I saw the thread title and thought ULM had changed its name.

(09-23-2016 03:12 PM)Pounce FTW Wrote:  

(09-23-2016 12:56 PM)Arrowhead Wrote:  I think the Carnegie designation helped, but I agree with you.

I think the Carnegie designation is exactly why it happened. If memory serves, the Carnegie classifications are what USNWR uses to divide up their categories. After the Carnegie update last year, the newest USNWR rankings moved a number of schools "up" from regional to national (quotes used to acknowledge that classification can represent a difference in focus rather than quality). I believe this is also the first national classification for Texas State and Little Rock (although I could be wrong, especially on the second).

this is correct to be in the US Snooze National rankings you have to be a Carnegie CLASSIFIED (they are NOT rankings) Doctoral University

Carnegie only updates their CLASSIFICATIONS every 5 years so if a school is not classified as Doctoral it will be at least 5 years for that to change

(09-23-2016 07:58 PM)swampbear Wrote:  

(09-23-2016 04:32 PM)Dawgxas Wrote:  

(09-23-2016 04:16 PM)EigenEagle Wrote:  Heads in Ruston exploded for now being in the same Carnagie category as ULM. Haha.

Nah, they made to the minor leagues with the other Sunbelt schools. ULM has got a long ways to go to make it to the majors (Tier 1) with Tech, LSU and Tulane

You really believe this claptrap? You are rated by Carnegie the same as ULM. One notch below UL. USNWR is a sideshow that's good for propoganda purposes....same as Princeton Review is for UL.

the Carnegie Classifications are not rankings and they have specifically made changes every 5 years when they release new classifications to discourage them being used as a "ranking" or as a metric that implies similarity of quality

inn their FAQs they make it clear over and over that they are not rankings, why they are not rankings and how they try and discourage them from being used as rankings and why doing so is not valid

http://web.archive.org/web/2016012510361...s/faqs.php

(09-23-2016 01:45 PM)ragin4u Wrote:  Good job ULM! Leaving ELAYTech behind!

Tech is a National Tier 1 University. ULM and ULL are not. Stupid Cajun trying to misrepresent the facts.

(09-24-2016 01:47 AM)stodgdog Wrote:  

(09-23-2016 01:45 PM)ragin4u Wrote:  Good job ULM! Leaving ELAYTech behind!

Tech is a National Tier 1 University. ULM and ULL are not. Stupid Cajun trying to misrepresent the facts.

Since there doesn’t appear to be an official Tier 1 definition, it seems to me that it’s a matter of perception. And it’s up to you to decide if the perception is based on your values and needs or of someone else’s.
http://diycollegerankings.com/tier-1-sch...ege/19594/

This is one explanation but there really isn't a definitive one except for being an AAU school. Any university that is classified as a Tier school by Carnegie can finagle other classifications and lists into calling themselves a Tier 1. At least Texas has an actual pathway towards that status.

By starting this thread, Arrowhead was simply pointing out a positive fact about ULM. I heartily congratulate you guys Arrowhead.

But as usual, ULL fans try to derail anything positive about ULM to the fans of other members of the SBC. And as they also always do, they bring up La Tech to TRY to make themselves feel better. They've been eaten up with envy about Tech's Tier I classification ever since we first attained it five or six years ago. ULL fans have made it quite clear how much they desire to be recognized with Tier I status, but alas, they've once again failed.

Just beware members of the SBC. If ever UL were to actually reach USN&WR Tier I status, it will suddenly become the most important ranking that has ever been bestowed upon ANY university, and it is you guys that will NEVER hear the end of it.

YOU are on the Sunbelt site, sweetheart. Face the fact that ULM has caught up with Tech in academics. Now toughen up buttercup.

In general, the difference between US News "national" and "regional" is number of doctoral degrees awarded.

To use a non-Sun Belt example. Most people who serious about academic stuff would consider Murray State and Southern Illinois (Carbondale) to be very similar in academic prestige and quite a few would argue Murray's merits as being better, but SIU awards enough doctoral degrees to be deemed national while Murray does not, so SIU is around 215 nationally and Murray around 35 in the south.

(09-24-2016 10:48 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  In general, the difference between US News "national" and "regional" is number of doctoral degrees awarded.

