PDA

View Full Version : Comparing the US Naval Academy To Columbia !



megimoo
09-19-2008, 03:58 PM
Comparing the Candidates' Colleges

When I speak with my liberal friends about the upcoming election, one point they think that they can trump me on is intelligence. They regurgitate the litany of how dumb Reagan was, and connect the dots to how dumb John McCain is because he graduated at the bottom of his class at the Naval Academy. It is amazing to me how uneducated liberals are when it comes to education. The world begins and ends with the Ivy League, and class rank must be the only indicator of intelligence.


Let's compare the schools the candidates went to, how they were graded, and what was expected of students. For argument's sake, I am going to select the two years Senator Obama spent as a transfer student at Columbia*, and the 4 years Senator McCain spent as a cadet at the Naval Academy.


Entering an Ivy League school as a transfer is a different process than entering as a freshman. Grades and especially faculty recommendations, as well as life story, may play a significant role.


In order to enter any service academy, you must pass a battery of interviews, physical tests, and standardized tests. Only the cream of the crop are admitted, and there are no preferences for race. Getting in at either as freshman is extremely tough.


Let's look at what happens when you arrive. Going to the Ivy is a typical college experience. You take classes that you need to take to graduate and declare a major. You have plenty of time to study, party, can miss class if you want. It is a casual atmosphere where it really doesn't matter what clothing you wear to class. You are accountable to yourself. If you want to participate in intramural activities, you can, or not. No matter what your behavior in your abundant unstructured time, if you do well on tests, you will get a good grade in class.


At a service academy, life is drastically different. http://www.usna.edu/midlife.htmBugle calls wake you up early in the morning. You have to wear a uniform of the day. Freshmen wake up a little earlier, and have to stand at attention and "shout" the days down the halls. Rooms are kept neat as a pin. Occasionally, they have to meet a SAMI (Saturday Morning Inspection). There are regulations as to how you store the equipment that is issued to you on the first day you came to the academy. Meals are regimented, and freshmen serve their upper class cadets.


You march to lunch. You walk at attention all the time when you are a freshman. With each passing year, your class assumes greater responsibility in running the academy. By the time you are a senior, your class runs the academy and is responsible to the entire corps of cadets.


Each day, you have to participate in intramural sports. You are not only graded in the classroom academically, but you receive a military grade as well..


Academically, there are no "rocks for jocks" type classes. You carry a huge load of semester hours. Cadets will carry 4-6 more hours of classes per semester than a typical civilian student.


You are specifically trained in leadership skills, and you are expected to use them. This is drastically different from anything offered to Ivy League undergraduates..


Oh, did I mention that you can get a thing called demerits?


Demerits are penalties issued to cadets for violations of the rules. It can be as much as leaving your lights on too late, to having un-shined shoes. The way to work off your demerits is to "walk tours" around a square line at the academy. You walk at attention with your rifle.


McCain has the record for demerits at USNA. His son attends Annapolis now, and I hope he is not trying to break it.


Class rank is computed from all of the above factors. It's not just academic grades. Ask an academy graduate if he is proud of the person that graduated last in their class. You will be intrigued by the answer.


When people hail Barack Obama's intelligence because of his college resume and degrades McCain's, tell them to check out the Naval Academy website.

http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/09/comparing_the_candidates_colle.html

Cold Warrior
09-19-2008, 04:18 PM
This is a very silly line of attack. If one wishes to take academic credentials as a measure of intelligence, the comparison between McCain and Obama is a "no contest."

The author blows a lot of smoke about the rigors of military school life in his implication that those rigors somehow equate to intelligence. He tells us that military school students "wake up early," "march to class" etc., etc. And, he implies that because Ivy League students don't do this, that somehow that compensates for the differing scores in their classes. But I'm not sure what marching to class has to do with intelligence.

McCain finished at the bottom, bottom of his Naval Academy class. I think it would do a disservice to his fellow classmates, for example, to indicate that he was just as bright as them. They had to do the same physical exercises that McCain and somehow they managed to finish (way, way) ahead of him in their class. Similarly, it does a disservice to Obama, who went through Columbia and Harvard, was President of the Harvard Law Review, etc., to compare his academic achievements of those ofMcCain.

Bad argument, Megs. I think even McCain would shy away from this one.

Shannon
09-19-2008, 05:05 PM
I kind of care about someone's grades but not really. I've been around the block enough to know that grades aren't necessarily a good indication of leadership.

Cold Warrior
09-19-2008, 05:06 PM
I kind of care about someone's grades but not really. I've been around the block enough to know that grades aren't necessarily a good indication of leadership.

And saying that grades aren't a good indicator is fine. But it's not fine to say that all grades are the same, a "F" and an "A," for example.

Shannon
09-19-2008, 05:10 PM
And saying that grades aren't a good indicator is fine. But it's not fine to say that all grades are the same, a "F" and an "A," for example.

Isn't the "a" ,"an" rule phonetic?:p

Cold Warrior
09-19-2008, 05:23 PM
Isn't the "a" ,"an" rule phonetic?:p

I'm a traditionalist and follow the rule that if the word begins with a consonant, it requires an "a," hey! :D

Phillygirl
09-19-2008, 05:46 PM
I'm a traditionalist and follow the rule that if the word begins with a consonant, it requires an "a," hey! :D

That is not traditionalist. Traditionalist follows the path that the auditory pronunciation of the first letter determines whether it is an a or an an.

Sheesh. :rolleyes:

JB
09-19-2008, 05:58 PM
That is not traditionalist. Traditionalist follows the path that the auditory pronunciation of the first letter determines whether it is an a or an an.

Sheesh. :rolleyes:Leave him alone. He's a honorable man. ;)

This is also one of the worst cases of threadjacking I have ever seen.

Shannon
09-19-2008, 07:10 PM
Leave him alone. He's a honorable man. ;)

This is also one of the worst cases of threadjacking I have ever seen.

