DOCSLIB.ORG

Washington Monthly 2018 College Rankings

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

The Prison-to-School Pipeline 2018 COLLEGE RANKINGS What Can College Do For You? PLUS: The best—and worst— colleges for vocational certificates Which colleges encourage their students to vote? Why colleges should treat SEPTEMBER/OCTOBER 2018 $5.95 U.S./$6.95 CAN students like numbers All Information Fixing higher education deserts herein is confidential and embargoed Everything you always wanted to know through Aug. 23, 2018 about higher education policy VOLUME 50 NUMBER 9/10 SEPTEMBER/OCTOBER 2018 SOCIAL MOBILITY RESEARCH SERVICE Features NATIONAL UNIVERSITIES THE 2018 COLLEGE GUIDE *Public institution Introduction: A Different Kind of College Ranking 15 °For-profit institution by Kevin Carey America’s Best and Worst Colleges for%offederalwork-studyfunds Vocational Certificates 20 GraduationGrad rate rate rank performancePell graduationPell rank performance gap rankFirst-gen rank performancerankEarningsperformancerankNoNetpricerank publicationRepaymentrankPredictedrepaymentraterankResearch has expendituresBachelor’stoPhDrank everScience&engineeringPhDsrank rank rankedFacultyawardsrankFacultyinNationalAcademiesrank thePeaceCorpsrank schoolsROTC rank wherespentonservicerankMatchesAmeriCorpsservicegrants? millionsVotingengagementpoints of Americans 1 Harvard University (MA) 3 35 60 140 41 2seek 5 168 job310 skills.8 Until10 now.17 1 4 130 188 22 NO 4 2 Stanford University (CA) 7 128 107 146 55 11 by2 Paul16 48Glastris7 6 7 2 2 70 232 18 NO 1 3 MA Institute of Technology (MA) 16 234 177 64 48 7 17 8 89 13 2 10 3 3 270 17 276 NO 0 4 Princeton University (NJ) 1 119 100 100 23 20 Best3 30 &90 Worst67 Vocational5 40 6 5 Certificate117 106 203 ProgramsNO 1 Rankings 22 5 Yale University (CT) 4 138 28 121 49 22 America’s8 22 87 18Best3 Colleges39 7 9 for134 Student22 189 VotingNO 0 28 6 Duke University (NC) 9 202 19 156 218 18 Our26 15 first-of-its-kind183 6 12 list37 of9 the15 schools44 49doing215 theNO most3 to turn students into citizens. 7 University of California–San Diego (CA)* 39 70 82 10 10 268 60 57 37 5 44 21 5 7 77 212 16 NO 3 by Saahil Desai 8 Georgetown University (DC) 10 66 55 227 202 1 95 23 63 92 39 132 140 73 5 134 189 NO 1 9 University of California–Los Angeles (CA)* 21 32 103 43 19 191 America’s42 85 88 9Best42 Colleges 12 21 13 for47 Adult 147 47LearnersNO 3 31 10 University of California–Davis (CA)* 53 53 134 7438 34 73 Nearly89 67 half19 of24 all 52college20 65students25 56 are 210twenty-five16 NO or4 older. 11 Texas A&M University–College Station (TX)* 70 30 222 225 93 94 Yet33 55no publication6 15 111 ranks8 109 the63 top 143schools1 for10 them—exceptNO 1 us. 12 Utah State University (UT)* 209 23 8 42 171 14 by92 Gilad89 4 Edelman94 191 128 104 161 242 100 1 NO 0 13 University of Pennsylvania (PA) 5 121 115 163 118 8 44 27 76 11 63 30 11 8 102 203 89 NO 1 14 Columbia Univ. in the City of NY (NY) 15 84 65 51 66 46 Best13 86 Colleges207 17 13 for23 Adult19 10 Learners45 231 Rankings73 NO 1 32 15 University of Washington–Seattle (WA)* 43 15 128 203 70 254 A21 N84ote62 on 3Methodology:59 15 20 14 Best18 90 Colleges124 NO for3 Adult Learners 40 16 University of NC–Chapel Hill (NC)* 32 60 125 109 174 244 14 48 58 10 31 28 35 37 10 110 110 NO 4 17 University of Florida (FL)* 36 6 169 54 53 185 America’s19 158 163 23Best37 Bang4 73 for69 the32 Buck95 276CollegesNO 4 2018 42 18 University of California–Berkeley (CA)* 22 85 92 27 7 274 Our49 106 exclusive206 21 list 21of schools2 8 6that help55 196 non-wealthy89 NO students1 19 Brown University (RI) 2 56 77 126 112 253 attain29 12 marketable15 59 7 degrees81 10 at35 affordable30 252 prices.295O N 4 IMAGINE A 20 University of California–Irvine (CA)* 37 11 71 32 12 182by 69 Robert102 56 Kelchen60 88 35 25 32 115 216 59 NO 1 21 Brigham Young University–Provo (UT) 45 4 10 8 298 15 Best79 43 Bang69 175 for38 the134 Buck171 148 Rankings218 97 306 NO 0 44 22 University of Wisconsin–Madison (WI)* 48 63 180 223 214 231 130 34 30 4 35 3 30 21 15 121 215 NO 4 23 Dartmouth College (NH) 8 92 27 151 194 70 Wh35 10y More83 86 Colleges8 125 29 Should34 41 Treat198 Students98 NO 1 Like Numbers BETTER54 WORLD. 24 CA State University–Fresno (CA)* 165 64 229 98 57 38 A4 few203 universities79 237 243 are274 using198 161 predictive201 124 analytics2 NO to boost1 25 University of Michigan–Ann Arbor (MI)* 26 105 165 188 189 215 student12 88 276 success.2 29Are 1they36 outliers—or26 27 151 the246 waveNO of the4 future? 