Friday Five: ‘I like to watch’ (YouTube) edition

OK, so it’s only Thursday. I’m early for a change.

This Friday Five is brought to you by the spirit of Chauncey Gardiner. Some of you youngsters have probably never heard of him. He was a character played by Peter Sellers in the movie Being There, and he liked to watch television. A lot.

Chauncey would have loved YouTube. Apparently, we all love YouTube. In the past year along, according to a Wall Street Journal article, we’ve spent 9.305 years watching YouTube videos. Wired‘s Monkey Bites blog calculates how many years have been wasted watching the following five YouTube posts:

14.26 years watching geriatric1927.

14.75 years watching lonelygirl15.

17.71 years watching “Real Life Simpsons Intro.”

93.31 years watching funtwo shred on the guitar.

378.99 years watching Evolution of Dance, YouTube’s most-viewed video.

Lest you think YouTube holds no educational value whatsoever, some educators are finding ways to use YouTube in the classroom. Hat tip to connect.educause.edu.

And if you’re of a certain age, a bit on the nerdy side, do not work in a cubicle and the boss is out of the office today, you have my permission to crank up the speakers and enjoy one of my guilty YouTube pleasures.

Friday five: college wranglings

It’s that time of year again: students returning to class, and U.S. News & World Report‘s annual rankings of America’s “best” colleges. Campus admissions officers, deans, presidents, faculty and PR folks across the nation are now scrutinizing the lists, comparing where they fall on the list to the rankings of their competitors, wondering why they slipped or rose in a certain category and lamenting the unjustness of a system that would exclude their institution from, say, the “best values” list. No doubt factions at every university in the nation — other than Princeton, that is — will spend hours critiquing the U.S. News methodology today.
So, before I begin my earnest investigation into how my employer rose from No. 51 in last year’s ranking of best engineering programs to 48 this year but dropped from No. 109 to 112 among national universities, let’s see what the blogosphere and mainstream media have to say about the rankings:

  1. From Tony’s Kansas City, an opinion about the tie in the rankings between two Big 12 universities known for their “border wars” in sports: Equally worthless schools tie in meaningless list.
  2. U.S. News rankings: What they mean for RIT is a post from a PR staffer at Rochester Institute of Technology. It’s a valiant attempt to make sense of the whole rankings hubbub and offer some perspective. “The U.S. News report is only one list and should be put into context with many other variables when determining the reputation and prestige of any university.” That’s pretty much our standard line, too.
  3. An op-ed piece from Ohio State’s student newspaper comparing OSU’s U.S. News ranking from last year (60th) with its No. 27 designation in yet another publication’s list. The op-ed piece wrongly asserts that “U.S. News’ much maligned college ranking system is based solely on academic quality.” It is not. Reputation, exclusivity, fund-raising and other factors come into play in the U.S. News rankings, too.
  4. Look beyond ‘U.S. News’ for college quality, an opinion piece by John A. Roush, president of Centre College, who criticizes U.S. News and other rankings organizations for relying on “flawed research methodology and inaccurately reported data.” He adds: “My real worry about the rankings and the guides is that they are based almost exclusively on ‘inputs’ — the size of a college’s endowment, for example, or the percentage of Ph.D.s on the faculty, or the median GPA of incoming freshmen. Such quantitative criteria, while important, say nothing about what actually takes place when a student attends and graduates from your institution.”
  5. Only in Chicago: Recount helps university rise in magazine’s ranking.