To use a non-Sun Belt example. Most people who serious about academic stuff would consider Murray State and Southern Illinois (Carbondale) to be very similar in academic prestige and quite a few would argue Murray's merits as being better, but SIU awards enough doctoral degrees to be deemed national while Murray does not, so SIU is around 215 nationally and Murray around 35 in the south.

Missouri State is the same way. We don't have enough doctoral degrees.

(09-24-2016 04:48 AM)BRtransplant Wrote:  By starting this thread, Arrowhead was simply pointing out a positive fact about ULM. I heartily congratulate you guys Arrowhead.

But as usual, ULL fans try to derail anything positive about ULM to the fans of other members of the SBC. And as they also always do, they bring up La Tech to TRY to make themselves feel better. They've been eaten up with envy about Tech's Tier I classification ever since we first attained it five or six years ago. ULL fans have made it quite clear how much they desire to be recognized with Tier I status, but alas, they've once again failed.

Just beware members of the SBC. If ever UL were to actually reach USN&WR Tier I status, it will suddenly become the most important ranking that has ever been bestowed upon ANY university, and it is you guys that will NEVER hear the end of it.

I stand by my comment earlier. USNWR is a very subjective ranking and so is the Princeton Review. Tech is ranked in US NEWS and not even mentioned in Princeton Review while UL is ranked as making the top 387 or whatever the number. Both are very subjective. What is important is both Catalogs are to be found in practically every HS guidance counselors office in the US. I will be pleased when UL makes tier 1 in USNews....beat my chest over it.....nope. Carnegie and S.R.E.B. ratings are far more important. I am happy for ULM. When a University strengthens itself academically it strengthens all members of that system.

(09-24-2016 02:37 AM)CatMom Wrote:  

(09-24-2016 01:47 AM)stodgdog Wrote:  

(09-23-2016 01:45 PM)ragin4u Wrote:  Good job ULM! Leaving ELAYTech behind!

Tech is a National Tier 1 University. ULM and ULL are not. Stupid Cajun trying to misrepresent the facts.

Since there doesn’t appear to be an official Tier 1 definition, it seems to me that it’s a matter of perception. And it’s up to you to decide if the perception is based on your values and needs or of someone else’s.
http://diycollegerankings.com/tier-1-sch...ege/19594/

This is one explanation but there really isn't a definitive one except for being an AAU school. Any university that is classified as a Tier school by Carnegie can finagle other classifications and lists into calling themselves a Tier 1. At least Texas has an actual pathway towards that status.

As todge pointed out the National University designation is based on the Carnegie Classification (not a ranking), that was why ULM was placed in the National University level but was not ranked- Tier 2.

The US News FAQ goes into great detail about the rankings

The top 75% of schools in each category are ranked and are considered Tier 1, The remaining schools are placed in the bottom, or second, tier based on their overall score in their category.

The second tier, also referred to as Tier Two, is approximately the bottom 25 percent of schools in a given category. In other words, schools listed in Tier Two are ranked lower than all those that are numerically ranked.



9. What are tiers, and why are some schools listed in tiers and not numerically ranked?

U.S. News publishes the numerical ranks of approximately the top 75 percent of schools in each of the categories. The remaining schools are placed in the bottom, or second, tier based on their overall score in their category. Schools in the second tier are labeled as Rank Not Published and listed alphabetically on usnews.com.

The second tier, also referred to as Tier Two, is approximately the bottom 25 percent of schools in a given category. In other words, schools listed in Tier Two are ranked lower than all those that are numerically ranked.

http://www.usnews.com/education/best-col...nkings-faq

(09-24-2016 01:11 PM)swampbear Wrote:  

(09-24-2016 04:48 AM)BRtransplant Wrote:  By starting this thread, Arrowhead was simply pointing out a positive fact about ULM. I heartily congratulate you guys Arrowhead.

But as usual, ULL fans try to derail anything positive about ULM to the fans of other members of the SBC. And as they also always do, they bring up La Tech to TRY to make themselves feel better. They've been eaten up with envy about Tech's Tier I classification ever since we first attained it five or six years ago. ULL fans have made it quite clear how much they desire to be recognized with Tier I status, but alas, they've once again failed.