26 University of Illinois at Chicago (IL)* 154 91 38 4 24 84by 84 Kevin147 68 Carey58 163 51 84 91 149 177 303 NO 4 27 University of Notre Dame (IN) 6 113 84 150 241 77 The113 2 Prison-to-College65 89 24 83 33 103 Pipeline48 9 36 NO 1 WE59 ARE. 28 University of California–Riverside (CA)*6 10 127 42 3 18 229 51 177 250 112 146 66 40 60 88 253 3 NO 1 54 For universities squeezed by falling enrollments, recruiting ex-offenders 29 University of Utah (UT)* 92 3 163 106 187 54 1055 10 22 45 124 46 72 55 151 153 124 NO 3 could be a new source of revenue—and a chance to transform lives. OVERALL SCORE: Overall score represents the combined score of ourby three Mel metrics—social Jones mobility, research, and service—with each metric being Imagine a world where sustainable energy powers our daily commute and weighted equally. SOCIAL MOBILITY: The first column ranks the college by the percentageEverything of all students graduating You Alwayswithin eight years, Wanted and the second to Know column ranks based where our nation is safe from cyber-attacks. Imagine a world where food on the predicted rate of graduation (based on incoming ACT/SAT scores, PellAbout Grant percentages, Higher and Education other measures; see Policy our full methodology on page 109). 63 The third column ranks colleges based on the difference in six-year graduationThe ratesbattle between lines Pell for Grant the recipients next Congressand those who are did alreadynot receive clear.a Pell Grant. shortages are replaced with food abundance and where the flu is something our The fourth and fifth columns rank the difference between the actual andby predicted Jared Bass percentages and Clare of Pell McCann Grant recipients and first-generation students based on ACT/SAT scores and the percentage of students admitted. The sixth column ranks colleges based on the difference between actual and predicted earn- children will read about in history books. Imagine a world where the spark of ings of all students (dropouts and graduates) ten years after starting college,Degrees after controlling of Separation for student demographics and majors, living costs, and other 70 factors. The seventh column ranks by the net price of attending that institution,Geography or the average is a barrierprice that tofirst-time, higher full-time education students forwho tenshave a offamily millions in- of an idea can grow into a solution that molds the future. Imagine a world where come below $75,000 per year and receive financial aid pay for college afterrural subtracting Americans. grants and A scholarships. few states The havefinal two hit columns on an rank innovative colleges based solution. on the actual and predicted performance of the percentage of students whoby repaid Anne at least Kim $1 in principal on their loans within five years of entering repayment. inspiration gives birth to innovation. We are, at Mississippi State University, RESEARCH: The first column ranks total research expenditures. The second shows the college’s ranking in the number of bachelor’s recipients who go on National University Rankings 74 to receive PhDs, relative to college size. The third ranks the college by the number of science and engineering PhDs awarded. The fourth column shows the where we ring true. MSSTATE.EDU college’s ranking by the number of faculty receiving prestigious awards, relativeLiberal to the Artsnumber College of full-time faculty. Rankings The fifth column ranks the college by the 88 number of faculty who are members of the National Academies, relative to the number of full-time faculty. SERVICE:The first column ranks the college by the number of alumni whoT opgo on 150to serve Master’s in the Peace Corps, Universities relative to college size. The second column ranks 98 the college by the percentage of students who serve in ROTC. The third Tranksop based 150 on Baccalaureate the percentage of funds inColleges federal work-study money that goes to 104 community service (versus non-community service). The59 fourth category reflects whether a college matches AmeriCorps service grants for undergraduate students in all fields of study (yes), at least one (some), or none (no). The final category includes measures of a college’s voting engagement, and colleges can TOC IMAGES: middle: Chris Matthews; bottom: John O’Boyle A Note on Methodology: 4-Year Colleges and Universities 109 score between zero and four points in this category. 74 September/October 2018 SeptOct_18_Well.indd 74 8/7/18 11:27 AM On POlitical BOOks Editor in Chief Founding Editor Republicans vs. Democracy 111 Paul Glastris Charles Peters Why the war on minority voting rights Senior Editor: Phillip Longman is about to get even worse. Managing Editor: Amy M. Stackhouse Editor: Gilad Edelman by Stephanie Mencimer Digital Editor: Saahil Desai Legal Affairs Editor: Garrett Epps Contributing Writer: Nancy LeTourneau Do You Know Why You Pulled Me Over? 113 Web Editor: Martin Longman Investigatory traffic stops are pointless and Art Director: Amy Swan College Guide Data Manager: Robert Kelchen discriminatory.
Recommended publications
  • Overuse White Paper Formatted

