Your Comments On...

The Cost of Bucking College Rankings

Why should we care if the U.S. News & World Report college rankings are far from reliable? Because so many people take these rankings seriously.
- By Michele Tolela Myers

Comments

What a fantastic piece, applicable to all facets of the US News ranking repertoire, from undergrad to professional schools. The implication of the *unilateral disarmament* fear, it should be said, is some kind of collected action. Large groups of universities deciding together: no more participation in the US News rankings period. There are plenty of college guides published that offer standardized test scores, post graduation employment rates, faculty quality and other measures of school performance. It is positively stupid to obsess over whether school number 35 is really *better* than school 49, and to make academic and budgetary policies accordingly.

By doug_pennington | Mar 11, 2007 12:33:24 AM | Request Removal

As a college counselor I find it deploarable that colleges are penalized in their rankings. Education is a public trust and it does not serve this trust to fabricate scores nor penalize universities for taking the challenge of education by individuating their admission process. Although I would be happy for USNEWS to stop ranking, if they must rank, I want them to do so ethically. If they are fabricating numbers in one part of their magazine who is to say they are not doing so in another? Let us be clear: It is fraud. USNEWS states that they rank colleges to help you [students] make one of the most important decisions of your life. And it sells magazines. A lot of them. It has generated an entire revenue model on the internet. They say that to find the right college, you need a source of reliable and consistent data-information that lets you compare one college with another and find the differences that matter to you. They are failing in this mission and need to take responsibility for it. If USNEWS is incapable of doing this, I wonder what would happen if 3500 universities, their professors and the thousands of high schools that subscribe to USNEWS simply canceled their subscriptions. And finally, where is the leadership from the flagship universities? I applaud Reed College for standing alone in the wilderness. What happened to Stanfords letter to stop the madness? College presidents your time has come: Stand up and be counted.

By Shaun.McElroy | Mar 12, 2007 5:26:36 AM | Request Removal

I must admit that after reading the article by Michele Toela Myers, President of Sarah Lawrence College SLC, I was feeling a bit sorry for the College. SLC has decided to drop SAT scores as part of the admission process/review. It would appear, at least from Ms. Myers� article, that SLC was being subjected to some very unethical pressure from US News in compiling what most parents, probably feel is a worthwhile service in listing of the top Colleges and Universities in the United States. In fact, I must admit that I looked at this listing more than 10 years ago when my son was applying to College. Out of curiosity, I found SLC on the Internet and I must admit that I was shocked when I learned that the annual cost of attending SLC tuition, room, board, books and fees was in excess of $45,000.00 and this does not, does not, include meals. We are not talking about some rinky-dink College this is a very elite College. This is a College that caters to the very wealthy. Forty-five thousand dollars excluding meals for one year? I�m sorry, but this column by the president of SLC is very misleading. No one should feel sorry for SLC, except perhaps for the crybaby tactics of its President!!

By selepak | Mar 12, 2007 8:05:14 AM | Request Removal

Please! Michelle Myers - on behalf of low-ranking Sarah Lawrence doesnt want to submit standard data to US News for comparative purposes - and then complains that Sarah Lawrence isnt being evaluated fairly? Ms. Myers would do well to see past her own bruised ego and recognize that US News college ranking arent intended for her agrandizement - they are intended for families of college bound students to sort out the differences between institutions of higher education. By refusing to submit SAT data, Myers is obfuscating a critical tool in the college planning process for families. Rather than faking data, US News is making a responsible decision to make a reasonable substitution of data for comparative purposes. US News World Report has always been the gold standard for fair, tell-it-like-it-is reporting. It is absurd for a whining, cry baby college president of a third tier college to suggest that US News would risk its reputation to discredit Sarah Lawrence. Please!

