[terry]

Not sure why that is worthy of an early announcement

Making an early announcement to highlight a one-year number is consistent with what they've been done in the past at UCBerkeley. They cherry-pick carefully selected data, which often is calculated by non-standard methods, and they tout that one bit of data as evidence that they've really turned things around. Then, when the real data come out later, it turns out that the big picture is not as good as the one data point they've been touting.

There's a reason that one-year numbers aren't used by the NCAA. One-year numbers can be misleading because they're subject to fluctuations that don't reflect the overall picture.

After seeing the same sort of thing coming out of Berkeley for years, I think maybe I'm going to wait and see whether there is real improvement this time, as measured by standard metrics, sustained over a period of years.

[terry]

Not sure why that is worthy of an early announcement

Making an early announcement to highlight a one-year number is consistent with what they've been done in the past at UCBerkeley. They cherry-pick carefully selected data, which often is calculated by non-standard methods, and they tout that one bit of data as evidence that they've really turned things around. Then, when the real data come out later, it turns out that the big picture is not as good as the one data point they've been touting.

There's a reason that one-year numbers aren't used by the NCAA. One-year numbers can be misleading because they're subject to fluctuations that don't reflect the overall picture.

After seeing the same sort of thing coming out of Berkeley for years, I think maybe I'm going to wait and see whether there is real improvement this time, as measured by standard metrics, sustained over a period of years.