    Overuse White Paper Formatted

    White Paper Series Ranking and analysis of overuse in U.S. hospitals EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Overuse, which is also known as low-value care, is often defined as the provision of health care services for which the potential for harm exceeds the likely benefit to a patient. Overuse occurs in all healthcare settings, including hospitals. It exposes patients to preventable harm and wastes more than $100 billion each year. To date, no study has published the rate of overuse in specific U.S. hospitals. The Lown Institute Hospital Index is the first hospital ranking to grade individual hospitals by how well they avoid overuse. This white paper provides an analysis of the overuse of 13 low-value services in 3,282 U.S. hospitals using Medicare data. These 13 services include imaging tests, surgeries, and cardiovascular procedures, and have all been validated in previous studies of low-value care. Only instances of these services deemed inappropriate in the literature were counted as overuse. Hospitals that did not have the capacity to perform a specific low-value procedure did not have that service counted in their total grade. We find that overuse varies across hospitals by type, size, and location. Teaching hospitals, larger hospitals, urban hospitals, and for-profit hospitals on average ranked lower for avoiding overuse overall, compared to non-teaching, smaller, rural hospitals. However, these patterns were not always consistent across all low-value services. Safety net hospitals and small rural hospitals had higher rankings in avoiding overuse overall, but their scores differed by specific low-value service. For-profit hospitals consistently ranked lower than nonprofit hospitals for avoiding nearly every low-value service measured.
  • The Stability of US News' Ranking System Robert Daly

