Valid and reliable rankings are clearly made by experts in the field of study not by students ,administrators,alumni or by reporters.
They are not done by reporters. These are experts. You do not look at the methodology^. Presidents and administrators do have an understanding of the academic accolades
Rankings made by other coaches is clearly the method of ranking used in athletics.
The AP poll is the sportswriters. The USA Today-ESPN Poll is the Coaches Poll. Sportswriters rank teams as much as the coaches. But coaches don't measure a team's market. That's not their job. This would be a job for the Nielsen rankings, demographers, and market researchers. In order to get a complete picture of a teams market and appeal, surveys would need to be done, to see what percentage of a state's population follows a team. But, the type of institution does reflect the market it has. If its a statewide flagship, there is a strong tendancy that its an entire state is the market for that team, because that institution has more identity statewide. If its a commuter campus, metropolitan-focused or a regional-focused university, then its market is smaller. The US News and World Report rankings consistently reveal that all state flagship universities in the United States are at least a 3rd Tier National Universities, and most are 2nd Tier or above. This means if you can get a state flagship, you will get a statewide market. The only state flagships that aren't at least 4th Tier are North Dakota State, Montana State, and the University of Alaska-Fairbanks, and none of them play Division 1-A football. So to get a state flagship means you can get a statewide following and define its market in that manner. Most, if not all Urban Grants and Historic Normals are at the best 3rd Tier and most are 4th Tier. There markets are focused on the metro location and/or region and they most likely compete with the state flagships in that region. These relate to rankings.
The measures used by USNWR are clearly are lacking in the concepts of validity and reliability.
Do you have proof?
How can a dean of an education school rate an engineering school.?
A dean of education doesn't rank an engineering school. Where did you get this from?
Ahievement in the use of a concept rather than in its learning measures what the student gets out of the course.
Do you have any basis for this.
Spending money on the wrong things does not improve a university.
What is a wrong thing to you? Broadbased education is very important to a undergraduate education. A person can't learn a high tech concept and go out into the field without the ability to write and communicate and have a broadbased knowledge that they are entering into. This is why Georgia Tech and MIT teach liberal arts. If they didn't, they would be the DeVry Institute of Technology, or an ITT Tech. This is why you take both a Verbal and Math tests on a SAT, and why the ACT has English, Social Sciences, Math and Sciences.
A productive university is measured by useful learning and research,not by superficial variables.
How do you define useful learning? By what are the hot career fields?
Look University of North Carolina is a Liberal Arts based university:
Does this make them inferior to you?
They don't even have an engineering college. That's at NC State. You're too fixated college as a job-training mechanism. It prepares people for careers, but it is much more broader than that. Otherwise, all career fields wouldn't require liberal arts in their curricullum. All engineering majors have to take a humanities course(s), social science, english and/or literature, as well as their broad based sciences and their engineering courses. If they didn't, it would be DeVry Tech. (No offense if anyone went to DeVry).