College Rankings Fail to Accurately Rank Schools

American consumerism has caused higher education to become a commodity where prestigious brand names and billion dollar test-prep firms have the ability to shape students' decisions. In 1983, U.S. News & World Report anticipated the insatiable desire for Americans to know and have the "best" product, in this instance, a college degree, when it published its first list of college rankings. The original list included a hierarchy of top universities and top liberal-arts colleges, as well as provided a regional four-tier system to encompass a greater number of schools.

The rankings achieved significant popularity and influence, and in 1988, U.S. News made the list of rankings an annual feature where the ranks depended on a complex algorithm. The algorithm takes into account various factors including a college's selectivity, or a percentage of accepted applicants, the average SAT score for incoming students, percentage of graduating students, student-to-faculty ratio, percentage of donating alumni, and a reputational survey

Increased criticism has risen with the increased circulation of the issue. The oversimplification of defining "best" has brought about questions regarding the defining algorithm. In 1997, the magazine hired the National Opinion Research Center (NORC) to evaluate its ranking process. The NORC report concluded that the system was inefficient and permitted intentional short-term fluctuations. The most prominent fluctuation occurred in 1999 when the California Institute of Technology seized the coveted top spot; out maneuvering the traditional Ivy League champions.

Bill Hiss, vice president of Bates College in Lewiston, Maine points out that admission offices are under constant pressure to raise the average SAT score of accepted students, as a means of increasing theirs schools' reputation and annual rank. In order to additionally increase SAT scores, colleges exaggerate their students' scores or write off low scores as statistical anomalies. In 1995, the Wall Street Journal found discrepancies between the average SAT score that colleges provided to ranking guides and the scores that colleges are federally required to present to debt-rating agencies.

U.S. News rankings have led more admissions offices to adopt early admission as a means of increasing selectivity. In 2004, U.S. News attempted to remedy the situation by declaring that the magazine will no longer consider yield; however, early admission programs still allow for an increased number of rejections in the spring, thus inflating selectivity.

To further embellish selectivity, admissions offices are increasing their recruiting staffs and more avidly consider junior year PSAT scores. The University of Chicago hired additional recruiters this year and saw a 45 percent increase in the number of early applicants. Similarly, Arizona State University promised the school's president, Michael Crow, a $60,000 bonus if the school increased its rank during his tenure.

Finally, the reputational survey, which U.S. News accounts for 25 percent of the ranking, the largest single element, has questioned the integrity of the academic elite. The survey consults the opinions of college presidents, deans, and provosts regarding less-tangible facets of schools' reputations, such as student-teacher relations. Critics of the survey highlight the fact that the rankings are being affected too greatly by the opinions of individuals who are not familiar about specific colleges

Is there an end in sight? Considering that U.S. News's competitor, Newsweek, instituted an annual issue ranking American high schools, probably not.

Sources:
"College Early Decision Policies." Issues & Controversies On File 24 Jan. 2007: 1-11. Issues & Controversies. Facts On File News Services. .

"College Rankings." Issues & Controversies On File 10 Aug. 2007: 1-11. Issues & Controversies. Facts On File News Services. .

"College Rankings Draw Criticism (sidebar)." Issues & Controversies On File 1 Feb. 2002: 1-3. Issues &
"Harvard to eliminate early admission." Harvard Gazette Archives. 12 Sep. 2006: 1-4. Harvard University Gazette. .

"Key Events in the History of College Rankings (sidebar)." Issues & Controversies On File 10 Aug. 2007:

Paulson, Amanda, and Teicher, Stacy. "Is Early Admission Unfair?." Christian Science Monitor 14 Sept. 2006: 1-3. SIRS Researcher. SIRS Knowledge Source. .

Bierma, Nathan. "The college chase- The process never has been so competitive, so controversial." Chicago Tribune 13 Apr. 2003: 1-10. Chicagoland Newspapers. NewsBank. .

Cohen, Jodi. "Early applications way up at U. of C.." Chicago Tribune 4 Dec. 2007: 1-3. Chicagoland Newspapers. NewsBank. .

Loftus, Margaret. "Early Decision." U.S. News & World Report. 23 Sep. 2002: 1-4. Opposing Viewpoints Resource Center. Gale. .

Marklein, Mary Beth. "Flag is raised on admissions.(LIFE)." USA Today. 25 Oct. 2006: 1-5. Opposing Viewpoints Resource Center. Gale. .

Bowers, Matthew. "Rift forms over early admissions." The Virginian-Pilot 24 Sep. 2006: 1-3. .

"Early admission numbers return to past levels." Harvard Gazette Archives. 15 Dec. 2005: 1-3. Harvard

Rachel, Torr. "Articles: The Chronicle of Higher Education." Early Decision and the Politics of Class. 26 Jan. 2001: 1-5. .

Thompson, Nicholas. "Playing With Numbers - problems with U.S. News' college rankings." Washington Monthly 1 Sep. 2000: 1-8. .

Chris, Smith. "News you can abuse." University of Chicago Oct. 2001. .

Arenson, Karen. "Yale President Wants to End Early Decision For Admissions." The New York Times 13 Dec. 2001: 1-3. .

Ballon, Hilary. "For Some Students, Early Decision Is Best." The New York Times 18 Dec. 2001: 1-2. .