    The Stability of US News' Ranking System Robert Daly

    1 Running to Stay in Place: The Stability of U.S. News’ Ranking System Robert Daly, University of California, Riverside Anne Machung, University of California, Office of the President Gina Roque, University of California, Riverside Abstract The ranks of most national universities in the annual U.S. News “America’s Best Colleges” have not changed significantly during the past eight years. This is true even though most national universities have spent considerable resources and energy trying to improve their ranks. In this paper, we document the stability of the national universities’ ranks since 1999, describe how a few private universities have been able to improve their ranks, and discuss whether or not these techniques can be used by other colleges and universities, especially public ones. Introduction: In 1983, U.S. News published its first rankings of colleges and universities, and except for 1984 and 1986 has ranked colleges and universities every subsequent year.1 The 1983 and 1985 rankings were based on academic reputation alone, but in 1987 U.S. News reduced the weight of academic reputation to 25% of its total score, and introduced a series of other measures which it combined into a single quantitative formula. The formula worked. U.S. News rankings have been enormously successful, so much so that they have spawned a whole cottage industry of emulators and competitors – the Washington Monthly rankings, TheCenter rankings from the University of Florida, Maclean’s rankings of Canadian universities, the TimesHigher Education Supplement’s rankings from London, and from the Institute of Higher Education at Shanghai Jiao Tong University in China a list of the top 500 universities in the world.
  • PBPL 5: INTRODUCTION to PUBLIC POLICY Winter 2016 Term—Rockefeller 003

    PBPL 5: INTRODUCTION to PUBLIC POLICY Winter 2016 Term—Rockefeller 003

    Nelson A. Rockefeller Center for Public Policy and the Social Sciences Dartmouth College PBPL 5: INTRODUCTION TO PUBLIC POLICY Winter 2016 Term—Rockefeller 003 Professor Ronald G. Shaiko 10: MWF 10:00-11:05am 204 Rockefeller Hall X-Hour: Thursday, 12:00-12:50pm Tel: 646-9146 Office Hours: MWF 12:00-2:00pm Email: [email protected] and by appointment Course Philosophy: Public policymaking in the United States is characterized by scholars and politicians in a wide variety of ways. For some, public policy reflects “the authoritative allocation of values;” while others see the policymaking process from a more bottom line perspective—“who gets what, when, and how.” Still others have incorporated the overtly political nature of public policy by referring to the process as “partisan mutual adjustment,” and have acknowledged that public policymaking involves trade-offs and, at times, less than optimal policy outcomes—“satisficing.” Those who make public policy in the United States often wrestle with normative questions of what constitutes the “best” policy outcomes for the most people as they strive to reach the right balance between government intervention and citizens’ rights to “the pursuit of happiness.” James Madison clearly stated in the Federalist Papers that “if men were angels, no government would be necessary.” Unfortunately, citizens of the United States are not angels and, as a result, must be constrained in their self-interested pursuits. Public policy—influenced by economics, psychology, sociology, philosophy, political science, and religion—reflects the aspiration of creating a society in which its citizens behave in a way that reflects the broadly agreed upon societal norms and values, but also the day-to- day rules and regulations established by governments at all levels.
  • Stanley B. Greenberg the Battle for Working People Begins with Government Reform

    Stanley B. Greenberg the Battle for Working People Begins with Government Reform

    Featuring an analysis by: Stanley B. Greenberg The Battle for Working People Begins with Government Reform with a Roundtable Discussion by: Ed Kilgore Ruy Teixeira and John Halpin John Judis Mark Schmitt Joan Walsh Karen Nussbaum Richard D. Kahlenberg Andrew Levison John Russo Jack Metzgar with a welcome by Ed Kilgore and Andrew Levison Welcome to the second white working class roundtable, a project of The Democratic Strategist in collaboration with the Washington Monthly. The first white working class roundtable, held in June 2014, brought together 15 leading pro-Democratic strategists and observers to discuss the subject of “progressives and the white working class” and had a very significant effect on the national debate regarding the white working class vote that emerged after the 2014 elections. The roundtable was directly cited by Thomas Edsall in The New York Times, E.J. Dionne in The Washington Post, Noam Scheiber in The New Republic, Kevin Drum in Mother Jones, Jamelle Bouie in Slate and was cited by many other commentaries that used data and quotes drawn from the contributions to the June 2014 roundtable discussion. As a follow-up to this debate, The Democratic Strategist published an in-depth review of the post-2014 discussion in December, 2014. It is available HERE.i The present White working class roundtable is organized around a provocative strategy paper by leading opinion analyst Stan Greenberg that is entitled, “The Fight for Working People Begins with Government Reform.” Stan’s analysis, which also appears in the June issue of the Washington Monthly, is discussed by a distinguished group of progressive thinkers including Ed Kilgore, Ruy Teixeira, John Halpin, John Judis, Mark Schmitt, Joan Walsh, Karen Nussbaum, Richard Kahlenberg, Andrew Levison and others.
  • International Rankings and the Contest for University Hegemony