Just beware members of the SBC. If ever UL were to actually reach USN&WR Tier I status, it will suddenly become the most important ranking that has ever been bestowed upon ANY university, and it is you guys that will NEVER hear the end of it.

I stand by my comment earlier. USNWR is a very subjective ranking and so is the Princeton Review. Tech is ranked in US NEWS and not even mentioned in Princeton Review while UL is ranked as making the top 387 or whatever the number. Both are very subjective. What is important is both Catalogs are to be found in practically every HS guidance counselors office in the US. I will be pleased when UL makes tier 1 in USNews....beat my chest over it.....nope. Carnegie and S.R.E.B. ratings are far more important. I am happy for ULM. When a University strengthens itself academically it strengthens all members of that system.

US News is the standard for college rankings and many University president's salary and incentives are tied to obtaining Tier 1 status.

Princeton Review is on par with Money magazine rankings. Tech was ranked 235, (highest return on investment in Louisiana), ULL 521. But US News is the standard college rankings used by guidance counselors

I don't know if you read Todge's post but once again the Carnegie Classifications are not ratings and the Carnegie website goes into great detail to explain that their Classifications should not be used for ratings or rankings.

(09-24-2016 10:48 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  In general, the difference between US News "national" and "regional" is number of doctoral degrees awarded.

To use a non-Sun Belt example. Most people who serious about academic stuff would consider Murray State and Southern Illinois (Carbondale) to be very similar in academic prestige and quite a few would argue Murray's merits as being better, but SIU awards enough doctoral degrees to be deemed national while Murray does not, so SIU is around 215 nationally and Murray around 35 in the south.

SIU has a medical, dental and law school and much more research than Murray State.

(09-24-2016 01:33 PM)Dawgxas Wrote:  

(09-24-2016 01:11 PM)swampbear Wrote:  

(09-24-2016 04:48 AM)BRtransplant Wrote:  By starting this thread, Arrowhead was simply pointing out a positive fact about ULM. I heartily congratulate you guys Arrowhead.

But as usual, ULL fans try to derail anything positive about ULM to the fans of other members of the SBC. And as they also always do, they bring up La Tech to TRY to make themselves feel better. They've been eaten up with envy about Tech's Tier I classification ever since we first attained it five or six years ago. ULL fans have made it quite clear how much they desire to be recognized with Tier I status, but alas, they've once again failed.

Just beware members of the SBC. If ever UL were to actually reach USN&WR Tier I status, it will suddenly become the most important ranking that has ever been bestowed upon ANY university, and it is you guys that will NEVER hear the end of it.

I stand by my comment earlier. USNWR is a very subjective ranking and so is the Princeton Review. Tech is ranked in US NEWS and not even mentioned in Princeton Review while UL is ranked as making the top 387 or whatever the number. Both are very subjective. What is important is both Catalogs are to be found in practically every HS guidance counselors office in the US. I will be pleased when UL makes tier 1 in USNews....beat my chest over it.....nope. Carnegie and S.R.E.B. ratings are far more important. I am happy for ULM. When a University strengthens itself academically it strengthens all members of that system.

US News is the standard for college rankings and many University president's salary and incentives are tied to obtaining Tier 1 status.

Princeton Review is on par with Money magazine rankings. Tech was ranked 235, (highest return on investment in Louisiana), ULL 521. But US News is the standard college rankings used by guidance counselors

I don't know if you read Todge's post but once again the Carnegie Classifications are not ratings and the Carnegie website goes into great detail to explain that their Classifications should not be used for ratings or rankings.

I don't care what you or anyone else says. I know the criteria used for US News and it's too damn subjective. Carnegie is important.. Go and ask your President if it's important.

Oh, let them brag. They want to go off of USNews, so be it. They just need to feel better. If they were in TX they wouldn't even be in the category of emerging Tier 1 Research University. Only 3 in TX are Tier 1, with 7 as emerging.

They won't convince me they are above UTA or even TXST for a Tier 1 Research U when they are categorized as moderate research; whereas UTA is Highest research and TXST is high research. Doctorates are on equal par with TXST, way under UTA and research dollars don't come close.