You do better then.:rolleyes: I anxiously await something about boobs in an economics thread.

texanne92
10-05-2008, 02:57 PM
I was in the first class of women to attend West Point, so I can give a first hand comparison of the two types of collegiate environments. The environment created at the academies is that of one to pressure your physical, emotional and mental self to create a continuous pressure in all three areas with an expectation of high performance and honesty. It develops the ability to perform under pressure and promote integrity and character. There really is no comparison. I left the academy after two years, married and had a child. Six years later, I returned to college. Attending Tarleton State University in Texas, with the responsibility of a family and a job, I graduated at a valedictorian status from the College of Arts & Sciences with a Bachelor's in mathematics. Believe me, there is no comparison.

Cold Warrior
10-05-2008, 03:06 PM
I was in the first class of women to attend West Point, so I can give a first hand comparison of the two types of collegiate environments. The environment created at the academies is that of one to pressure your physical, emotional and mental self to create a continuous pressure in all three areas with an expectation of high performance and honesty. It develops the ability to perform under pressure and promote integrity and character. There really is no comparison. I left the academy after two years, married and had a child. Six years later, I returned to college. Attending Tarleton State University in Texas, with the responsibility of a family and a job, I graduated at a valedictorian status from the College of Arts & Sciences with a Bachelor's in mathematics. Believe me, there is no comparison.

Tarleton State University in Texas is hardly Columba.

lacarnut
10-05-2008, 03:35 PM
This is a very silly line of attack. If one wishes to take academic credentials as a measure of intelligence, the comparison between McCain and Obama is a "no contest."

The author blows a lot of smoke about the rigors of military school life in his implication that those rigors somehow equate to intelligence. He tells us that military school students "wake up early," "march to class" etc., etc. And, he implies that because Ivy League students don't do this, that somehow that compensates for the differing scores in their classes. But I'm not sure what marching to class has to do with intelligence.

McCain finished at the bottom, bottom of his Naval Academy class. I think it would do a disservice to his fellow classmates, for example, to indicate that he was just as bright as them. They had to do the same physical exercises that McCain and somehow they managed to finish (way, way) ahead of him in their class. Similarly, it does a disservice to Obama, who went through Columbia and Harvard, was President of the Harvard Law Review, etc., to compare his academic achievements of those ofMcCain.

Bad argument, Megs. I think even McCain would shy away from this one.

I would have to see Obama's grades,thesis writings and his class ranking and the courses he took which he has refused to make available. At least that is my understanding. Makes me wonder if he is as smart as you think he is. If he can not write any better than his wife, then he is as dumb as a rock and was given special consideration due to his race. Plus, why all the secrecy about his grades. Could be he was at the bottom of his class also with that doping addiction.:eek:

The qualities that military service instills in one over someone that has never been in the military does not have any benefits in the intelligence sector but from a leadership standpoint and love of country, it certainly may. Comparing Obama to McCain in those two qualities is no contest either. McCain wins hands down.

megimoo
10-05-2008, 04:10 PM
Tarleton State University in Texas is hardly Columba.
And Columbia is hardly West Point .The service academy's were established to feed the Army and other branches of the military with officer candidates of high caliber in discipline,honor,leadership and of late technology .The average graduate of Columbia is meant to persue a career in business or acedmedia .West Point produces potential military leadership and has in the past produced
such men as Grant,Lee,Patton,Eisenhower and other notable leaders .

After graduation Columbia has little influence on her graduates other than the schools reputation and the constant demands of contributions from the alumni association.Admission to Columbia is highly prized and there is much competition.Admission to West Point is by Appointment .

An applicant must obtain a nomination to be considered for an appointment to the academy. The sources of nomination are the President of the United States; the Vice President; U.S. Senators and Representatives; and the representatives of the District of Columbia and the U.S. territories. Special appointment categories include children of deceased and disabled veterans or of career military personnel, foreign students, regular U.S. army, U.S. army reserve, honor graduates of military and naval schools and ROTC, and children of Medal of Honor recipients. Candidates must be between the ages of 17 and 22 and must meet physical and educational qualifications.

Cadets undergo a four-year course of instruction on full scholarship, with summers devoted to practical military training, and are paid a monthly salary. Graduating cadets receive a bachelor's degree and a commission as a second lieutenant. Women have been admitted since 1975 and, in the 1990s, they constituted more than 10% of the academy's 4,000 cadets. The West Point Museum contains ordnance and military trophies of historical interest. It is one of the most important college museums in the United States. George W. Cullum compiled a valuable biographical register of West Point cadets.

Cold Warrior
10-05-2008, 04:19 PM
And Columbia is hardly West Point ...

The military academies are tasked with completing a different kind of education than most universities and colleges in this country. Therefore, to compare the physical training, etc. required to successfully complete one of the academies to other universities, whether it be Columbia or Tarleton State is a specious comparison. That said, however, the academies are not particularly known for their level of scholarship, research, and educational rigor, and are typically (and justifiably) not measured along those standards.

The original article tried to mix these additional physical and specifically-military requirements of the academies into a comparison of other universities which, as I noted, is faulty in that that type of training is not within the purview of other universities. In my response to the poster, I was making the point that to compare West Point to Tarleton State in a discussion comparing Annapolis to Columbia is doubly specious, as Tarleton State is "hardly Columbia."

megimoo
10-05-2008, 05:13 PM
The military academies are tasked with completing a different kind of education than most universities and colleges in this country. Therefore, to compare the physical training, etc. required to successfully complete one of the academies to other universities, whether it be Columbia or Tarleton State is a specious comparison. That said, however, the academies are not particularly known for their level of scholarship, research, and educational rigor, and are typically (and justifiably) not measured along those standards.

The original article tried to mix these additional physical and specifically-military requirements of the academies into a comparison of other universities which, as I noted, is faulty in that that type of training is not within the purview of other universities. In my response to the poster, I was making the point that to compare West Point to Tarleton State in a discussion comparing Annapolis to Columbia is doubly specious, as Tarleton State is "hardly Columbia."