    International Rankings and the Contest for University Hegemony

    This article was downloaded by: [UNAM Ciudad Universitaria] On: 26 November 2014, At: 08:29 Publisher: Routledge Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK Journal of Education Policy Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/tedp20 International rankings and the contest for university hegemony Imanol Ordorikaa & Marion Lloyda a Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Dirección General de Evaluación Institutional, Circuito del Estadio Olímpico Universitario s/n (costado poniente), antigua tienda UNAM, Ciudad Universitaria, México, México Published online: 24 Nov 2014. To cite this article: Imanol Ordorika & Marion Lloyd (2014): International rankings and the contest for university hegemony, Journal of Education Policy, DOI: 10.1080/02680939.2014.979247 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02680939.2014.979247 PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content.
  • Download Curriculum Vitae

    Download Curriculum Vitae

    JUDITH SCOTT-CLAYTON TEACHERS COLLEGE, COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY / COMMUNITY COLLEGE RESEARCH CENTER 525 W. 120TH ST., BOX 174 ∙ NEW YORK, NEW YORK 10027 TEL: (212) 678-3478 ∙ E-MAIL: [email protected] ∙ Twitter: @jscottclayton URL: http://www.tc.columbia.edu/academics/?facid=js3676 EMPLOYMENT 2015 – present TEACHERS COLLEGE, COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY, Associate Professor of Economics and Education, Dept. of Education Policy and Social Analysis 2009 – 2015 TEACHERS COLLEGE, COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY, Assistant Professor 2009 – present COMMUNITY COLLEGE RESEARCH CENTER, Senior Research Scholar PROFESSIONAL APPOINTMENTS 2011 – present NATIONAL BUREAU OF ECONOMIC RESEARCH, Research Associate since 2017 2015 – present EDUCATION FINANCE AND POLICY, Editorial Board 2016 – present EDUCATIONAL EVALUATION AND POLICY ANALYSIS, Editorial Board EDUCATION 2009 HARVARD KENNEDY SCHOOL OF GOVERNMENT, Ph.D. in Public Policy 2000 WELLESLEY COLLEGE, B.A., Sociology (Economics minor) summa cum laude 1999 LONDON SCHOOL OF ECONOMICS, General Course (visiting student) TEACHING & ADMINISTRATION Program Director, Economics & Education MA, EdM & PhD programs. Teaching: Economics of Education, Causal Methods for Education Policy Research, Applied Labor Economics GRANTS & FELLOWSHIPS 2015 Spencer Foundation Grant #201500101 ($50,000) “Financial Aid, Debt Management, and Socioeconomic Outcomes” 2011-2016 IES Center for the Analysis of Postsecondary Education and Employment (CAPSEE) ($10,000,000; PI: Thomas Bailey, my projects ~ $760,000 of total) 2012-2013 AERA Research
  • Hbcus and the Washington Monthly's College Rankings

    Hbcus and the Washington Monthly's College Rankings

    Serving Students and the Public Good: HBCUs and the Washington Monthly’s College Rankings UNCF Frederick D. Patterson Research Institute Institute for Capacity Building ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This report was a collaboration between UNCF’s Frederick D. Patterson Research Institute, Drs. Janet Awokoya and David Richards, and UNCF’s Institute for Capacity Building, Dr. Clarissa Myrick-Harris. We are also very grateful to Drs. Karl Reid and Brian Bridges for their editorial comments and advice. Suggested Citation: Awokoya, J., Richards, D., & Myrick-Harris, C. (2012). Serving students and the public good: HBCUs and the Washington Monthly’s College Rankings. Fairfax, VA: Frederick D. Patterson Research Institute, UNCF. Executive Summary Many HBCUs have graduation rates that match and exceed those of many non-HBCUs. Other HBCUs have lower rates, sometimes substantially lower. Such For many, the US News & World Report college comparisons can be misleading, however, because rankings are the gold standard for identifying the they do not take into account the socio-economic country’s best institutions of higher learning. But a backgrounds of the students that colleges serve. Since close analysis of the less well-publicized but highly their founding well over a century ago, HBCUs have respected college rankings compiled by the Washington been dedicated to serving students from low-income Monthly indicates that those rankings may be a better families and those whose pre-college education guide to identifying colleges and universities that has put them at a disadvantage in doing college address one of the nation’s most urgent education coursework. and economic priorities: helping students from low- income, minority families who are often the first in Forty-six percent of HBCU students, for example, their family to attend college—in other words, students come from families with incomes lower than $36,000.
  • Getting Rid of Thecollege Loan Repo Man by STEPHEN Burd

