Is US higher education the best in the world?

[Otto Kretschmer]

I often hear a claim that US universities are the best in the world, often backed up by lists like the Shanghai Ranking.

 

So, are they? 

This claim gets my inner skeptic on for a simple reason - they are not free unlike universities in my.country (Poland)

[CharonY]

It really depends on which level you are looking at it. Undergrad? Not so much. There can be differences in how the technical labs are equipped, though in the US (and elsewhere) labs are getting cut because of cost. This trend is less so in countries in which Universities are not funded by tuition. I will also add that having tuition as a significant part of the university budget often creates perverse incentives and often also leads to administrative bloat. Examples include having offices who are actively trying to recruit and attract students, which is largely absent in entirely publicly funded institutions. Likewise, there is more incentive for student retention, which is associated with higher grade inflation. From a student perspective the experience can be better as there is more support (incl. recruitment, accommodation, living space, guidance and career counseling, as well as easier to grieve grades). But it does not mean that the education is better (often the reverse, actually).

On the graduate level, that depends more on individual researchers than the university per se. I.e. individual profs can run successful groups regardless on which university they are working in. However, there are disparities between countries. The US provides quite a bit of funding for research, but there are quite differences between European countries. Highly ranked universities are often also flush with money and often support profs more with resources to establish successful research programs. 

That being said, there are many moderately or low ranked universities with good researchers and successful (research) graduate programs. Things are a bit iffier when the University primarily sees itself as a teaching university. There, Profs struggle to maintain a program as they get virtually no support (e.g. no lab space). They therefore rarely have successful programs in natural sciences (though they might have social science programs).

[iNow]

5 hours ago, Otto Kretschmer said:

So, are they? 

Depends entirely on how YOU define “best”

[Otto Kretschmer]

On 1/31/2024 at 10:23 PM, CharonY said:

It really depends on which level you are looking at it. Undergrad? Not so much. There can be differences in how the technical labs are equipped, though in the US (and elsewhere) labs are getting cut because of cost. This trend is less so in countries in which Universities are not funded by tuition. I will also add that having tuition as a significant part of the university budget often creates perverse incentives and often also leads to administrative bloat. Examples include having offices who are actively trying to recruit and attract students, which is largely absent in entirely publicly funded institutions. Likewise, there is more incentive for student retention, which is associated with higher grade inflation. From a student perspective the experience can be better as there is more support (incl. recruitment, accommodation, living space, guidance and career counseling, as well as easier to grieve grades). But it does not mean that the education is better (often the reverse, actually).

On the graduate level, that depends more on individual researchers than the university per se. I.e. individual profs can run successful groups regardless on which university they are working in. However, there are disparities between countries. The US provides quite a bit of funding for research, but there are quite differences between European countries. Highly ranked universities are often also flush with money and often support profs more with resources to establish successful research programs. 

That being said, there are many moderately or low ranked universities with good researchers and successful (research) graduate programs. Things are a bit iffier when the University primarily sees itself as a teaching university. There, Profs struggle to maintain a program as they get virtually no support (e.g. no lab space). They therefore rarely have successful programs in natural sciences (though they might have social science programs).

Why do you think so many US universities make it to top ranks?

[CharonY]

 

Quote

The US provides quite a bit of funding for research, but there are quite differences between European countries. Highly ranked universities are often also flush with money and often support profs more with resources to establish successful research programs. 

 

[Phi for All]

1 hour ago, Otto Kretschmer said:

Why do you think so many US universities make it to top ranks?

 

Quote

 

https://www.bestcolleges.com/news/analysis/2021/10/27/is-us-higher-education-still-the-best-in-the-world/

In the 2023 edition [Shanghai Rankings], eight of the top 10 institutions are American, as are 15 of the top 20. This representation is exactly the same as it was in 2003, when the rankings debuted.

What does such dominance mean? It certainly means America's best are considered among the world's best, at least by STEM-related standards. But are we the world's best system?

Bentley MacLeod and Miguel Urquiola, writing in the Journal of Economic Perspectives, aren't convinced. They point out that although the U.S. accounts for 40 of the top 100 universities in the Shanghai rankings and Spain accounts for zero, 83% of public Spanish universities appear in the top 1,000, while only 23% of all American institutions do.

 

Apparently it's not "so many" US universities that make it to the top ranks. 

[CharonY]

38 minutes ago, Phi for All said:

 

Apparently it's not "so many" US universities that make it to the top ranks. 

As I alluded to earlier, it is related to how funding (for teaching and research) is allocated, and in the US (but also Canada, and I believe UK) there is marked disparity in what universities get. Also in many publicly funded universities in Europe you lack many amenities (and sports teams), but in return you can study without getting into debt.

[John Cuthber]

It seems that America isn't really "good" it's just "big".

There are (if Google is to be believed) about 5300 universities in the USA. About 200 are on the "top 1000" list. That's about 3.8%
There are 166 in the UK of which 25 are on the "top 1000" list which is about 15%
France has 71 of which 27 are on the Shanghai list. 38% is impressive.
Germany  is confusing.
 "a total of 423 higher education institutions in Germany, including 108 universities, 211 universities of applied sciences, 52 colleges of art and music, 30 colleges of public administration, 16 theological universities and 6 colleges of education."

[CharonY]

1 hour ago, John Cuthber said:

Germany  is confusing.

Of course it is. Germans like to categorize stuff and there is a distinction between applied sciences (which are often called Technische Hochschule) which usually includes areas such areas with applied training such as engineering, nursing etc. and "regular universities. 