You seem preoccupied with the physical aspects of the Point as in the marching to class and the demands of physical training.True the demand for a healthy cadet and the discipline are true but their academic standards are as high or higher than any civilian college.

Most kids at Columbia or even MIT for that matter are into passing grades and beer and pizza .The academy insists on high grades and offer strong incentive for every cadet to excel.The internal tutoring is intense for those having a difficult time of it.The full potential of each candidate is never reached without a certain degree of stress and this has proven to produce great leaders.Even those in the low ranks of the standings are much better and more self assured people and than when they first came into the academy.The past graduates have established the excellence of their training and they assume much greater responsibility's upon graduation than the average college graduate .

Cold Warrior
10-05-2008, 05:17 PM
You seem preoccupied with the physical aspects of the Point as in the marching to class and the demands of physical training.True the demand for a healthy cadet and the discipline are true but their academic standards are as high or higher than any civilian college.
...

That is simply not true, as can be verified by looking at purely academic ratings from many sources. Moreover, the admission procedures as described in your previous post do not, necessarily promote academic merit...


An applicant must obtain a nomination to be considered for an appointment to the academy. The sources of nomination are the President of the United States; the Vice President; U.S. Senators and Representatives; and the representatives of the District of Columbia and the U.S. territories. Special appointment categories include children of deceased and disabled veterans or of career military personnel, foreign students, regular U.S. army, U.S. army reserve, honor graduates of military and naval schools and ROTC, and children of Medal of Honor recipients

Remember, these 100 Senators and 435 Representatives (plus DCs) are the same people who have, on this website TODAY, been described as idiots, asses, and know-nothings. While many nominees, I'm sure, do have significant academic achievements, many are also there as a direct result of political patronage.

And remember our last POTUS who graduated from a military academy?

Phillygirl
10-05-2008, 05:28 PM
That is simply not true, as can be verified by looking at purely academic ratings from many sources. Moreover, the admission procedure as described in your previous post do not, necessarily promote academic merit...



Remember, these 100 Senators and 435 Representatives (plus DCs) are the same people who have, on this website TODAY, been described as idiots, asses, and know-nothings. While many nominees, I'm sure, do have significant academic achievements, many are also there as a direct result of political patronage.

And remember our last POTUS who graduated from a military academy?

They are idiot asses, but the recommendation procedure is pretty rigorous and it is an honor to be chosen. Granted, the legacy aspects are there, but to be recommended is a lofty proposition. The Senators do not get unlimited recommendations (I think they only get 2 per year, but I could be wrong on that).

Two of my colleagues have children in the academies right now. One at the Naval and one at West Point. The one at West Point is a legacy (her grandfather went there), the one at the Naval Academy is not. Both were tops of their classes at very academically rigorous private schools and had some pretty impressive extra-curriculars.

A third "kid" that I was involved with regarding admissions chose to go to Columbia instead of the Naval Academy due to early admission standards. Funny, although he was top of his class at another tony private school, what really got him into Columbia was his status as a national champion in crew. Columbia most certainly opened lots of doors for him, and financially I'm sure he's doing much better than had he chosen the Academies, but I'm not certain he got a better education. The liberalism running rampant there was pretty tough for him to swallow and he found that, other than the other athletes there, most of the students were pretty freakish.

Cold Warrior
10-05-2008, 06:03 PM
They are idiot asses, but the recommendation procedure is pretty rigorous and it is an honor to be chosen. Granted, the legacy aspects are there, but to be recommended is a lofty proposition. The Senators do not get unlimited recommendations (I think they only get 2 per year, but I could be wrong on that).

Two of my colleagues have children in the academies right now. One at the Naval and one at West Point. The one at West Point is a legacy (her grandfather went there), the one at the Naval Academy is not. Both were tops of their classes at very academically rigorous private schools and had some pretty impressive extra-curriculars.

A third "kid" that I was involved with regarding admissions chose to go to Columbia instead of the Naval Academy due to early admission standards. Funny, although he was top of his class at another tony private school, what really got him into Columbia was his status as a national champion in crew. Columbia most certainly opened lots of doors for him, and financially I'm sure he's doing much better than had he chosen the Academies, but I'm not certain he got a better education. The liberalism running rampant there was pretty tough for him to swallow and he found that, other than the other athletes there, most of the students were pretty freakish.

I am sure that the academies attempt to keep control of the nomination process as much as possible, as it would be prone to deteriorate into pure political patronage. Moreover, private universities, and particularly Ivy League universities, have their own problem with legacy admissions (how else could have GWB gotten into the Harvard MBA program after his record at Yale? For that matter, how else could he have gotten into Yale?).

Although I don't have your personal experience, I have to suspect that there are many admissions based on patronage. I wonder, for example, how qualified McCain was in his admission. He went to a fine high school, but from the articles I've seen didn't seem particularly distinquished, at least academically (that's an inference, only btw).

And yes, Columbia is a particularly liberal institution, as is Harvard. I watched that fairly closely over a period of four years. However, the academic standards and offerings are also extremely high. Columbia's dental school, for example, is the highest ranked in the nation, with extremely modern facilities and equipment. Additionally, up until his death recently, they had one Nobel winner on staff.

megimoo
10-05-2008, 07:02 PM
I am sure that the academies attempt to keep control of the nomination process as much as possible, as it would be prone to deteriorate into pure political patronage. Moreover, private universities, and particularly Ivy League universities, have their own problem with legacy admissions (how else could have GWB gotten into the Harvard MBA program after his record at Yale? For that matter, how else could he have gotten into Yale?).

Although I don't have your personal experience, I have to suspect that there are many admissions based on patronage. I wonder, for example, how qualified McCain was in his admission. He went to a fine high school, but from the articles I've seen didn't seem particularly distinquished, at least academically (that's an inference, only btw).

