The College Rankings Revolt

xiggi
Tue, 26 Jun 2007 17:01:42 +0000

I’m afraid I’ve joined the same circle-jerk I left months ago. My mistake! Those schools seeking to deemphasize the SAT have a different philosophy concerning what qualities they are looking for in a student.



I’m not sure I understand the reference to “circle-jerk” but that is not important.

For the record, I have ZERO problems with schools seeking to deemphasize the SAT have a different philosophy concerning what qualities they are looking for in a student. After all, the pick the students according to whichever criteria they select. However, schools that opt for an different “route” should not be rewarded for their … gamemanship. In so many words, schools that are not able or not willing to fill the USNews survey correctly should be … eliminated from the rankings and listed in a separate category. I’m sure that schools like Sarah Lawrence should be thrilled to be unranked! But wait, that is NOT what they want: what they want is to have their cake and eat it too!

In the past, I have advocated for USNews to the RIGHT thing. Reed does not want to participate … honor their request and ignore them!
SL wants to play the game of reporting partial scores … drop them! Does it get any simpler than that?

I have also opined for several years that the peer assessment is NOTHING but an abject tool for schools to handicap their foes and reward their friends. The solution for USNews would be to present TWO rankings: one for the PA fans and one for whoever prefers objective data over blatant cronyism.

Were USNews willing to do that, we would have a perfect world. The PA could shine in all its subjective splendor and earn the kudos of the research public universities and non-coed schools that are correctly pegged, starting at the second column. The schools that provide partial or misleading data could have their own little fiefdom devoid of ranking.

Unfortunately, USNews knows very well that they HAVE to have a minimum response to their survey, regardless of the identity of the respondent, and that highlighting the gamemansship or make it moot would only ensure a further drop in the participation. They know that schools participate when it BENEFITS them. It just happens that some are more devious about their objective. Fortunately, they are easy to spot: just check LLoyd Thacker’s list of misfits and rebels.