Why is Princeton only #5 on the US News rankings for physics?

  • Thread starter Thread starter CyberShot
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Physics Princeton
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the ranking of Princeton University in the US News rankings for physics, specifically questioning why it is placed at #5, tied with Berkeley. Participants explore the implications of rankings in academic programs, the significance of historical ties to renowned scientists, and the overall value of such rankings in assessing educational quality.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Meta-discussion

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants argue that Princeton's historical connections to famous scientists do not necessarily reflect its current standing or quality in physics education.
  • Others contend that the obsession with rankings is meaningless and that a good education can be obtained at schools outside the top tier.
  • A few participants suggest that rankings are a rough measure and may not accurately represent the quality of a department.
  • There is a viewpoint that rankings should be grouped into tiers rather than precise positions, with some arguing that many schools in lower tiers still have excellent research and faculty.
  • Some participants express skepticism about the validity of rankings compiled by those without relevant academic credentials.
  • A participant humorously compares ranking schools to ranking unrelated items, suggesting the absurdity of such comparisons.
  • Concerns are raised about the focus on prestige over actual interest in physics among students, with some noting that many students may prioritize reputation over their specific academic interests.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally disagree on the significance and validity of rankings, with multiple competing views on their relevance and implications for educational quality. There is no consensus on whether Princeton's ranking is justified or what the rankings truly measure.

Contextual Notes

Some participants highlight that rankings may not account for various factors such as faculty quality, research opportunities, and individual student experiences, indicating limitations in how rankings are interpreted.

CyberShot
Messages
133
Reaction score
2
I don't really get it. If Princeton undoubtedly has the most ties with the most famous scientists ever, Einstein, Feynman, Witten, Godel, Weinbgerg, Polyakov, and is even home to the Institute for Advanced Study, why is it only #5 on US News? Tied with Berkeley? I think that's BS.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
At some point, the obsession with "ranking" of various physics programs is utterly meaningless.

Here's a shocking FACT: You can get a damn good physics education in a school that is even out of the top 30 in any ranking.

Zz.
 
CyberShot, apart from ZZs' comments, which are right on the money, do you have a PhD in physics? If not, how are you qualified to judge? Additionally, the fact that there have been famous people there in the past doesn't tell you anything about how good it is today.
 
Vanadium 50 said:
CyberShot, apart from ZZs' comments, which are right on the money, do you have a PhD in physics? If not, how are you qualified to judge? Additionally, the fact that there have been famous people there in the past doesn't tell you anything about how good it is today.

Not to mention the fact that the IAS is an institute that is unconnected with Princeton other than it's geographical location, and there are some quotes about what it does to scientists...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Institute_for_Advanced_Study
 
Furthermore, rankings are only a rough measure of how good a certain department is. It's hard to say exactly what these rankings measure.
 
princeton is still a top university. ranking is meaningless.
competition is meaningless in the area of science.
 
These rankings try to resolve physics departments to an impossible and absurd degree.

Personally, I think the only use of these rankings is the potential to break schools up into three tiers:

Tier 1: Any top 20 program.

Tier 2: Top30-50

Tier 3: Top 60 and Beyond.

Any breakdown of programs beyond these three groups using US N&WR data is useless.

In fact, there are several schools in the Tier 2 range with top notch research, great faculty (in some cases, nobel laureates), and great facilities. I believe my department is one of these, and I believe there are quite a few more as well.
 
ZapperZ said:
At some point, the obsession with "ranking" of various physics programs is utterly meaningless.

Here's a shocking FACT: You can get a damn good physics education in a school that is even out of the top 30 in any ranking.

Zz.

I agree with you. I feel more people are into physics because of the prestige associated with it than the actual workings with physics itself. I know that's evident at my "large state school," some of my 2nd year classmates will talk about going to MIT or Harvard for grad school. I don't even think they know what area of physics they like yet, but they sure know that MIT will have the right program for them.
 
Quick rank the following:

1) a $20 bill
2) a snow shovel
3) a bottle of aspirin
4) air
5) alpha centauri

Now you might ask me on what basis should you rank these things and think that it's pretty silly that anyone would enough try come up with a list, but that's pretty much what school rankings are like.
 
  • #10
You could do it on size, usefulness, cost, etc.

:P
 
  • #11
twofish-quant said:
Quick rank the following:

1) a $20 bill
2) a snow shovel
3) a bottle of aspirin
4) air
5) alpha centauri

Now you might ask me on what basis should you rank these things and think that it's pretty silly that anyone would enough try come up with a list, but that's pretty much what school rankings are like.

Omgoshness this is so easy. Stand back, I got this. (No really stand back or you might get hurt)

1) Air
2) Alpha Centauri
3) A $20 bill
4) Snow shovel
5) A bottle of aspirin

Next?

:P

On a serious note, to the person who said that competition in the area of science is meaningless...are you kidding? Cooperate, sure. But if you're not competing with *something* or *somebody* then a) you will probably never meet your potential and b) you're going to atrophy.

Or did I take you too literally/generally/something? lol
 
  • #12
If you are concerned about unofficial rankings compiled by people who usually do not even have an undergraduate degree in that subject area then the good news is that no-one actually reads or pays any attention to these rankings.
 
  • #13
Don't care about ranking. It's your supervisor and your hard working that count.
 
Last edited:
  • #14
CyberShot said:
I don't really get it. If Princeton undoubtedly has the most ties with the most famous scientists ever, Einstein, Feynman, Witten, Godel, Weinbgerg, Polyakov, and is even home to the Institute for Advanced Study, why is it only #5 on US News? Tied with Berkeley? I think that's BS.

Your post seems to imply that Berkeley is a 2nd tier school. As a California native, I'm slightly insulted. Also, #5 out of several hundred is pretty damn good also its "#5" because there are 4 schools tied for #1, so its really like tied for second place. Really not that bad. It is worthwhile to note that Einstein's most notable scientific work was not done at Princeton. With your argument, Florida State University should be a highly ranked physics school because P.A.M. Dirac was tied to it. FSU comes in at #48, but if you think #5 is bad, I can't imagine how lowly you think of #48. Oppenheimer was a Berkeley professor. Berkeley has official ties to Lawrence Berkeley and Livermore National Laboratories, which have contributed to a number of scientific advancements. I don't see why Princeton having a tied ranking with Berkeley is such BS, they're both great schools. The rankings change every year anyway, there's no need to make such a fuss. As others have said, you should take these rankings with a grain of salt. University of Hawaii Manoa comes in nowhere near the top of the list, yet it is a very well respected school for astronomy and astrophysics. If these rankings are based purely on prestige, maybe Princeton should be a little higher (although at #5 there's not much room to move up) but if all you care about is prestige, you're just a phony.
 

Similar threads

Replies
23
Views
5K
  • · Replies 40 ·
2
Replies
40
Views
5K
  • · Replies 119 ·
4
Replies
119
Views
18K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 49 ·
2
Replies
49
Views
7K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 98 ·
4
Replies
98
Views
12K