Sonia Sotomayor for USSC?

[Valmy]

I guess my main complaint is really just cultural annoyance--it seems 90% of the time I hear of some schools it is because of their sports teams, manned by people who may never graduate.

It is amazing how jock stereotypes continue despite all the tons of actual evidence that suggests athletes graduate at higher rates than their non-athlete counterparts.

[Berkut]

I guess my main complaint is really just cultural annoyance--it seems 90% of the time I hear of some schools it is because of their sports teams, manned by people who may never graduate.

Indeed, but your annoyance, while valid for you, makes no damn sense when applied to everyone else.

Its not like universities in America are some monolithic top down organization that takes direction from someone. There are a lot fo them, and MANY have no sports program of any kind.

If you find the idea of college sports annoying, then so what? Don't go to a school that has athletics - or if you do, ignore them. There are enough schools out there that you can pick and choose one that suits your level of tolerance for anything.

So why the need to change anything? Universities do what they think their customers want. You are basically arguing that everyone should change because you don't like how something works, rather than you just exercising the option to have nothing to do with what you don't like.

[Admiral Yi]

Yi has a good point about fostering donations though.

Oh yeah, and apparel sales.

[The Minsky Moment]

Should that be the goal for every single school in America, to make it into the top academic rankings?

I think that should be the goal, yes.  At least an aspiration.

[Admiral Yi]

If you find the idea of college sports annoying, then so what? Don't go to a school that has athletics - or if you do, ignore them. There are enough schools out there that you can pick and choose one that suits your level of tolerance for anything.

It's not like there's a box we can check on state tax returns if we don't want our taxes to fund college athletics.

[Berkut]

Should that be the goal for every single school in America, to make it into the top academic rankings?

I think that should be the goal, yes.  At least an aspiration.

Meh, I don't. To do so is basically impossible for most schools, and the attempt would push them to over-specialize.

I think there is nothing at all wrong with aspiring, for example, to provide a excellent education to more people, rather than a stupendous education to the elite.

For every Stanford there has to be a dozen Arizonas, and a hundred SUNY-Brockports.

[garbon]

Yes, some should recognize that mediocrity is their lot in life.

[Valmy]

I think that should be the goal, yes.  At least an aspiration.

The academic ratings are often built on things like original research and grant money that have nothing to do with educating students.  The best place to get an education rarely is reflected by the ratings.

[Barrister]

Should that be the goal for every single school in America, to make it into the top academic rankings?

I think that should be the goal, yes.  At least an aspiration.

Why?

This debate came up at my alma-mater, and the university President said it was NOT that university's ambition to be #1 in the ranking.  It was stated that in order to be #1 it would mean being far more exclusive than they wanted to be, with much higher entrance requirements and much smaller class sizes.  That university, a large public institution, instead stated their ambition was to give a high quality education to as many resident of the province as reasonably possible.

[Valmy]

Yes, some should recognize that mediocrity is their lot in life.

Some?  The very definition of mediocrity requires that most recognize that fact.

[jimmy olsen]

Should that be the goal for every single school in America, to make it into the top academic rankings?

I think that should be the goal, yes.  At least an aspiration.

Why?

This debate came up at my alma-mater, and the university President said it was NOT that university's ambition to be #1 in the ranking.  It was stated that in order to be #1 it would mean being far more exclusive than they wanted to be, with much higher entrance requirements and much smaller class sizes.  That university, a large public institution, instead stated their ambition was to give a high quality education to as many resident of the province as reasonably possible.

And we all saw how that turned out! 

[Barrister]

Should that be the goal for every single school in America, to make it into the top academic rankings?

I think that should be the goal, yes.  At least an aspiration.

Why?

This debate came up at my alma-mater, and the university President said it was NOT that university's ambition to be #1 in the ranking.  It was stated that in order to be #1 it would mean being far more exclusive than they wanted to be, with much higher entrance requirements and much smaller class sizes.  That university, a large public institution, instead stated their ambition was to give a high quality education to as many resident of the province as reasonably possible.

And we all saw how that turned out! 

Clearly it has turned out very well judging by Buddha and I.   

[Valmy]

And we all saw how that turned out! 

Producing a noble public servant who brings truth and justice and keeps the north strong and free?

[The Minsky Moment]

A public institution can have a commitment to educating a broad swath of people and yet still aspire to provide the best quality academics as possible.  There are plenty of public universities out there that admit lots of residents and yet still have departments and programs with a strong commitment to academic excellence.  (And there are others that do not have as strong a commitment.)  Perhaps they will never be able to reach #1 in the canned rankings or even #20, but they can still aspire to reach as high as possible in terms of academic excellence.  Seems to me if an institution lacks that aspiration, it is basically saying that the people it serves don't deserve any better than a half-assed effort.

[Barrister]

A public institution can have a commitment to educating a broad swath of people and yet still aspire to provide the best quality academics as possible.  There are plenty of public universities out there that admit lots of residents and yet still have departments and programs with a strong commitment to academic excellence.  (And there are others that do not have as strong a commitment.)  Perhaps they will never be able to reach #1 in the canned rankings or even #20, but they can still aspire to reach as high as possible in terms of academic excellence.  Seems to me if an institution lacks that aspiration, it is basically saying that the people it serves don't deserve any better than a half-assed effort.

Then I suspect we are just quibbling over words.  I agree with what I think you're saying - that every institution should arpise to be very good at what it does.  It was really just the word "best" that I disagreed with.