<p>The notion of these being silly has nothing to do with the outcomes, altho we all like to think our fave is #1. But it’s no less silly if USNA is #1 or #3000. </p>
<p>The silliness comes from how “quality” is measured. Pure and simple. There’s only one valid measure of educational quality … value added. How much does a series of events, activities, etc. contribute to changing an indidual and the collective of individuals. And how much do those changes coincide with the institution’s purported mission.</p>
<p>And the problem is that this is so grossly complex to measure that even the experts, those who’ve spent lifetimes exploring these things … Robert Pace, Alexander Astin, Ken Mortimer, Chickering, others …have concluded it’s difficulty and thus we’re left to more pragmatic measurement of issues like time spent on task and self-reported, graduation (including the TYPE of students admitted, i.e. Ivies admit the best so they SHOULD ALL GRADUATE … graduation, careers, incomes, outcomes becomes ludicrous. Same might be said for the service academies. They OUGHT to graduate the most.) </p>
<p>So it’s these basic notions and looking at what US News, Forbes, ad nauseum are trying to do with this … WHY? Because they know no matter how “silly” a whole bunch of us like to think it has some meaning, which of course in terms of real measurement and any and all specific students, it’s useless. </p>
<p>But it sells lots of magazines. btw, did you ever wonder WHY it is that MAGAZINES, those bastions of intellect and truth, take the lead on such silliness? Duh …</p>