University graduate programs score high in latest U.S. News rankings

The numbers are in. The 2002 U.S. News & World Report graduate school rankings were released earlier this month, with three Princeton departments among the top five nationwide, and an additional three departments rated in the top 10.

Princeton's top-ranking graduate programs are history (number one, tied with Yale for first and retaining the number-one position from last year), economics (number two, tied with Harvard, Stanford, and the University of Chicago, and moving up two positions from 2001) and the Wilson School (number four, tied with University of California, Berkeley, and falling one spot from last year).

Other programs in the top ten include English (number six, tied with Cornell, moving up one place from 2001), politics (number six, no change in the past year) and sociology (number nine, retaining its position from last year). The psychology department fell two positions, from number nine in 2001 to number eleven this year.

Math and science rankings have not been updated since 1999. These 1999 rankings place Princeton's mathematics and physics departments in the top five, and biology and computer science in the top ten. The engineering program ranked 17th this year.

Dean of the Graduate School John Wilson said, "I'm pleased by the ranking of many of the Princeton departments. Economics and history were quite properly very highly rated and a number of other departments showed up well."

However, Wilson also expressed concern about the methods the magazine used to rank the schools. U.S. News uses a survey sent to deans of public affairs schools and academics in doctoral fields and asks them to rank schools offering graduate degrees in those fields. The response rate averages about 40 percent and serves as the basis for the rankings. In addition to reputation, the magazine uses other criterion including student selectivity, faculty resources and research activity to determine the rankings of engineering programs.

Graduate program administrators were pleased to see their programs recognized, yet, like Taylor, they place little faith in the methodology or reliability of the rankings.

Dean of the School of Engineering and Applied Science James Wei said he does not believe the rankings are an accurate reflection of program quality.

"I put some value on the opinions they collect from other university deans and company top management," he said. "But they use too many indicators that do not make sense. Another problem I have with them is the volatility of the ranking, so that [California Institute of Technology] is number one in one year, and Princeton is number one in the next year. In real life, nothing in the universities changes that fast."

Philip Nord, chair of the history department, said he believes his department deserves the top ranking it has held for the past two years. "On the other hand," he said, "the top four or five programs are all excellent. On another occasion, it's conceivable one or more of them might be given a higher rating."

Economics department chair Ben Bernanke said he feels his department deserves a ranking in the top two nationwide. "We've added a lot of good faculty," he said, "and we are a powerhouse in theory, macroeconomics, international economics and finance."

"Very few places have the breadth and depth that this department has," he added.

Get the best of ‘the Prince’ delivered straight to your inbox. Subscribe now »

Mike Rothschild, dean of the Wilson School, said, "Of course, we would prefer to be number one, rather than number four. But it is extraordinarily hard to rank programs as dissimilar as ours. In terms of the paper credentials of our students, we're at least equal to the Harvard Kennedy School [ranked number one]."

Both Wilson and Wei recommended the National Research Council rankings as more accurate indicators of Ph.D. research programs than those of U.S. News.

"[The National Research Council] ranking is done by academic leaders with real professional competence, and not by magazine publishers primarily to sell magazines," Wei said.

Dave Ball, a first-year graduate student in the English department, said he was happy to hear his program had advanced one position this year. However, he said the rankings "are only important for prospective students though," adding, "on a job search, no one talks about ratings. U.S. News could have rated us at 53 and I still would have come."

Sylvan Merlin, a first-year economics graduate student from France, also did not consider the exact ranking when he chose Princeton.

"Our high ranking is due to a lot of new faculty that have come here recently," he said. "Others see the Princeton economics department through publications, what economists read, but that doesn't indicate the type and quality of students we have."

Many Wilson School students said they thought that Princeton's small programs, international focus, commitment to public resources and financial support are hard to match.

"Unlike their ranking for colleges, their public affairs ranking employs only a one-dimensional 'reputation' score, using a survey that had a less than 50 percent response rate," said John McCoy GS. "Other factors that might round out your perception of a program aren't included."