[falkor1995]

I have to say the university of Hamburg is a wonderful university for people who need distance education and provides top notch education.  It really depends what you’re looking for,  at the end of the day though I feel nothing is stopping someone from getting a textbook on a subject,  you don’t need a degree to be educated in a subject.   

[oliviajackson]

No doubt, the US provides the best education. But it depends on different factors, such as personal perspective and specific fields etc.

[dimreepr]

2 hours ago, oliviajackson said:

No doubt, the US provides the best education. .

Indeed, if what you want to educate is the wolf of wall street...

 

 

Edited May 10 by dimreepr

[MigL]

I've only ever attended Brock University ( southern Ontario ), which, at the time was about 10 years old, and its sciences departments were run in the old Corning Glass Lab separate from the main small campus.
One of my nephew's best friends, graduated from there and went on to do a PhD in Physics, at the Max Planck Institute in Germany.
The daughter of my ophthalmologist also graduated from Brock, and went on to complete her studies at Princeton to also become an ophthalmologist, specializing in glaucoma, but unfortunately ( for me ) in Philadelphia.

Those two schools of higher education have probably turned out more Nobel laureates than the next 10 combined, and would have been my first choices for Physics.

So the US has 50 % of the ( what I consider ) best universities.

[abuislam]

Interesting point! US universities are often highly ranked, but their cost differs significantly from countries like Poland where education is free. It's worth considering factors beyond rankings when evaluating education quality. Thoughts?

[Mordred]

On 5/24/2024 at 4:07 AM, abuislam said:

Interesting point! US universities are often highly ranked, but their cost differs significantly from countries like Poland where education is free. It's worth considering factors beyond rankings when evaluating education quality. Thoughts?

When I chose Universities on the west coast of Canada I had several options and acceptance at several different Universities. The criteria I chose wasn't cost but rather classroom size.

I didn't want a classroom of several hundred students but instead chose a University where the average classroom size was restricted to 30. This gave me better access to the instructors.

 The other concern was equipment availability. At least for the field I studied. Once again providing good hands on skills.

[CharonY]

The best undergrad training IMO are labs where you have to apply what you have learned. Unfortunately in most countries this is the first thing to cut, as they are expensive and many students don't like them, as they are harder to get good grades in. 

 

[Mordred]

4 hours ago, CharonY said:

The best undergrad training IMO are labs where you have to apply what you have learned. Unfortunately in most countries this is the first thing to cut, as they are expensive and many students don't like them, as they are harder to get good grades 

Agreed one of my more memorable moments from my coursing was being able to get some time in TRIUMF. While the university I attended wasn't in partnership of owners we were still able to get a limited access. Got quite a bit more time with the University telescope though. Roughly the same size as the telescope Hubble used.

I was able to get more time by being that helpful student with facility maintenance.

[swansont]

23 minutes ago, Mordred said:

Agreed one of my more memorable moments from my coursing was being able to get some time in TRIUMF.

Was this as part of the internship program? My recollection is that TRIUMF was quite supportive of this.

[Mordred]

Yes and AFAIK they still are quite open for internship.

Edited May 26 by Mordred

[swansont]

1 hour ago, Mordred said:

Yes and AFAIK they still are quite open for internship.

We had a couple of pretty good ones when I was a postdoc there.

[Mordred]

Lmao small World indeed. I always thought highly of my time there. Very friendly and supportive environment. Everyone was incredibly helpful. 

[MigL]

11 hours ago, Mordred said:

When I chose Universities on the west coast of Canada I had several options and acceptance at several different Universities. The criteria I chose wasn't cost but rather classroom size.

My largest class in second year Physics at Brock University, Classical Mechanics, in78-79, had 22 students, only one of whom was a girl.
In third year Physics there were four of us.
In fourth year, just two.

My fourth year course in advanced QM usually had us two and the prof ( Dr. Shukla ) at the bboard writing equations.
The other guy ( who was a genious compared to me ) stayed to do a Masters degree; when I ran into him a few years later, he told me he had quit halfway through it, and gone into business/finances because there is no money in Physics

Edited May 27 by MigL

[Mordred]

I'm sure you found the instructor to individual time extremely useful. Lol perhaps a bit too much instructor to student time in your case lol. I can certainly understand your class mates sentiment. Good thing physics is useful in a wide range of trades beyond being a physicist.

Edited May 27 by Mordred

[dimreepr]

Higher education, higher than what?

The best education, teaches you to be higher than your teacher's; while accepting your no different...

[CharonY]

13 hours ago, Mordred said:

I'm sure you found the instructor to individual time extremely useful. Lol perhaps a bit too much instructor to student time in your case lol. I can certainly understand your class mates sentiment. Good thing physics is useful in a wide range of trades beyond being a physicist.

Coming from Germany, I think I have talked to profs maybe a total of 30 mins through undergrad. It is not that much because of class sizes, it was mostly because you were expected to work through things on your own. There were exercises with postdocs/grad students, but they were often hit and miss. However there were block courses in the 3rd and 4th year, which were basically focussed topics where you went to the lab (or field) for a month to run a project (one lecture a week, the rest was whole day doing things, ranging from collecting plants, to running gels). The number of instructors depended on the group size of the prof (I had courses where there was basically just one technical assistant for the whole bunch, to a half-dozen grad students plus assistants).  And then the real, real learning started when you ran your own project for a year (for a MSc equivalent). Good times.