elsewhere. Why? Because the research component of the ranking is based overwhelmingly upon graduate student conditions... not undergraduates. The typical % of undergraduates doing research at any institution is less than 5%. Thus, for 95% of the undergraduate students at the school, the research context for that school will be, for them, meaningless (yet the primary basis for ranking is tethered to research).

 

Also, the "prestige factor" will always favor large schools with many graduates and schools in populous states.

 

So... NU will rank the lowest in the B10. But this means nothing re: quality of educational experience for the undergraduate enrolled at NU relative to those at the rest of the B10 institutions. NU is a fine school... no method exists for any meaningful comparison relative to the other schools. Too many variables. Too many inter-related constructs to measure and too few metrics to make meaningful measurements.

 

Bottom line? The rankings are of little to no value re: the educational experience of the vast majority (ca. 90%) of the students enrolled. And....

 

NU is a fine institution... as are the others in the B10.

I completely buy #1, the research factor.

 

#2 seems pretty relevant, ACT/SAT scores. I know about the flaws of standardized testing, but still, there is a decent correlation between those test scores and the quality of students. Selective universities are going to have better students than universities that let in anyone with a pulse, and you get a better education when surrounded by smarter students.

 

#3 is a lot more meaningful than you say. For proof, which universities as a group have the highest prestige? The Ivies. And their enrollment isn't that large, and I don't think the population density of the northeast explains it when you've got schools in New Hampshire and upstate NY. Plus, as someone who was in the corporate world, we wouldn't even consider college hires from anyone outside of a relatively small number of prestigious universities. Once you had experience, schooling barely mattered, but it sure is easier to get experience if you graduated from Stanford or Cornell than from Arkansas.

 

All that said, the most important thing is that you get what you put into going to college, and working hard at UNL is probably going to get you farther than slacking off an an Ivy League school. A lot probably depends on whether you want to stay in Nebraska, or work in Silicon Valley or on Wall Street or some place like that. If it's the latter, a higher ranked school will have value. My own personal experience is that I had a Regents and National Merit scholarship, graduated in '84 from UNL with a 3.9+ GPA in CompSci when tech firms were hiring, and I managed to get a Silicon Valley interview, but not a job offer.

 

I think there's a decent chance that UNL will get the same kind of boost that Penn St did.

[bbeerma2]

Doesn't NU only require a 30 on the ACT for a regents scholarship, which is basically a full ride (academically)?

 

The number it takes to get a scholarship varies year to year based on how many applicants there are from in-state with high ACT scores. Really you'd need a very strong profile outside of the 30 to get it. You would be well off to get a 32+ to improve your chances. I know people with 32s who were not given regents scholarships.

That is simply not true. My daughter averaged a 31 and got one. I believe it is ACT and class rank alone. There is not a set amount of scholorships.

 

Whether or not you believe this due to your daughter's situation does not have any merit on the validity of my statement. It is true. I know plenty of students who were in the 30s and did not get full regents scholarships but instead received the Canfield scholarship ($1,000) a year.

[74Hunter]

Suffice it to say, Nebraska woefully trails academically in the Big Ten. But if it's any consolation, we're ranked right around where Penn State was ranked 20 years ago - just before they joined the Big Ten. The CIC is a powerful thing, a very good thing for UNL.

 

 

LINK TO LIST

 

This. The CIC is probably the most important thing that is going to happen to Nebraska by virtue of joining the Big 10.

+ 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000.........

 

just sayin.......

Yep. Look for Nebraska's ranking to move up the charts somewhat. Penn State received quite a bump after joining the Big Ten. It might take a few years but things are looking up.

Add in the new research/technology center (whatever it is) that is projected to be built at the old fairgrounds, and DoNU's future looks bright.

 

Good job by Harvey P.

[mnhusker]

Don't fool yourself for a fraction of a second. Dead last is the answer.

 

 

I think that we just need to improve our execution and now that the refs are not out to get us each week the scores will improve.

[huKSer]

 

#2 seems pretty relevant, ACT/SAT scores. I know about the flaws of standardized testing, but still, there is a decent correlation between those test scores and the quality of students. Selective universities are going to have better students than universities that let in anyone with a pulse, and you get a better education when surrounded by smarter students.

 

Standardized test scores are a very good indicator of college grades . . . for exactly ONE semester. Then social activities, ability to handle freedom (or embracing the freedom) financial stresses take over.

[VectorVictor]

You forgot UI-Chicago. Aren't they a member of the B1G academically?

 

 

That is correct. UI-Chicago is academically part of the Big 10 Educational Consortium.

 

 

Wrong. You're thinking of the University of Chicago. UI-Chicago is a school that stupid kids or kids who can't afford to go to Urbana or just about any other school in Illinois go to. Big difference.

 

Oops. My bad.

 

You knew what I meant, not what I wrote, at any rate.