This is a great post. A quibble about the changed title: the NRC rankings are largely for university graduate-level departments such as math, not really for colleges.
Some questions to ponder while we all continue to wait for the new NRC rankings:
Are the data that will be used in the rankings losing their analytical validity since they will be from the 2005-2006 academic year?
Why wasn't the NRC able to produce its rankings more quickly, using more up-to-date information?
How many faculty members have switched institutions and departments since the NRC first started collecting data in fall 2006? This is very important because faculty data are a key part of the NRC's analysis.
3 comments
[ 3.9 ms ] story [ 22.0 ms ] threadAre the data that will be used in the rankings losing their analytical validity since they will be from the 2005-2006 academic year?
Why wasn't the NRC able to produce its rankings more quickly, using more up-to-date information?
How many faculty members have switched institutions and departments since the NRC first started collecting data in fall 2006? This is very important because faculty data are a key part of the NRC's analysis.