And yes, Columbia is a particularly liberal institution, as is Harvard. I watched that fairly closely over a period of four years. However, the academic standards and offerings are also extremely high. Columbia's dental school, for example, is the highest ranked in the nation, with extremely modern facilities and equipment. Additionally, up until his death recently, they had one Nobel winner on staff.

QUESTION ABOUT COLUMBIA UNVERSITY SCHOOL OF DENTAL AND ORAL SURGERY


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

DrNo7212-28-2000, 06:01 AM
i had a friend who went to columbia
and then subsequently quit. quite a number of ppl quit there.
the dental school there isn't that good in my opinion.
the rankings are too much like med school, w/ research money.. i didn't come to dental school to do research, i would have gone to grad school.

nestled in the med school building, and taking the same courses as med students,
you are treated as second class citizen at columbia.
talk about lack of clinical experience!
they start seeing patients in their 2nd semester of 3rd yr!!! can you say GPR or AGD? or lack of experience? some schools get your feet wet in your first yr. but most will get you fully involved in end of 2nd yr.

hope it helps.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

turtleboard12-28-2000, 11:23 PM
Not that I'm particularly partial to my Alma Mater's dental school, but I hear that NYU offers the best clinical experience of practically all dental schools.

The downsides of NYU College of Dentistry? 1) The "dental center" is ugly, but it's one of the only dental schools I've ever seen that wasn't housed in the basement of someone's medical school. 2) Tuition is notoriously high, making it one of the most -- if not THE MOST -- expensive professional school in the country. 3) Not such a sparkling academic reputation, but then again, we're talking about a university whose claim to fame is its business school, law school, and its film school. http://www.studentdoctor.net/bbs/smile.gif


Tim W. of N.Y.C.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

DrNo7212-29-2000, 07:24 AM
actually heard that tufts has the best clinical, and usc which is THE most expensive, has the best clinical teaching and experience. uconn supposedly has the best facility. u of md has its own dental school and building and planning on building a spankin' new building in couple of yrs if the economy doesn't turn too sour.


Originally posted by turtleboard:
Not that I'm particularly partial to my Alma Mater's dental school, but I hear that NYU offers the best clinical experience of practically all dental schools.

The downsides of NYU College of Dentistry? 1) The "dental center" is ugly, but it's one of the only dental schools I've ever seen that wasn't housed in the basement of someone's medical school. 2) Tuition is notoriously high, making it one of the most -- if not THE MOST -- expensive professional school in the country. 3) Not such a sparkling academic reputation, but then again, we're talking about a university whose claim to fame is its business school, law school, and its film school. http://www.studentdoctor.net/bbs/smile.gif
http://forums.studentdoctor.net/archive/index.php/t-28743.html

Cold Warrior
10-05-2008, 07:19 PM
QUESTION ABOUT COLUMBIA UNVERSITY SCHOOL OF DENTAL AND ORAL SURGERY

...l[/url]

I'm not sure what you're getting at megs. First, you do realize that NYU and Columbia are different universities with different dental programs? Therefore, what value do Turtleboard's comments (that are posted twice) add to or detract from Columbia, the subject of the discussion. If you didn't realize this, you should stop cutting-and-pasting long enough to find out.

Therefore, that leaves DrNo's comments, which are factually incorrect in a couple of things I can see immediately. Very few people leave the program voluntarily and, in fact, the graduation to admission ratio is probably above 80% (given a yearly class size of about 75). Several people do take more than 4 years to graduate, but few leave, particularly after the first year.

Secondly, dental students see patients in the first semester of their third year. Yes, some schools do clinical work prior to this, but Columbia requires additional medical courses. Many of Columbia's graduates go onto specialities after graduation, while some go into research. Therefore, the delay of clinical experience. And yes, Tufts does have a fine program, but Columbia and Harvard are normally ranked 1 and 2 in the country.

megimoo
10-05-2008, 07:19 PM
This is a very silly line of attack. If one wishes to take academic credentials as a measure of intelligence, the comparison between McCain and Obama is a "no contest."

The author blows a lot of smoke about the rigors of military school life in his implication that those rigors somehow equate to intelligence. He tells us that military school students "wake up early," "march to class" etc., etc. And, he implies that because Ivy League students don't do this, that somehow that compensates for the differing scores in their classes. But I'm not sure what marching to class has to do with intelligence.

McCain finished at the bottom, bottom of his Naval Academy class. I think it would do a disservice to his fellow classmates, for example, to indicate that he was just as bright as them. They had to do the same physical exercises that McCain and somehow they managed to finish (way, way) ahead of him in their class. Similarly, it does a disservice to Obama, who went through Columbia and Harvard, was President of the Harvard Law Review, etc., to compare his academic achievements of those ofMcCain.

Bad argument, Megs. I think even McCain would shy away from this one.

" the comparison between McCain and Obama is a "no contest.""

Then why has your boy Obama sealed his academic records at Harvard and refuses to realease them.Every other candidate has been forthcoming with their records but not Obama,the man of mystery's,He can't even produce a valid birth certificate .
He has done nothing significant with his life after Harvard and was just a community organizer and a lawyer for several radical organisations like ACRON by his own admission .Could it be that he is nothing but a token and hides his shortcomings ?Even Kerry admits that he couldn't even get into Harvard and Obama is admitted under a special program for deserving blacks .

Cold Warrior
10-05-2008, 07:30 PM
" the comparison between McCain and Obama is a "no contest.""

Then why has your boy Obama sealed his academic records at Harvard and refuses to realease them.Every other candidate has been forthcoming with their records but not Obama,the man of mystery's,He can't even produce a valid birth certificate .
He has done nothing significant with his life after Harvard and was just a community organizer and a lawyer for several radical organisations like ACRON by his own admission .Could it be that he is nothing but a token and hides his shortcomings ?Even Kerry admits that he couldn't even get into Harvard and Obama is admitted under a special program for deserving blacks .

