“do rankings change that quickly, and that steeply? If you go back 20 years, UChicago’s College was ranked #12 - now it’s ranked #3. That’s a nice increase. UPenn’s college was ranked #13, now it’s ranked #8, a nice change.”
- Yes. Take a look at schools that aggressively pursue the rankings game. It helps if you are coming from a relatively lower starting point.
“But in the med world. UChicago had specialties ranked in the top 10 or the top 20 6 years ago that have dropped 20, 30, 40 places or more.”
- totally concerning, no doubt. It's not clear what the answer is.
“Could you point me to any other top, wealthy school that has seen a 40-spot drop in a period of 10 years?”
- Can certainly point to a few that have had significant increases. In the world of healthcare there has been rapid change within the past 10 - 20 years so while a 40 point drop in some ranking system may be pointing to a fundamental problem, it may not be all that surprising.
The question, again, is whether anything’s changed about UChicago Hospitals or the affiliated Med school. For instance - 10 years ago if a UChicago faculty member contracted a form of cancer, was he more likely to receive treatment at UChicago than today? And if so, why? People I know who worked in the ICU know that Billings would get a heck of a lot more desperate cases than Northwestern - oftentimes they were turned away from those places and ended up at Billings. So it’s quite possible that certain factors that are deemed important today simply aren’t present at UChicago and so the ranking isn’t high.
“I’m also confused by your statement of size being rewarded. Vandy’s med plant is bigger than Chicago’s, but Chicago was ranked ahead of Vandy as recently as 8 years ago. I apologize for bringing this up again, but what happened, as the methodology has stayed quite consistent?”
- could be wrong here, but Vandy specifically has had significant expansion and renovation in the past 10 or so years and of course Nashville has had nice growth as well. Has Chicago had the same? HP and the surrounding area were certainly gentrifying over the past several years and hopefully that is continuing (not sure of the pace). Those factors absolutely matter. Something as simple as being able to attract faculty to your facilities and to your area of the city is a huge deal. This is where Northwestern has a definite advantage - while Chicago itself is shrinking, the gentrifying of the neighborhoods to the north of the loop, as well as the continued affluence in the surrounding burbs, puts it at a distinct advantage to UChicago monetarily. Now, why Rush is ahead of UChicago is a different story. Just connected with a relative who graduated from Rush nursing and spent time working at UChicago hospitals and she doesn't believe those ranking at all (except for the part about NMS being #1). Nevertheless, even if unreliable and easily manipulated, Rush is still doing something that UChicago isn't.
“Are you attributing this mainly to lax advertising? What’s the reason for that? I mean if everyone else is achieving success thru advertising, why fall 8 years behind on this?”
- My point about advertising is that the healthcare industry has rapidly moved into a very competitive one over the past 20 or so years. Those who don't get with the program (either merging with other hospitals to form a system, investing in new and better physical plant, etc.) are left behind. As mentioned, I'm not up with what UChicago has done to improve it's medical facilities over the past 10 or so years but I understand they've done some things with more in the works (including the level one trauma center). I do know that cash is limited, there's a real dearth of decent healthcare on the south side, and the the surrounding community depends very heavily on the hospitals. Those factors certainly present an opportunity but they may also hinder expansion exactly the way that the university sees fit. It is beyond excellent in terms of being a community hospital but it just doesn't have the modern visibility as a state of the art research facilitiy. It's not in an area where the average working Chicagoan desiring state of the art care tends to go or think of going and it's not located near the loop (where thousands upon thousands work every day). I'm not sure that it's attracted a national or even international patient base the way that MD Anderson, or Mayo, and similar have done. Someone coming in from another country is more than likely to land at O'Hare and get to Northwestern than to go to the south side. It's a harsh assessment, I realize, but the location might be a real disadvantage w/o either rapid changes in perceptions about the south side as a place to live and work or the hospitals' ability to provide some specialized niche care that one can only get in Hyde Park. That's why advertising is so important - but it has to be backed up with substance, of course.