By sapatton55 | Mar 12, 2007 9:54:38 AM | Request Removal

President Myers seems all too willing to deny parents and prospective students information that most feel is very relevant in the college application and selection process. Although Dr. Myers might feel that SAT scores arent important, that doesnt justify denying information about its students to potential applicants, who might feel that it is important. Furthermore, her opinion about SAT scores doesnt justify withholding the other information included in the US News World Reports rankings, such as faculty resources and the percentage of faculty who are full-time, the percentage of freshman students returning for their sophomore year, graduation rates, and alumnae giving. There are many factors that go into a students decision on which college to choose. But college administrations should err on the side of producing too much information, not denying it. That smacks of arrogance and defensiveness. It also suggests that students and their parents, who should also be involved in the process, are better off not knowing whats in store at a particular school for the next four years. Rather than witholding information, Dr. Myers might include more, such as information regarding the percentage of students going on to graduate school, acceptance rates for medical and law schools, and how her students perform on tests for graduate school, such as the GRE and MCATs. Then students would be able to understand not just the quality of inputs to Sarah Lawrence, but also quantitatively the quality of education received.

By sbgoldrick | Mar 12, 2007 10:32:34 AM | Request Removal

Im a college economics professor who has investigated this topic extensively. First, let me dispose of the myths, duplicity, and mysticism on ranking, USNews, and college admissions. Elite college criticism of USNews rankings is a red herring argument. These rankings are suspect precisely because top colleges refuse to release -- or even collect -- assessment information such as NSSE or surveys of graduates - which USNews can therefore only report anecdotally. Sure, USNews methodology is ad hoc, but I determined that even dramatic changes in the weights they used has little effect on final rankings anyway. As a last resort, Congress is threatening to intercede into this unregulated and broken system that lacks any standards or quality control. Colleges claim they are accredited but this nearly rubber-stamp process primarily functions to give profs a basis for getting more resources while keeping the public off colleges backs. Meanwhile, higher education has become the primary vehicle for increasing inequality of opportunity. Morover, the U.S. colleges have abandoned their liberal arts core, math and science education, and doctoral programs in favor of professional schools and vo-tec undergrad degrees masquerading as bachelors degrees. Our future economic competitiveness hangs in the balance, so we dare not ignore reform proposals. P.S.: Sarah Lawrences Oxford approach, tiny class sizes, and not-following-the-pack theirs are the only tour guides that dont walk backwards should be considered despite their slightly higher tuition. Some of their programs like creative writing are the finest in the country.

By darccity | Mar 12, 2007 1:10:13 PM | Request Removal

My daughter is currently waiting for decisions from several of the most selective colleges in the US. We didnt really pay attention to the rankings, but targeted certain schools after visiting and talking to administration, faculty and students. I can understand the authors lamenting that if they dont use the SAT that the arbitrary number assigned isnt really appropriate. However, I would say that even if they dont use the SAT, why not collect it and report it to avoid this trap? Seems like they SLC have the option of ignoring a 1600 if they so choose, and they apparently have so chosen. Just because I dont use an employees race as a decision factor doesnt mean that I cant say I have a diverse workforce, right?

By ctaylor39 | Mar 12, 2007 3:06:10 PM | Request Removal

To the ones decrying Sarah Lawrences motives, read the article. It is about fraud being perpetuated by USNEWS. They are fabricating numbers for colleges that do not require the SAT. To the university researcher: I am frankly surprised you found changing weights matter little. The evidence shows dramatic changes like the rise and fall of Cal Tech a few years ago. Sadly the single most relevant piece of data to a student search for a college is not a part of the USNEWS. The National Survey of Student Engagement is a voluntary on the parts of colleges. They can choose to publicly share their data or not. This survey tackles students experiences directly.

By Shaun.McElroy | Mar 12, 2007 8:15:36 PM | Request Removal

Years ago I attended Cal Berkeley. At that time the university was starting its bioengineering department for the first time, admitting its first freshmen within two years and graduate students to start within four. I personally had classes and conferences moved from rooms that were newly assigned to the brand new department and watched the empty nameplates go up on the doors as the department was taking shape. At this time US News had ranked Berkeley as one of the top schools in bioengineering for several years throughtout which no department exsisted although there were research projects that could be classified as being in this field being conducted by graduate students earning degrees in other departments. US News is highly misleading even for top ranking schools. Prospective students GO VISIT!