Being previously ranked by USNews just gives a leg up on being in the top 75% as opposed to ones that just made it but when/if you try to defend being better than a school that might categorically be above you, I will have to take pause.

As for Presidents pay increases? In Texas, it's all about that Tier 1 Research status. TXST Pres brought TXST up by its bootstraps, got that Emerging designation and got that Carnegie T2 ranking in short order. If you think the BOR doesn't see that here, you know nothing about colleges in Texas.

As was said, this was a congratulatory thread to ULM but, once again, got derailed by visiting posters that it didn't even apply to. (like me) So, sorry guy.

(09-24-2016 04:34 PM)CatMom Wrote:  Oh, let them brag. They want to go off of USNews, so be it. They just need to feel better. If they were in TX they wouldn't even be in the category of emerging Tier 1 Research University. Only 3 in TX are Tier 1, with 7 as emerging.

They won't convince me they are above UTA or even TXST for a Tier 1 Research U when they are categorized as moderate research; whereas UTA is Highest research and TXST is high research. Doctorates are on equal par with TXST, way under UTA and research dollars don't come close.

Being previously ranked by USNews just gives a leg up on being in the top 75% as opposed to ones that just made it but when/if you try to defend being better than a school that might categorically be above you, I will have to take pause.

As for Presidents pay increases? In Texas, it's all about that Tier 1 Research status. TXST Pres brought TXST up by its bootstraps, got that Emerging designation and got that Carnegie T2 ranking in short order. If you think the BOR doesn't see that here, you know nothing about colleges in Texas.

As was said, this was a congratulatory thread to ULM but, once again, got derailed by visiting posters that it didn't even apply to. (like me) So, sorry guy.

the issue with attempting to use the Carnegie Classifications as a ranking is clearly pointed out by the foundation themselves

it looks at gross research dollars without looking at anything about how meaningful that research is and it also takes NOTHING into account about the dramatically different faculty counts of various universities

UTA and Texas State probably have at least 2X the number of faculty as La Tech if not a larger ratio than that so it would be expected that they would do a larger amount of research on a total dollar basis

and really the way they did their classifications this year makes it even more meaningless as far as trying to say that "research productivity" (without any normalization for faculty count) means you are a better university because OkState thrashes north Texas state in total research and in PhD productivity, but for some reason they are not "highest research" while north Texas state is and it has to do with something in the methodology about "expected productivity" or some nonsense like that

it is easy to find fault with the US Snooze, but at least they attempt to look at the outcome of producing undergrads with a degree and retaining students and having students in classes that are not 200 students in a theater

and while there are well documented incidents of universities cheating the evaluations of peers (Clemson) most evaluate fairly hell dem coogs doh at UH filed a FOI request to see the president of UT Austin's evaluations and when they go them they found that he was MORE than fair with dem coogs doh and in fact IMO he had then evaluated too highly

and even the "alumni giving" rate if you think about it who looks and says "well my time at that school sucked and it was meaningless, but I am going to give them more money after I have graduated".....almost no one in the USA would do that especially successful people nor would they go back and hire alumni of they felt those students were going to be morons educated by a schools they thought was a joke while they were there

admissions % is a joke and a meaningless metric and HS counselor rankings are much more questionable than those from others in higher ed, but the Carnegie Foundation looks at total research and PhD production without any normalization for faculty count of need for the PhDs produced......it is hard to get a much less meaningful metric for the quality of UNDERGRADUATE education than that

and as far as The State of Texas is concerned "tier 1" means ONE THING and that is AAU membership and that is HIGHLY unlikely for any of the emerging research universities in the next two decades or more

if you want to know what it takes for a public university with no medical school in a state with many many public universities to get into the AAU all you have to do is look at the metrics of Ga Tech and there is not an emerging research university in Texas that is close to those metrics and Ga Tech is about as close as a comparison to what the AAU would evaluate against as any university out there in the AAU

(09-24-2016 02:37 AM)CatMom Wrote:  

(09-24-2016 01:47 AM)stodgdog Wrote:  

(09-23-2016 01:45 PM)ragin4u Wrote:  Good job ULM! Leaving ELAYTech behind!

Tech is a National Tier 1 University. ULM and ULL are not. Stupid Cajun trying to misrepresent the facts.