Way to go, megs. You must have recently graduated from the MrsSmith's School of Biased Editing. Here's the original...


If one wishes to take academic credentials as a measure of intelligence, the comparison between McCain and Obama is a "no contest."

A statement that is factually correct. And, btw, he ain't my boy. But neither is the pandering McCain nor the idiot Palin.

megimoo
10-05-2008, 07:53 PM
Way to go, megs. You must have recently graduated from the MrsSmith's School of Biased Editing. Here's the original...



A statement that is factually correct. And, btw, he ain't my boy. But neither is the pandering McCain nor the idiot Palin.
And here is where I found my quote,brutis !

"This is a very silly line of attack. If one wishes to take academic credentials as a measure of intelligence, the comparison between McCain and Obama is a "no contest." "

The venom flows thick from your keyboard .If you work yourself up you should be able to produce a facsimile of full blown BDS !

Cold Warrior
10-05-2008, 07:59 PM
And here is where I found my quote,brutis !

"This is a very silly line of attack. If one wishes to take academic credentials as a measure of intelligence, the comparison between McCain and Obama is a "no contest." "

Uh, yeeaahhh. We all realize that. It's exactly the quote I provided and was in my post cited in your previous post. I think everyone realizes where you got it. The point I was making was that by only including the last phrase in your post, you were taking it out of context. BTW, I always wanted to Antony, not Brutis. A much more intersting character, plus he got all the good looking women.

megimoo
10-05-2008, 08:10 PM
Uh, yeeaahhh. We all realize that. It's exactly the quote I provided and was in my post cited in your previous post. I think everyone realizes where you got it. The point I was making was that by only including the last phrase in your post, you were taking it out of context. BTW, I always wanted to Antony, not Brutis. A much more intersting character, plus he got all the good looking women.
You are stuck with Brutis as it describes you well .Back to your hero .When will he release his Harvard records so your claims of his excellance are available for examination ?

LibraryLady
10-05-2008, 08:20 PM
The Naval Academy has very high rankings

U.S. News & World Report.


The Naval Academy was ranked sixth for Best Undergraduate Engineering program. The Academy was also ranked fourth best Aerospace/Aeronautical/Astronautical Engineering program; fifth best Electrical Engineering program; and ranked 22nd in the category of small public undergraduate/liberal arts schools.

The Point


The academic program consists of a core of 31 courses balanced in the arts and sciences. All cadets are required to take at least three engineering courses and three calculus courses. Cadets choose their majors in the fall of their second year. Up until their third year, all cadets take the same classes (with the exception of those who are able to "validate" out of lower level classes and take advanced or accelerated courses). Regardless of major (there are currently 43), all cadets graduate with a Bachelor of Science Degree because of the engineering requirements. The school ranks near the top of all undergraduate programs in the winning of prestigious scholarships and fellowships (e.g., Rhodes Scholarship (#4), Hertz fellowship (#4), Truman Scholarship (#3), Marshall Scholarship (#6), and East-West).

Academic quality


In the 2009 "National Liberal Arts College" category in the US News & World Report rankings, West Point ranks #14 overall, and #1 of the public institutions on the list. The 2008 Forbes Magazine report on America's Best Colleges, which puts more weight "on the quality of the education they provide, and how much their students achieve" ranks West Point as the #6 college in the country and #1 among the public institutions. According to the Office of the Dean, "West Point is 4th on the list of total winners for Rhodes Scholarships, 7th for Marshall and 4th on the list of Hertz Fellows.

from Liberal Wiki

Forbes - America's Best colleges


1 Princeton University NJ 47,975 1,242
2 California Institute of Technology CA 46,560 231
3 Harvard University MA 48,550 1,668
4 Swarthmore College PA 48,215 365
5 Williams College MA 47,140 540
6 United States Military Academy NY NA 1,272
7 Amherst College MA 48,352 NA
8 Wellesley College MA 47,870 590
9 Yale University CT 50,350 1,318
10 Columbia University NY 49,260 1,333

LibraryLady
10-05-2008, 08:40 PM
By the way:


Jimmy Carter, the only Naval Academy graduate to serve as president to date, graduated 59th out of a class of 820, so draw your own conclusions.

Anchormen
The legends of Annapolis. (http://article.nationalreview.com/print/?q=NTM3ZmE0YTE1MTVmZjQwZjQ3ZmY0NzQ1MDk0YzRjYWU=)

Phillygirl
10-05-2008, 09:36 PM
I am sure that the academies attempt to keep control of the nomination process as much as possible, as it would be prone to deteriorate into pure political patronage. Moreover, private universities, and particularly Ivy League universities, have their own problem with legacy admissions (how else could have GWB gotten into the Harvard MBA program after his record at Yale? For that matter, how else could he have gotten into Yale?).

Although I don't have your personal experience, I have to suspect that there are many admissions based on patronage. I wonder, for example, how qualified McCain was in his admission. He went to a fine high school, but from the articles I've seen didn't seem particularly distinquished, at least academically (that's an inference, only btw).

And yes, Columbia is a particularly liberal institution, as is Harvard. I watched that fairly closely over a period of four years. However, the academic standards and offerings are also extremely high. Columbia's dental school, for example, is the highest ranked in the nation, with extremely modern facilities and equipment. Additionally, up until his death recently, they had one Nobel winner on staff.

Every high end school will have their legacies. Not all legacies are necessarily unqualified (similar to AA), but certainly there will be the appearance of not cutting the mustard when it comes to legacies.

An interesting issue with regards to Univ. of Penn law school (which is on the lowest end of the ivies). While grades are certainly required to get in, once you get there, it's easy peasy. No letter grades are given. Most Penn grads I know weren't worth a damn as lawyers. I refuse to hire them again. I hesitate to hire anyone from the ivies because the admission process nowadays is so skewed towards legacy and AA that I don't find the pedigree worth much. I prefer to hire someone from a more "working class" school such as Temple or Villanova. I'd rather someone who played varsity athletics at some point in their past; someone who held down at least a part-time job while attending school; and someone whose parents were not attorneys; or someone who was in the service.

Cold Warrior
10-05-2008, 10:30 PM
The Naval Academy has very high rankings

U.S. News & World Report.

The Point

Academic quality

from Liberal Wiki

Forbes - America's Best colleges

Ah, LL, ever since your stunt with Palin's favorability ratings after the debate, I've learned to check your citations, since what you don't convey, what you purposely chose to leave out, is typically more important than what you chose to actually cite. So it is with your rankings. Yes, the Naval Academy is ranked 22nd and, what (surprisingly) you failed to cite, West Point is ranked 14th among Liberal Arts Colleges. This category is described as...


Liberal Arts Rankings
Among the liberal arts colleges are schools like Oberlin and Harvey Mudd, which emphasize undergraduate education and award at least half of their degrees in the liberal arts fields of study

BTW, Number 1 in this category is Amherst. The ranking does not compare against national universities, such as Harvard, Stanford, Yale, or Columbia, defined as...


National Universities
Schools in the National Universities category, such as Yale and UCLA, offer a full range of undergraduate majors, master's, and doctoral degrees. These colleges also are committed to producing groundbreaking research

The publication's categorization itself says all that needs to be said about any academic comparison of the two schools. In terms of academic merit, they are in two different categories.

Now, let's proceed to dissect your Forbes reference. Is there something hidden in it? You know it! First, let's look at the article's (http://www.forbes.com/2008/08/13/college-university-rankings-oped-college08-cx_rv_mn_0813intro.html) opening paragraphs...


Choosing a four-year undergraduate college is one of the biggest decisions a typical American family can make. And for too many years, information about the quality of American higher education has been monopolized by one publication, U.S. News & World Report.

We offer an alternative

An alternative? What sort of alternative, one wonders? Well, let's look at the methodology...


CCAP's methodology attempts to put itself in a student's shoes. How good will my professors be? Will the school help me achieve notable career success? If I have to borrow to pay for college, how deeply will I go into debt? What are the chances I will graduate in four years? Are students and faculty recognized nationally, or even globally?

To answer these questions, the staff at CCAP (mostly college students themselves) gathered data from a variety of sources. They based 25% of the rankings on 7 million student evaluations of courses and instructors, as recorded on the Web site RateMyProfessors.com. Another 25% depends on how many of the school's alumni, adjusted for enrollment, are listed among the notable people in Who's Who in America.

The other half of the ranking is based equally on three factors: the average amount of student debt at graduation held by those who borrowed; the percentage of students graduating in four years; and the number of students or faculty, adjusted for enrollment, who have won nationally competitive awards like Rhodes Scholarships or Nobel Prizes. (Click here for complete methodology.)

So, 25% of the ranking comes from student surveys, another 17$ comes from the costs, while another 17$ comes from the percentage of the students graduating in 4 years. Hardly measures of the academic merit of the college or university. Moreover, one would not be surprised to see the military academies do quite well, particularly given that 17$ of the ranking comes from the cost!

No try! But not overly clever.

Cold Warrior
10-05-2008, 10:32 PM
By the way:


Anchormen
The legends of Annapolis. (http://article.nationalreview.com/print/?q=NTM3ZmE0YTE1MTVmZjQwZjQ3ZmY0NzQ1MDk0YzRjYWU=)

I referenced the Peanut Prez in a previous post as the last POTUS who graduated from one of the academies. I assume by citing his ranking in class, you're implying that McCain, given his significantly lower ranking, would be significantly worst that Jimmy. I'm not sure I'd agree, although you could be right.

LibraryLady
10-05-2008, 10:32 PM
Maybe they would even accept you since they are so mediocre.

Why do you need to put the military academies down? Because they don't like liars?

Cold Warrior
10-05-2008, 10:38 PM
Maybe they would even accept you since they are so mediocre.

Why do you need to put the military academies down? Because they don't like liars?

No, I just enjoy showing how you lie through omission, a technique I suspect you practice a lot. However, in terms of the academies, I'm not "putting them down." I do, however, insist that it's a bit silly to say that they are on an academic par with this country's best universities. American universities are among the finest in the world and such comparisons, simply for the purpose of politics, the stupid "we're better than you" mentality, does them a disservice.

LibraryLady
10-05-2008, 10:47 PM
The links were there. Anyone can look at the info.

Harvard University Cambridge, MA Fall 2007 Acceptance rate: 9.2 %
Princeton UniversityPrinceton, NJ Fall 2007 Acceptance rate: 9.7 %
Yale UniversityNew Haven, CT Fall 2007 Acceptance rate: 9.9 %
Stanford UniversityStanford, CA Fall 2007 Acceptance rate: 10.3 %
Columbia UniversityNew York, NY Fall 2007 Acceptance rate: 10.6 %
Cooper UnionNew York, NY Fall 2007 Acceptance rate: 10.7 %
United States Naval AcademyAnnapolis, MD Fall 2007 Acceptance rate: 11.8 %
Massachusetts Institute of TechnologyCambridge, MA Fall 2007 Acceptance rate: 12.5 %
Brown UniversityProvidence, RI Fall 2007 Acceptance rate: 14.0 %
National-Louis UniversityChicago, IL Fall 2007 Acceptance rate: 14.3 %
United States Military AcademyWest Point, NY Fall 2007 Acceptance rate: 15.0 %

The military academies are damned good schools. My Mother was a University Counselor for many, many years. I value her opinion more than your drivel.

http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/college/lowest-acceptance-rate

LibraryLady
10-05-2008, 10:53 PM
By the way, McCain's daughter graduated from Columbia.

Cold Warrior
10-05-2008, 10:57 PM
The links were there. Anyone can look at the info.

Harvard University Cambridge, MA Fall 2007 Acceptance rate: 9.2 %
Princeton UniversityPrinceton, NJ Fall 2007 Acceptance rate: 9.7 %
Yale UniversityNew Haven, CT Fall 2007 Acceptance rate: 9.9 %
Stanford UniversityStanford, CA Fall 2007 Acceptance rate: 10.3 %
Columbia UniversityNew York, NY Fall 2007 Acceptance rate: 10.6 %
Cooper UnionNew York, NY Fall 2007 Acceptance rate: 10.7 %
United States Naval AcademyAnnapolis, MD Fall 2007 Acceptance rate: 11.8 %
Massachusetts Institute of TechnologyCambridge, MA Fall 2007 Acceptance rate: 12.5 %
Brown UniversityProvidence, RI Fall 2007 Acceptance rate: 14.0 %
National-Louis UniversityChicago, IL Fall 2007 Acceptance rate: 14.3 %
United States Military AcademyWest Point, NY Fall 2007 Acceptance rate: 15.0 %

The military academies are damned good schools. My Mother was a University Counselor for many, many years. I value her opinion more than your drivel.

There were no links in your original post, just as there are none in this one. This appears to be a ranking by acceptance rate, which again is not a particularly useful measure of academic merit for the academies as they provide a direct entry to a career, as opposed to a non-military university, which provides more of the potential for a career and therefore one would expect their application rate to be very high. You're correct that they are good schools. However, they are not on a par with the finest US academic institutions. BTW, the university I attended is not either.

I'm not going to bother to search for this one, despite your assurance that the link is there, as it really doesn't seem at all applicable to the topic. Simply googling various types of rankings and then cutting-and-pasting is not very useful to furthering reasoned discussion. I would, however, be interested in specifically what I've said that you consider "drivel."

Phillygirl
10-05-2008, 11:00 PM
There were no links in your original post, just as there are none in this one. This appears to be a ranking by acceptance rate, which again is not a particularly useful measure of academic merit for the academies as they provide a direct entry to a career, as opposed to a non-military university, which provides more of the potential for a career and therefore one would expect their application rate to be very high. You're correct that they are good schools.

Where do you get your backup for this last statement?

LibraryLady
10-05-2008, 11:04 PM
BTW, the university I attended is not either.

Yet you slammed a new poster (who had been accepted at West Point) for the quality of her education.

I went to state universities and got a decent education. My ex went to excellent school and got his MBA at William and Mary (Mason). Guess what? He decided to work for Joint Forces after he retired.
I happen to have great respect for the Military academies. I have been associated with their graduates and find they are much more squared away then some of the Ivy League "wacky wacks".

Cold Warrior
10-05-2008, 11:12 PM
Where do you get your backup for this last statement?

I'm assuming you mean that supposition that you would have a higher application rate at the academies due to the fact that they offer a direct path to a career. No backup, simply a supposition. If I stated it as a citable fact, I apologize. However, the bases for that supposition include several factors, including (1) class size (relatively small at the academies) to number of applicants that, thereby, drives the percentage of acceptances,(2) as noted, the fact that successful graduates are immediately employed with a potential 20 year career in front of them (thereby alleviating the uncertainty of finding a job with a four year degree), and (3) the whole concept of public service and the military which certainly, and rightly, attracts many young men and women in general. Would you disagree?

Cold Warrior
10-05-2008, 11:21 PM
Yet you slammed a new poster (who had been accepted at West Point) for the quality of her education...

No I "slammed" a new poster for making an erroneous comparison. In a discussion comparing the academic credentials of the Naval Academy to Columbia, he/she introduced a personal comparison of West Point (analogous) to a Texas state university (not analogous). The conclusion that he/she implied was that since the poster's experience showed that West Point was tougher by some measure than the state university, the Naval Academy must be tougher than Columbia. This is completely fallacious.


I went to state universities and got a decent education. My ex went to excellent school and got his MBA at William and Mary (Mason). Guess what? He decided to work for Joint Forces after he retired.
I happen to have great respect for the Military academies. I have been associated with their graduates and find they are much more squared away then some of the Ivy League "wacky wacks".

It's "whacky-whacks" but we're not talking about being "squared away." My original statement in this thread that started out with an article asserting that the Naval Academy was academically on a par with Columbia was that this was a silly comparison. I don't recall ever saying anything about graduates of either being "squared away," whatever that means.

Phillygirl
10-05-2008, 11:32 PM
I'm assuming you mean that supposition that you would have a higher application rate at the academies due to the fact that they offer a direct path to a career. No backup, simply a supposition. If I stated it as a citable fact, I apologize. However, the bases for that supposition include several factors, including (1) class size (relatively small at the academies) to number of applicants that, thereby, drives the percentage of acceptances,(2) as noted, the fact that successful graduates are immediately employed with a potential 20 year career in front of them (thereby alleviating the uncertainty of finding a job with a four year degree), and (3) the whole concept of public service and the military which certainly, and rightly, attracts many young men and women in general. Would you disagree?

You assume wrongly, you pompous bag of wind. I was very clear in my question. Where do you get your backup for the last sentence I quoted.





errr....that would play better if I'd actually properly cut and pasted the last sentence I was talking about. Here it is.




However, they are not on a par with the finest US academic institutions

This damn small text is making me go blind!! :D

Eyelids
10-05-2008, 11:32 PM
By the way:


Anchormen
The legends of Annapolis. (http://article.nationalreview.com/print/?q=NTM3ZmE0YTE1MTVmZjQwZjQ3ZmY0NzQ1MDk0YzRjYWU=)

One time when I clapped my hands it rained, so I never clap my hands.

Cold Warrior
10-06-2008, 07:24 AM
You assume wrongly, you pompous bag of wind. I was very clear in my question. Where do you get your backup for the last sentence I quoted.

errr....that would play better if I'd actually properly cut and pasted the last sentence I was talking about. Here it is.