By methomas_99 | Mar 13, 2007 1:07:46 AM | Request Removal

As a Sarah Lawrence student who applied when the S.A.T requirements were still in place, I feel the need to respond to and clarify some of the comments written above. First, SLC is a very expensive school, but its not just for wealthy students. My family is middle class my mother is unemployed at the moment and I receive a lot of need based aid in the form of a gift as do many of my friends. The tuition of SLC really has nothing to do with this article. We have the smallest endowment of any liberal arts school in the country. We have the smallest student teacher ratio in the country. That is what you pay for. Not for fancy facilities and spa treatment. This is not a question of feeling sorry for SLC. This is about speaking the truth and getting facts right and not misleading the public. Second, often times although not always the case high selectivity can be equated with academic prestige. Our selectivity is based on the student as a whole I got in and my score was below an 1100 and their ability to write which cannot possibly be determined from S.A.Ts--try writing a 20pg conference paper for two classes your freshman year without being able to write SLC does not owe it to the average college consumer to report an average SAT score because most students who apply to SLC are interested in the schools philosophy and are probably looking at other similar small liberal arts school. They are aware of SLCs reputation-any educated person would be. We know everyone at Harvard is smart regardless of what they scored on the S.A.Ts and if Harvard stopped providing SAT scores, would people think less of Harvard? Would they find it less selective? I feel sorry for parents and their children who are too ignorant to know that they shouldnt judge a school based on the average SAT score. They should visit the school and hear from teachers and students. They shouldnt have to rely on numbers. If anyone reads Princeton Review, in just one year numbers for SLC changed drastically such as going from a 96 out of 100 in academics to a 93. How in one year could that change? The moment we stopped accepting SAT scores, our academic rating drops? Did we fire all our teachers and start offering under water basket weaving as a major? NYU which is a school VERY hung up on SAT scores and is very selective got a rating of 86 for academics and the number seems to keep dropping. So obviously selectivity does not imply much. What is upsetting is that Us News and World Report feels that SLC should comprise their philosophy for the good of the public. It misleads the public into thinking SLC is something it isnt. Do not come to SLC if you you believe tests are indicative of intelligence. You wont make it as a student. Youll probably be banging your head into a wall most of the time especially since teachers dont provide grades on assignments. SLC really is about learning for the sake of learning. There are many reasons why SLC has chosen not to require those scores and if the public wants to see numbers, they can look at other schools where that matters, like NYU. Should we have standardize testing in college so employers can see who to hire based on a number rather than a resume? Michelle Myers is not whining, she is trying to prove a point and raise awareness to many parents and students who are receiving false information. If Us News is willing to fabricate numbers about SLC what other schools are they lying about?

By ERybnick | Mar 14, 2007 5:30:07 PM | Request Removal

When I applied to Sarah Lawrence in 2000, I did so knowing that my strong SAT score would not be considered as strongly as it would at the other schools I was applying to. Aside from Sarah Lawrence, I was admitted to Reed, Mt. Holyoke, Bard and others. Had I just read statistics and not visited the campus, I may or may not have chosen Sarah Lawrence as an alma mater. Its true that you wont find the updated facilities and extensive resources at SLC that you may see at certain other liberal arts schools although the campus remains a timelessly lovely place. What you will find, though, and what I did find upon my first visit to the campus, is a community of lively, engaged, creative thinkers. The small classes foster passionate discussion, and bi-weekly meetings with each professor provide a degree of individualized learning that is, so far as I know, unsurpassed by any college in the country. As a student I shaped my own course of learning, which allowed for an integration between classes and subject matter not to mention a level of personal commitment to my work that proves the true merit of a liberal arts education. I may have been graded at the end of each semester for the sake of graduate school, but far more valuable to my development were the evaluations my professors wrote in response to each of my papers some evaluations were upwards of two pages in length. Sarah Lawrence may be known as the black sheep of higher learning but and I write this having been acquainted with Ms. Meyers it is not rebellion for rebellions sake. Standardized learning, and thereby standardized testing, is counter to the philosophy of a liberal arts education. Sure, if it proves beneficial to students SLC will play by the rules and submit the test scores for outside purposes. Within the walls of the admissions office, however, it makes complete sense to disregard them.

By rebeccakeeling | Jun 17, 2008 4:14:08 AM | Request Removal