The Schizophrenia Associated with U.S. News and World Report College Rankings
The release of the U.S. News rankings are one of those annual occurrences that incite much loathing, cursing, fear and anxiety across almost all segments of higher ed. On the other hand, one can easily find positive college rankings splattered across admissions materials and websites across the country. What gives?
I mention this because of a conversation I had with a partner institution just a few days ago, one that may be familiar to you. The synopsis: a key staff member is extensively lectured by the then president on the evils of the U.S. News rankings. The university did not endorse or support the rankings or their methodology in any way, shape or form. Then one day the institution was favorably positioned on the list and its ranking was quietly added to the front page of their website. A few years pass and a new president sits behind the big desk. In a conversation with a consultant, the president asks the staffer what the institution is doing to influence the reputation vector of their ranking. The staff member says, “nothing,” since they believe they should avoid U.S. News. The consultant then asks, “isn’t your ranking on your website homepage?” The president responds, “isn’t that a bit schizophrenic?” Perhaps more than just a little.
The heart of the debate seems to center on fairness and accuracy – do the rankings really attest to the quality of education a student will obtain from an institution? One of my mentors in higher education used to frame the question like this: which hospital would you say does a better job – one that takes the most hopeless cases and produces miraculous results or one that treats mostly well patience and keeps them healthy? I would opt for choice one. In that sense, it should be fairly easy to look at inputs and outputs and determine the benefit the learning environment has on students to determine which schools are 'best.’
And there is the rub. Why is so much of the ranking score based on institutional reputation as perceived by other administrators? Is Harvard ranked at the top because it provides the best education – the best turnaround from point A (entry from high school to college) to point B (entry into the world after graduation), or because it admits top students and has to do little to make them successful? Is it possible to obtain a ‘better’ education at XYZ State U than Harvard?
Additional questions – if every other school in our category is sending nice, glossy vanity pieces to higher education opinion leaders, even if we don’t agree with the concept, are we conspicuous by our absence? Although we say we don’t value the rankings, why do we spend significant sums of money annually in an attempt to find the golden ticket to raise our rankings? These just point again to the duality of our thoughts and feelings toward the rankings.
This issue is one that is not soon to be resolved. There are many pieces/presentations to be found on the topic, yet I would love to delve deeper and write a comprehensive white paper. For now, let me provide you with a few places to find current thoughts and opinions on the rankings: U. of Chicago Magazine , CollegeConfidential.com, Black Excel , Top Law Schools Forum, Collegenews.org, Chronicle.com .
As a final tidbit, I want to ensure everyone knows about NSSE – the National Survey of Student Engagement , though Dr. George Kuh would probably cringe to see NSSE and marketing mentioned in the same piece. NSSE administers a sophisticated instrument and analysis that looks at student learning and engagement at participating institutions. NSSE’s survey and resultant data provide a different approach towards assessing turnaround from point A to point B. By combining NSSE’s efforts with a whole host of other surveys and analyses, perhaps we can reframe the conversation of what it means to be the ‘best.’