Since there doesn’t appear to be an official Tier 1 definition, it seems to me that it’s a matter of perception. And it’s up to you to decide if the perception is based on your values and needs or of someone else’s.
http://diycollegerankings.com/tier-1-sch...ege/19594/

This is one explanation but there really isn't a definitive one except for being an AAU school. Any university that is classified as a Tier school by Carnegie can finagle other classifications and lists into calling themselves a Tier 1. At least Texas has an actual pathway towards that status.

I'm not sure what you are saying, but Louisiana Tech University is a National Tier 1 University per USNWR. ULM should be congratulated for achieving National Status, and I congratulate them. Why can't the Cajuns congratulate them as well without posting completely FALSE information about Louisiana Tech? Why would they mention Louisiana Tech at all. It doesn't make sense. Tech folks certainly have every right to set the record straight when misinformation is posted about our school. I just can't understand why the Cajuns would post such nonsense.

(09-24-2016 01:11 PM)swampbear Wrote:  

(09-24-2016 04:48 AM)BRtransplant Wrote:  By starting this thread, Arrowhead was simply pointing out a positive fact about ULM. I heartily congratulate you guys Arrowhead.

But as usual, ULL fans try to derail anything positive about ULM to the fans of other members of the SBC. And as they also always do, they bring up La Tech to TRY to make themselves feel better. They've been eaten up with envy about Tech's Tier I classification ever since we first attained it five or six years ago. ULL fans have made it quite clear how much they desire to be recognized with Tier I status, but alas, they've once again failed.

Just beware members of the SBC. If ever UL were to actually reach USN&WR Tier I status, it will suddenly become the most important ranking that has ever been bestowed upon ANY university, and it is you guys that will NEVER hear the end of it.

I stand by my comment earlier. USNWR is a very subjective ranking and so is the Princeton Review. Tech is ranked in US NEWS and not even mentioned in Princeton Review while UL is ranked as making the top 387 or whatever the number. Both are very subjective. What is important is both Catalogs are to be found in practically every HS guidance counselors office in the US. I will be pleased when UL makes tier 1 in USNews....beat my chest over it.....nope. Carnegie and S.R.E.B. ratings are far more important. I am happy for ULM. When a University strengthens itself academically it strengthens all members of that system.

So why can't you idiot Cajuns just congratulate them without posting false information about Tech. Why bring up Tech at all? If you do, using your logic that academic success strengthens the system, then you should congratulate Tech for maintaining Tier 1 status.

(09-24-2016 06:52 PM)stodgdog Wrote:  

(09-24-2016 01:11 PM)swampbear Wrote:  

(09-24-2016 04:48 AM)BRtransplant Wrote:  By starting this thread, Arrowhead was simply pointing out a positive fact about ULM. I heartily congratulate you guys Arrowhead.

But as usual, ULL fans try to derail anything positive about ULM to the fans of other members of the SBC. And as they also always do, they bring up La Tech to TRY to make themselves feel better. They've been eaten up with envy about Tech's Tier I classification ever since we first attained it five or six years ago. ULL fans have made it quite clear how much they desire to be recognized with Tier I status, but alas, they've once again failed.

Just beware members of the SBC. If ever UL were to actually reach USN&WR Tier I status, it will suddenly become the most important ranking that has ever been bestowed upon ANY university, and it is you guys that will NEVER hear the end of it.

I stand by my comment earlier. USNWR is a very subjective ranking and so is the Princeton Review. Tech is ranked in US NEWS and not even mentioned in Princeton Review while UL is ranked as making the top 387 or whatever the number. Both are very subjective. What is important is both Catalogs are to be found in practically every HS guidance counselors office in the US. I will be pleased when UL makes tier 1 in USNews....beat my chest over it.....nope. Carnegie and S.R.E.B. ratings are far more important. I am happy for ULM. When a University strengthens itself academically it strengthens all members of that system.

So why can't you idiot Cajuns just congratulate them without posting false information about Tech. Why bring up Tech at all? If you do, using your logic that academic success strengthens the system, then you should congratulate Tech for maintaining Tier 1 status.

I have in the past....now crawl into a corner and lick your balls.....

Can someone give me back the last 15 minutes. Oh, congrats ULM!!

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk