Skip to Navigation
University of Pittsburgh
Print This Page Print this pages

April 29, 2010

Some Pitt grad programs climb in most recent U.S. News rankings

usnewsRankings for Pitt’s education, engineering and law schools improved, while the business school’s ranking dipped and results for the medical school were mixed in U.S. News & World Report’s latest list of the nation’s top graduate schools.

Each year, the magazine measures graduate programs in these five major disciplines, using quality indicators such as peer assessments, entering students’ test scores, faculty/student ratios and reputational ratings drawn from inside and outside academia.

Nationally, Pitt tied for 79th in business (down from 60th last year); tied for 23rd in education (tied for 32nd last year); tied for 48th (up from last year’s rank of 49th) in engineering, and tied for 67th in law (tied for 71st last year).

Medicine was split into two rankings: Pitt’s School of Medicine ranked 14th (last year it tied for 13th) in the research category. In the primary care preparation category, the University tied for 12th (tied for 17th last year).

Information on the five disciplines was published in the magazine’s April 26 edition. The magazine also produces a supplement that includes more extensive listings and top rankings for subdisciplines and specialty program areas. In addition, U.S. News offers an expanded online edition, with even more extensive listings. The online version was the source for this story.

U.S. News also ranks individual areas of study on a three-year rotation. This year, the magazine produced new rankings of graduate programs in the sciences.

The magazine’s web site (www.usnews.com) and expanded print version also include rankings of subdisciplines completed in previous years; only this year’s new rankings that include Pitt programs are summarized here.

U.S. News methodology

According to U.S. News, rankings are based on two types of data: expert opinions about program quality, and statistical indicators that measure the quality of a school’s faculty, research and students. “These data come from surveys of more than 1,200 programs and some 12,400 academicians and professionals that were conducted in fall 2009,” U.S. News stated.

To gather the peer opinion data, the magazine asked deans, program directors and senior faculty to judge the academic quality of programs in their field on a scale of 1 (marginal) to 5 (outstanding).

In the five disciplines, the magazine also surveyed professionals in the field who hire new graduates. To compute the assessment scores of these professionals, the two most recent years’ surveys were averaged.

“The statistical indicators used in our rankings of business, education, engineering, law and medical schools fall into two categories: inputs, or measures of the qualities that students and faculty bring to the educational experience; and outputs, measures of graduates’ achievements linked to their degrees,” the magazine stated.

Depending on the field, output measures vary. For example, indicators in the business discipline include starting salaries after graduation and the time it takes graduates to find jobs. For law, indicators include state bar exam passage rates and how long it takes new attorneys to land jobs.

The weights applied to the indicators reflect the magazine’s judgment about their relative importance, as determined in consultation with experts in each field. Every school’s performance is presented relative to comparable schools.

Like officials at other institutions, Pitt’s administration periodically has raised objections to the U.S. News rankings, particularly the magazine’s methodology, which it has said uses unscientific peer assessment, or reputational, survey data. While higher education officials often object to the U.S. News rankings, public interest in them continues: The rankings issues traditionally are among the magazine’s most-purchased issues.

Business

The Joseph M. Katz Graduate School of Business was tied for 79th with Oregon and Connecticut. Last year the school was 60th.

All 433 master’s programs accredited by the Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business were surveyed in fall 2009 and early 2010. Of these, 129 provided the necessary data, according to the magazine.

Quality indicators for business schools included: overall academic quality assessment as determined by deans and directors of accredited MBA programs, as well as by corporate recruiters and company contacts who hired MBA graduates from previously ranked programs; job placement success (mean starting salary and employment rates for 2009 graduates computed at graduation and three months later), and student selectivity (GMAT scores, mean undergraduate GPAs and proportion of applicants accepted in fall 2009).

One business specialty at Katz was ranked nationally by U.S. News. The school’s part-time MBA program tied for 24th with California-Irvine, Florida, Georgia Institute of Technology, Georgia State, Rice and Rochester. The online edition lists 203 such programs.

This year, U.S. News modified its methodology to determine part-time MBA program rankings. The rankings are based solely on a 5.0-scale peer assessment survey; previously, the part-time MBA ranking methodology was based solely on the number of times a part-time program was nominated to be among the top 10 such programs.

Education

Pitt’s School of Education tied for 23rd (tied for 32nd last year) with Minnesota-Twin Cities, out of 179 education schools ranked.

Of the 279 education schools granting doctoral degrees surveyed, 234 provided the data needed to calculate rankings, according to U.S. News.

Quality indicators for education schools included peer quality assessment by school deans and deans of graduate studies, as well as a 2009 nationwide survey of school superintendents in a sampling of districts; student selectivity (mean GRE scores of doctoral students entering in fall 2009 and acceptance rates of doctoral applicants for 2009-10); faculty resources (student-teacher ratio, percentage of full-time tenured or tenure-track faculty winning awards or holding journal editorships in 2008 and 2009, the ratio of the number of doctoral degrees awarded in the school year 2008-09 to the number of full-time faculty members); total school research expenditures (separately funded research, public and private, conducted by the school) averaged over fiscal years 2008 and 2009, and average research expenditures per full-time tenured and tenure-track faculty member  over fiscal years 2008 and 2009.

U.S. News also ranked schools in 10 education specialty areas based solely on nominations by education school deans and deans of graduate studies. They were asked to choose up to 10 top programs in each specialty area.

Pitt’s education school’s educational psychology specialty was 21st among 21 programs ranked by the magazine.

Engineering

The Swanson School of Engineering was tied for 48th (up one spot from last year) with Dartmouth and Washington University-St. Louis.

Programs at 198 engineering schools that grant doctoral degrees were surveyed; 192 provided the data needed to calculate rankings. U.S. News ranked the top 144 programs in its online edition. Engineering school deans and deans of graduate studies at engineering schools, as well as corporate recruiters and company contacts who hire engineers with graduate degrees from previously ranked engineering schools, were asked to rate programs.

Quality indicators for engineering schools included the same indicators used for education schools: quality assessment, student selectivity, faculty resources and research activity, based on two surveys conducted in fall 2009.

Research activity was based on total externally funded engineering research expenditures, and research dollars per full-time faculty member, averaged over FY08 and FY09.

Pitt also had eight engineering specialty programs listed among the nation’s best by U.S. News. Those rankings were based on assessments in each specialty area by department heads, whose names came from the American Society for Engineering Education. The magazine listed 11 engineering specialties altogether.

Pitt’s specialty program in biomedical/bioengineering tied for 12th (same as last year) with California-Berkeley and Michigan-Ann Arbor. Seventy such programs were listed.

Pitt’s program in chemical engineering tied for 41st (up from a tie for 43rd last year). Pitt tied with Case Western Reserve, Lehigh, Maryland-College Park, SUNY-Buffalo and Yale. A total of 97 such programs were listed.

Pitt’s civil engineering specialty tied for 58th this year among 122 institutions listed (tied for 65th last year). Pitt tied with Auburn, Cincinnati, Clarkson, Nebraska-Lincoln, Tennessee-Knoxville and Tufts.

Pitt’s electrical/electronic/communications specialty tied for 53rd (not ranked last year) among 145 programs listed. Pitt tied with Auburn, Dartmouth, New Mexico, Rochester and Utah.

Among 80 programs listed in the environmental/environmental health specialty area, Pitt tied for 55th (tied for 57th last year) with Houston, Lehigh, Southern California, SUNY College of Environmental Science and Forestry and Texas A&M-Kingsville.

In the industrial/manufacturing specialty category, Pitt tied for 17th (tied for 21st last year) among the 64 programs listed by the magazine’s online edition. Pitt tied with Arizona State, Lehigh, Illinois/Urbana-Champaign and Texas-Austin.

This year Pitt’s materials specialty tied for 48th (tied for 49th last year) among the 68 programs ranked nationally by U.S. News. Pitt tied with Connecticut and Michigan Technological University.

Among 132 specialty programs in mechanical engineering, Pitt’s program tied for 59th (last year it tied for 58th). Pitt tied with Brigham Young, Clemson, Cincinnati, Connecticut, Illinois Institute of Technology, Massachusetts-Amherst and Northeastern.

Law

For overall quality, Pitt’s School of Law tied for 67th (tied for 71st last year) with Brooklyn, Kansas, New Mexico and Villanova out of a total of 188 accredited law schools nationwide. The online edition ranked 102 schools.

Schools of law were assessed for quality based on a weighted average of 12 measures from survey data collected in fall 2009. Law school deans and three faculty members at each school were asked to rate programs on a scale from marginal (1) to outstanding (5). According to the magazine, 65 percent of those surveyed responded.

Lawyers and judges also rated schools; 21 percent of those surveyed responded. For this group, the magazine averaged the responses of the two most recent years of surveys.

Other indicators were student selectivity (median LSAT scores, median undergraduate GPA and proportion of accepted applicants who entered in 2009); faculty resources (average 2008 and 2009 expenditures per student for instruction, library and supporting services; financial aid; 2009 student-teacher ratio; the total number of volumes and titles in the library, and job placement success (employment rates for 2008 graduates at graduation and at nine months after graduation, as well as bar exam passing rate).

Employment rates for the 2008 graduating class determine success in the last category. Employment rates include 2008 graduates reported as working or pursuing graduate degrees at graduation; for the nine-month rate only, 25 percent of those whose status was unknown also were counted as working. Those not seeking jobs were excluded; all others were counted as unemployed.

The bar exam passage rate indicator is the ratio of the school’s rate to the overall state rate, computed for first-time test takers in summer and winter 2008.

Ten law specialty areas also were ranked by U.S. News. The rankings were based on votes by law faculty who are listed in the AALS Directory of Law Teachers 2007-2008 as teaching in the specialty field, or by directors of clinical and legal writing programs. They named up to 15 of the best programs in each field.

In the health care law specialty, Pitt tied for 15th with Widener (12th last year) among the 20 such programs listed.

Pitt’s law school also was listed in two other categories: the law school diversity index table, and the average indebtedness of 2009 graduates who incurred law school debt.

The diversity index is based on data collected by U.S. News from each law school to identify law schools where students are most likely to encounter classmates from different racial or ethnic groups. According to the magazine’s online edition, “the diversity index is based on the total proportion of minority students — not including international students — and the mix of racial and ethnic groups on campus. The index is calculated using demographic data reflecting each law school’s student body during the 2009-2010 academic year, including both full- and part-time students.

“The groups that form the basis for our calculations are African Americans, Asian Americans, Hispanics, American Indians and non-Hispanic whites. For the purposes of this index, students classified as ‘ethnicity unknown/unreported’ were counted as white. Our formula produces a diversity index that ranges from 0.0 to 1.0. The closer a school’s number is to 1.0, the more diverse is the law school’s student population. … This index doesn’t measure how successful schools are at meeting diversity goals.”

Pitt’s score was 0.28, with African Americans at 7 percent representing the largest non-white ethnic group of the student body. That tied Pitt for 128th with Brigham Young, Indiana-Indianapolis, Seton Hall, St. Louis, Wayne State and William & Mary.

Florida A&M with a 0.66 diversity index topped the list; Duquesne and South Dakota tied for last with a diversity index of 0.12.

According to the magazine’s online edition, 88 percent of 2009 Pitt law graduates incurred debt. The average debt was $83,826. That average was the 106th largest debt among 185 law schools surveyed nationally.

Thomas Jefferson School of Law topped the list with 95 percent of its grads incurring an average of $131,800. Texas Southern University had 100 percent of its graduates incurring an average debt of $20,429, the lowest amount among listed schools.

Medicine

U.S. News issues two separate medical school rankings, one emphasizing research activity and the other a school’s preparation of primary care physicians.

Pitt’s School of Medicine ranked 14th (last year it tied for 13th) in the research category among 92 medical schools ranked in the online edition.

In the primary care preparation category, the University tied for 12th (tied for 17th last year) among the 97 schools ranked nationally. Pitt tied with Wisconsin-Madison.

The magazine surveyed the 126 accredited medical schools plus 20 accredited schools of osteopathic medicine for both the research rankings and the primary care rankings.

For the research category, 122 schools provided the data needed to calculate the rankings; 122 schools also provided the data needed to calculate the primary care rankings.

Quality assessment indicators for both categories were based on peer assessment surveys conducted in fall 2009 of deans of medical and osteopathic schools, deans of academic affairs, heads of internal medicine and directors of admissions. The response rate was 50 percent.

In both categories those quality indicators included student selectivity (mean composite Medical College Admission Test score, mean undergraduate grade point average and the proportion of total applicants accepted for the class entering in 2009), and faculty resources (ratio of full-time faculty to students in 2009).

In the research category only, research activity was included in the rankings. It was defined as total dollar amount of National Institutes of Health research grants awarded to the medical school and its affiliated hospitals, and the average amount of those grants calculated per full-time medical school and clinical faculty member, both averaged for fiscal years 2008 and 2009.

In the primary care category, the magazine measured the percentage of graduates who entered primary care specialties, such as family practice, pediatrics and internal medicine, averaged over the past three graduating classes.

Among eight medical school specialties ranked by U.S. News, five of Pitt’s programs were ranked nationally.

Pitt’s drug and alcohol abuse specialty tied for 8th with California-San Diego among 17 such programs ranked nationally. Pitt ranked 15th last year.

The geriatrics specialty at Pitt tied with Yale for 8th (10th last year) among 22 programs listed.

Internal medicine was ranked 14th (same as last year) among 28 schools listed.

The pediatrics specialty program was ranked 13th (11th last year), among 20 programs listed nationally.

Pitt’s women’s health program tied with Johns Hopkins for 4th (3rd last year) among 21 such programs listed.

Medical specialty rankings were based on ratings by medical deans and senior faculty at peer schools, who were asked to identify up to 10 schools offering the best programs in each of eight specialty areas.

The Sciences

Rankings of science doctoral programs were based solely on the results of surveys sent to academicians in biological sciences, chemistry, computer science, earth sciences, mathematics, physics and statistics during fall 2009.

Schools surveyed in the sciences (except statistics) were those that awarded at least five doctoral degrees from 2003 through 2008, according to the National Science Foundation report “Science and Engineering Doctorate Awards.”

The American Statistical Association provided U.S. News with eligible programs for statistics. This is the first year the magazine has ranked graduate statistics programs, which may be offered through a university’s biostatistics or statistics department.

Questionnaires were sent to the department heads and directors of graduate studies at each program in each discipline.

According to the magazine, response rates for the doctoral sciences were: for biological sciences, 15 percent; chemistry, 25 percent; computer science, 46 percent; earth sciences, 29 percent; mathematics, 34 percent; physics, 31 percent, and statistics, 67 percent.

Pitt’s biological sciences graduate program tied for 46th with nine other institutions among the 233 ranked online edition.

Pitt tied with California-Santa Barbara, Carnegie Mellon, Florida, Georgia, Michigan State, Ohio State, Southern California, UMass Medical Center-Worcester and Virginia.

Pitt’s chemistry graduate program tied for 38th among 151 such programs ranked nationally. Pit tied with Arizona, California-Davis, Emory, Iowa State, Maryland-College Park and Michigan State.

The computer science graduate program here tied for 53rd among the 126 such programs ranked in the online edition. Pitt tied with Arizona State, California-Riverside, California-Santa Cruz and Indiana-Bloomington.

Pitt’s earth sciences graduate program tied for 81st nationally with Florida State, Georgia, Michigan Technological, Montana, Penn, South Carolina and SUNY-Binghamton. The magazine ranked 112 such programs overall.

The mathematics graduate program tied for 59th among 127 such programs ranked nationally by U.S. News. Pitt tied with Florida, Northeastern and Virginia Tech.

The University’s physics graduate program tied for 52nd nationally with California-Riverside, North Carolina State, Rochester and Southern California. The online edition ranks 148 such programs.

The graduate program in statistics tied for 45th with Boston among 69 such programs ranked nationally.

—Peter Hart


Leave a Reply