    Getting Rid of Thecollege Loan Repo Man by STEPHEN Burd

    Why the Presidential Debates Won’t Matter GETTING RID OF THECOLLEGE LOAN REPO MAN BY STEPHEN BURd Best-bang-for-the- buck colleges 2012 SEPTEMBER/OCTOBER 2012 $5.95 U.S./$6.95 CAN Silicon Valley’s assault COLLEGE on higher education RANKINGS Why aren’t What Can College conservatives funny? Do For You? HBCUsHow do tend UNCF-member to outperform HBCUsexpectations stack in up successfully against other graduating students from disadvantaged backgrounds. higher education institutions in this ranking system? They do very well. In fact, some lead the pack. Serving Students and the Public Good: HBCUs and the Washington Monthly’s College Rankings UNCF “Historically black and single-gender colleges continue to rank Frederick D. Patterson Research Institute Institute for Capacity Building well by our measures, as they have in years past.” —Washington Monthly Serving Students and the Public Good: HBCUs and the Washington “When it comes to moving low-income, first-generation, minority Monthly’s College Rankings students to and through college, HBCUs excel.” • An analysis of HBCU performance —UNCF, Serving Students and the Public Good based on the College Rankings of Washington Monthly • A publication of the UNCF Frederick D. Patterson Research Institute To receive a free copy, e-mail UNCF-WashingtonMonthlyReport@ UNCF.org. MH WashMonthly Ad 8/3/11 4:38 AM Page 1 Define YOURSELF. MOREHOUSE COLLEGE • Named the No. 1 liberal arts college in the nation by Washington Monthly’s 2010 College Guide OFFICE OF ADMISSIONS • Named one of 45 Best Buy Schools for 2011 by 830 WESTVIEW DRIVE, S.W. The Fiske Guide to Colleges ATLANTA, GA 30314 • Named one of the nation’s most grueling colleges in 2010 (404) 681-2800 by The Huffington Post www.morehouse.edu • Named the No.
  • Sample Draft Syllabus

    Sample Draft Syllabus

    CREATING THE AMERICAN METROPOLIS Loyola University Chicago Prof. Timothy J. Gilfoyle HIST 386, Sec. 204 511 Crown Fall 2018 (773) 508-2221 Tuesday, 2:30-5 p.m. E-mail: [email protected] Corboy Law Center, Room L08 Office Hours: MW, 9-10am, 11:30am-2pm http://luc.edu/history/people/facultyandstaffdirectory/timothyjgilfoyle.shtml "God made the country and man made the town." William Cowper, 1780 The United States was born in the country and moved to the city. This course examines the transformation of the United States from a simple agrarian and small-town society to a complex urban and suburban nation. Field trips and walking tours are a vital component of the class. Between 1850 and 1950, American urban communities were transformed from "horizontal" cities of row houses, tenements and factories to "vertical" cities of apartments and skyscrapers. From New York's Brooklyn Bridge to Chicago's Sears Tower to San Francisco’s Golden Gate Bridge, the tower and the bridge epitomized American urbanism, and frequently America itself. Certain themes recur throughout the course of American urban and cultural history which will be focal points of this class: the interaction of private commerce with cultural change; the rise of distinctive working and middle classes; the creation and segregation of public and private spaces; 1 Sample Draft Syllabus the formation of new and distinctive urban subcultures organized by gender, work, race, religion, ethnicity, and sexuality; problems of health and housing resulting from congestion; and blatant social divisions among wealthy, poor, native-born, immigrant, and racial groups. More broadly, the course attempts to comprehend the American city within the changing questions of what it means to be an American.
  • Etd Nlw8.Pdf

