A May 20 A-section article incorrectly said that the Arizona Board of Regents approved performance bonuses for Arizona State University President Michael Crow with the single goal of rising above "third-tier" designation in U.S. News & World Report's college rankings. Changing the designation was merely one benchmark set by the board.
| Page 2 of 2 < |
Some Colleges Want to Curb Flow of Data to Magazine
|
Discussion Policy
Comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions. You are fully responsible for the content that you post.
|
The peer assessment, particularly, rankles some college presidents, who say that they and their colleagues can't possibly know in detail what other institutions are doing.
"I think it is preposterous to think that you can issue one score for an academic reputation for an entire institution when our academics are about a whole lot of different kinds of programs and different kinds of teachings," said Patricia McGuire, president of Trinity College in the District and a vocal critic of the rankings.
She throws the forms away.
Still, many colleges don't.
Some presidents -- like John A. Fry, president of Franklin & Marshall College in Pennsylvania -- said they respond on only the few schools they really know. "It really doesn't at all allow you to formulate any sort of intelligent analysis of what is going on," he said. "You are just checking a box."
Kelly said the magazine thinks the peer survey has great value and is similar to those taken in other industries.
"You ask the experts in a profession to rank their competitors," he said.
"The ones complaining [about the survey] say they don't know about their competitors. We say, 'If you don't know enough about their schools, don't rate it.' "
Some college presidents periodically send colleagues updates on their own school's progress, complete with personal letter and glossy promotional materials.
In March, J. Michael Adams, president of Fairleigh Dickinson University in New Jersey, sent out letters that said, in part, "I know how busy you are but I would ask that you take just a moment to browse through . . . and enjoy a glance at a rapidly emerging leader in higher education. In turn, I welcome the opportunity to learn more about your institution's recent accomplishments."
Through e-mail, Adams wrote that the university participates "because we understand that peer rankings are part of the equation and we want our peers to be able to make informed decisions."
Still, most of the rankings are based on statistical data colleges present to the university, and Kelly said this part of the survey has become "the gold standard" in the business.
Some college presidents see it differently.
George Mason University President Alan G. Merten said he believes that some colleges engage in "dishonest behavior" when they submit data. For example, he said, some schools won't submit SAT scores for provisional students. And some schools don't start tracking students until the beginning of the second semester.
"You know something is wrong when they say they have 98 percent retention rates," he said. "It just can't be."


![[Michelle Rhee]](http://media.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/photo/2009/02/09/PH2009020903587.jpg)
![[Fixing D.C.'s Schools]](http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/graphic/2008/12/16/GR2008121601031.gif)
![[Class Struggle]](http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/photo/2005/11/29/PH2005112901195.gif)
