Jan 12, 2007, 12:54 PM
Re: [Clench Million] Another New MFA Ranking
Thanks for clarifying/restating. For some reason it didn't hit me that you were particularly concerned about the top twenty, though indeed I see now you said that. The good news is, the LJPW/TKS margin of error (MoE) is much smaller for the top twenty than for the schools below that in the rankings, so your concerns should (I hope) be assuaged, I hope. Two points on that:
1) Whereas 77% of the top 48 schools in TKS and LJPW are within 11 spots of one another, that confidence-interval jumps to an incredible 91% for the top 21 schools (i.e., 19 of 21 are within 11 spots); more importantly,
2) That 11-spot MoE is very, very misleading, particularly for the top twenty-one schools. Here's why: the average MoE for the "matching" nineteen (of the top twenty-one schools in the LJPW and TKS) is a scant 4.63 spots. The average MoE for all of the top twenty-one schools in LJPW (including, now, Notre Dame and Ohio State, which are more than 11 spots "off") is just 7.29 spots on average.
Hope this clarifies any confusion.
I should note, also, that almost the entirety of the MoE mentioned in point #2, above, comes from six schools, which are (in order of greatest to least affect on the MoE for the top twenty-one): Ohio State (N/A), Notre Dame (28 spots), Iowa (11), UMass (10), The New School (9), and Irvine (8). Ironically, at least half of these MoEs say a lot more about the oddities of the LJPW than the validity (or lack of validity) of TKS. For instance, which ranking seems more likely for UMass: the #3 of LJPW, or the #13 of TKS? #9 for Notre Dame (LJPW), or #37 (TKS)? As for The New School, Kealey's clerical error left it out of his Handbook--a human mistake, nothing more--and there's just no way to ascertain whether the ranking I gave it (#26 in TKS) is WKWD (What Kealey Would Do). That said, I can agree that Iowa and Irvine essentially swapping spots--as between TKS and the LJPW--does emphasize Kealey's weighting of "funding" as a criterion, one reason I created the TSE Composite, which now (I think more realistically) puts Irvine at #5 and Iowa within even the most modest MoE of that, at #7.
I tend to think of Ohio State as one of just a handful of Kealey's "dropped balls." It's perfectly excusable to have SIU, Illinois, and BGSU just bubbling under in TKS when maybe they deserve to be between 35 and 50, or to miss a mid-40s school like the Art Institute of Chicago, or to put the University of Georgia twenty spots higher than USNWR97 when the LJPW shows it off the radar completely, but the Ohio State omission is simply inexplicable, I think. Maybe I misread something somewhere along the line, and there's an explanation for it? I just don't know.
(This post was edited by umass76 on Jan 12, 2007, 12:57 PM)