    Etd Nlw8.Pdf

    RED STATE, BLUE STATE, RED NEWS, BLUE NEWS A Thesis submitted to the Faculty of the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences of Georgetown University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in Communication, Culture and Technology By Niki L. Woodard, B.A. Washington, DC April 28, 2006 RED STATE, BLUE STATE, RED NEWS, BLUE NEWS Niki L. Woodard, B.A. Thesis Advisor: Diana Owen, Ph.D. ABSTRACT The phrase “red state, blue state” has set off a debate as divisive as the social trend it describes. This thesis not only recognizes the disparity in defining red states and blue states, but aims to both separate and bridge these differences while introducing a powerful explanatory variable to the discussion – the news media, or what will be referred to as “red news, blue news.” Scholars have approached the topic of American polarization in a variety of ways, namely by looking at the public’s differences on salient issues, the public’s electoral voting habits and the differences among political elites. While the “culture war” and the “red state, blue state” maps of the 2000 and 2004 elections are illustrative of the general debate over political polarization, these theories have ignored the impact of both the mass media and the alternative media. Since the news media is where most Americans gather their information on world, national and local affairs, this seems an obvious place to look for polarizing messages. This research is organized by an investigation of the demand-side and supply- side of media polarization.
  • Growth Management and the City

    Growth Management and the City

    Growth Management and the City James A. Kushnert The way urban growth has been "managed," it is no surprise that Amer- ica's cities are dying.' During the last three decades, American urban growth policy was directed to suburban growth. Government encouraged exodus from the metropolis through: deep subsidies for highways, utilities, and open space; housing finance, particularly in the form of tax deductions for mortgage interest and real property taxes; and subsidized Veteran's Administration loans and Federal Housing Administration mortgage insurance.2 Leaving the city in search of suburban values, the affluent were followed by industry in search of greener locations, retail establishments that favor malls, and restaurants and entertainment outlets looking for secure locations. Thus, the economic base from which taxes are generated to fund public services was transferred to the suburbs. Despite notable, symbolic, and often exciting urban renewal projects, the suburban growth explosion left distinct patterns of systemic poverty in the cities. These patterns include: racial segregation, burgeoning crime, inadequate transit systems, decaying neighborhoods and housing stock, declining school systems, inadequate job training, high unemployment, rapid population expan- sion, minimal employment creation, and inadequate systems of public safety and health. America's urban streets and parks are often unsafe, and urban transit systems, bridges, water and sewer lines, and public buildings need extensive rebuilding. The situation requires both massive reallocation of the tax base and an escalation in taxing and spending on public works, human services, and job creation rivaling the scale of the New Deal. Without this radical alteration of America's urban policy, together with public safety initiatives reflecting a wartime mobilization, the American metropolis-indeed the nation-will be doomed to a declining quality of life that leads to eventual third world economic status.
  • The Impact of Ranking Systems on Higher Education and Its Stakeholders

    The Impact of Ranking Systems on Higher Education and Its Stakeholders

    Journal of Institutional Research 13(1), 83–96. 83 The Impact of Ranking Systems on Higher Education and its Stakeholders MARIAN THAKUR Monash University, Australia Submitted to the Journal of Institutional Research, July 23, 2007, accepted August 27, 2007. Abstract The arrival of university ranking has changed the landscape of higher education all over the world and is likely to continue to influence further development nationally and internationally. This article provides an overview of rankings systems in which Australian universities feature and it goes on further to discuss the impact ranking systems have on higher education and its stakeholders. It concludes by acknowledging that ranking systems are viewed differently by different stakeholders and hence affect them in different ways. While no one ranking can be accepted as definitive, these ranking systems will remain a part of the higher education system for some time to come. Keywords: University rankings; league tables; higher education; stakeholders There is a new era in higher education, characterised by global competition, in which university ranking systems have assumed an importance. Their emergence, often controversial and subject to considerable debate, has been met with a lot of scepticism, some enthusiasm and an institutional unease. Regardless, ranking systems are here to stay and it is important to assess their effect on the higher education sector and its stakeholders. Correspondence to: Marian Thakur, University Planning and Statistics, Monash University, Victoria 3800, Australia. Email: [email protected] Journal of Institutional Research 13(1), 83–96. 84 Overview of ranking systems There are many standards used to assess excellence in universities but the quality of teaching and research is fundamental (Taylor & Braddock, n.d.).