This damn small text is making me go blind!! :D

Jeez, I'm not a mindreader, although I thought it was an odd question. :D

This whole discussion originated from my original comment, which megs quoted out of context until I called him on it, that in terms of academic credentials, there is no comparison between Obama and McCain. I base this upon one graduating with some unknown rank in his class from Columbia, going on to Harvard Law School, and becoming President of the Harvard Law Review, compared to the other graduating in the bottom of his class at the Naval Academy. I would have thought that that required no further explanation, but partisan blinders seem to have dictated otherwise.

The discussion then diverted into the relative merits of the two schools, during which I made the statement that you (belatedly) refer to. The short answer is that I base it on all applicable objective, as opposed to anecdotal ("squared away") analyses available. Applicable analyses, btw, do not include "I like my school" surveys. The somewhat longer answer is as follows.

While educational institutions have differing purposes and goals, it is a fact that some, U.S. News' so-called "National Universities" as defined above, have a much broader scope than others, in terms of academics. Therefore, while some universities may specialize and excel in certain programs, the national universities are measured in terms of academic excellence across all programs.That said, even within the more limited categorization that the academies are included in, they do not rank in the top 10.

The academies do an excellent job of fulfillig their mission to train and educate the officer corps for the various militaries. But to compare them in terms of academics to the finest institutions in the US, which are consistently ranked among the finest in the world, is to allow partisan politics (my guy's smarter than your guy) to intrude upon objective reality (independent rankings). Hence, the basis for my statement.

Sonnabend
10-06-2008, 07:52 AM
The conclusion that he/she implied was that since the poster's experience showed that West Point was tougher by some measure than the state university, the Naval Academy must be tougher than Columbia. This is completely fallacious.

It's a statement of fact.

Tell ya what, why dont you go to West Point, graduate, then come back and tell us how you went.

West Point men are distinguished in every field. and their training is recognised as some of the best in the world.

Cold Warrior
10-06-2008, 07:57 AM
It's a statement of fact.

Tell ya what, why dont you go to West Point, graduate, then come back and tell us how you went.

West Point men are distinguished in every field. and their training is recognised as some of the best in the world.

Sonna, along the dimensions we are discussing, i.e., academic excellence, it is simply not a statement of fact by any objective measure and all your "wishin' and hopin'" don't make it so.

AlmostThere
10-06-2008, 04:27 PM
Does anyone have a reasonable explanation as to why Obama's time at Columbia is such a secret and his time at Harvard is only marginally more transparent? That seems like an area the press would be climbing all over if they were interested in at least appearing non-partisan.

LibraryLady
10-06-2008, 04:40 PM
Interesting:


Bill Ayers Columbia University in Early Childhood Education (1987)

How long did these two know each other?

Ree
10-06-2008, 04:41 PM
how can ya compare their academic records ya don't see both records?

Goldwater
10-06-2008, 05:28 PM
By the way, McCain's daughter graduated from Columbia.

So McCain must've thought it was a good college?

LibraryLady
10-06-2008, 05:32 PM
She USED to be a democrat.

Goldwater
10-06-2008, 05:36 PM
She USED to be a democrat.

Maybe she thinks for herself? That kind of gives off more of a positive impression than being boring and just supporting whatever her father supports.

LibraryLady
10-06-2008, 05:41 PM
If you read her blog you would know she definitely thinks for herself

http://www.mccainblogette.com/

The mascot on the Straight Talk

http://i24.photobucket.com/albums/c12/dtharman/mccain/30.jpg

Eyelids
10-06-2008, 05:51 PM
I laughed out loud when she picked that Stereolab song as the song of the day. I dont think she really knew what it meant.

LibraryLady
10-06-2008, 05:56 PM
Yeah, Huff Po made asses of themselves over that.

megimoo
10-06-2008, 07:04 PM
Maybe she thinks for herself? That kind of gives off more of a positive impression than being boring and just supporting whatever her father supports.
Do you have a college aged daughter willie ?They choose the school they want to go to based on where their friends may go,what they hear on the latest music beat and where the good looking guy all go .Academics are usually far down on the list for most young woman.Columbia university would scare most of the pizza generations young woman away because of the work load and it's location !

ironman425
11-03-2008, 09:06 PM
Cold Warrior,
I stumbled across this thread through a random search i found on Google. After reading your thoughts on the Academies, it greatly angered me of your simple arrogance. I found myself having to join this website in order to correct your interpretations. First of all, you say that John McCain graduating near in his class makes him less then Graduating say in the middle of his class at the Academy. For those who are uninformed you may not understand that the last ranked guy in the graduating class receives a dollar from each member of the class. This is a tradition that has been around for ages, it is seen as a sign of respect that anyone who can get through the Naval Academy whether first or last deserves the same respect because they had struggled through some of the hardest years of their life.
Second you contend that Colombia and the Naval Academy do not compare academically. This is a GREAT misinterpretation. I contend that the Naval Academy has tougher academics then schools such as Colombia. The academy prides itself on its small student to faculty ratio. What is so significant of this ratio is that it combines a staff of half military professors and half civilian professors. These professors come from every ivy league school from Yale, Harvard, Colombia, and Princeton. As one ivy league professor described the academy "the rigors of the academics are on par with ivy league schools, yet there is no inflation of grades in order to provide a better looking school." As a midshipman you receive the grade that you receive and inflation of grades does not occur. Also you must understand that the rigors of daily life at the academy weigh heavily on how you can perform in academics. The weight of military performance as well as physical performance deteriorates your time you can spend toward academics. Yet you are still demanded to have perfection in all three areas.
Third you speak of the "quality of candidates" that apply to the academy. This seemed the most absurd to me. Most candidates who apply to the Naval Academy are in the top 10% of their class, are actively involved in leadership in their respected school and sports, have very high activity in community service, and display some of the highest maturity and conduct found among students today.
Cold Warrior next time do some research before you make such outstandingly outlandish remarks about the Academy. I hope you learned something and your elitist attitude about Ivy league schools can shove it, they are just a bunch of spoiled rich kids.