Are colleges and universities trying to “game” the college rankings game?
In this Chronicle of Higher Education article, Christopher C. Morphew and Barrett J. Taylor, a professor and a doctoral student in educational leadership, describe their finding that schools often use multiple mission statements, in part to influence their standing in the U.S. News and World Report rankings. As they write, this may or may not be such a big deal. But, it is one more piece of evidence that, as much as colleges and universities like to complain about the rankings, they do whatever it takes to look better without ever really talking about learning outcomes.
What is really galling about this is that everyone wants to complain about the rankings, but few want to produce more important and objective information about quality. Morphew and Taylor state that “higher education’s goals and outputs are notoriously difficult to quantify.” That is because we argue that education is so complex that it cannot or should not be measured and reported. The fact is that colleges and universities exist to educate. There are ways to measure whether and to what extent intended learning has occurred – and it can be reported.
I have written repeatedly about Transparency by Design. The schools in that initiative are doing their best to lay out what learning can be expected, how it’s measured, and how well graduates demonstrate what they’re expected to learn. Granted, it has not been easy, but we are doing it and we will get much better at it. So should other schools. Rather than using multiple mission statements, or dismissing the competition in peer assessments, I think all of higher education should work at this important goal and make learning outcomes transparent.
If you don’t like the way the rankings are done today, then the best way to change the rankings is to provide more relevant and important information. That information is about learning outcomes, and I am confident that U.S. News would be more than thrilled to have substantive data on which to base their rankings. Producing different mission statements is just one more silly example about how schools reject the rankings on one hand while trying to “win” on the other, and all the while avoid the production of meaningful data that would allow a consumer to make an informed choice.
What do you think? Please feel free to leave a comment.
Mike
Share This4 Responses to “Are colleges and universities trying to “game” the college rankings game?”
Dr. Michael "Jeff" LeHew, PhD Says:
Thank you for taking comments. I would first like to address the point of “rankings” as mostly a matter of “recruitment” as the overall goal; and the attraction of future students; not necessarily learners. I have worked in and around this “other 85%, received degrees out of several schools even”. I also have been a director of a research project or two at a State Land Grant University System; and they fall short in “Academics” often; having seen the assignments of my 3 now grown children. My field is DATABASES; so I am a ravenous reader of data of all types. Open schools or “sunshine” schools are or usually fairly easy to assess. Those that “hide” from the public; have something to hide; and having “chaired” a department at one of those it is not for the “secret recipe” but for the mere fact that “outcomes” do not match hype. Enrollments, Government moneys and military especially GI Bill or veterans money being garnered based upon a “ranking” or Higher Learning assessment; well I will say this in closing-I CHOSE CAPELLA in the end for my OM-IT; dual PhD for a reason; it is providing “SUNSHINE RULE” or open to external review PhD education by PEERS and is without questios of a measurable quality comparable to in outcomes “any” school in the land; except those with “NO REVIEW” allowed. Some of those schools get ranked mysteriously; with no external review. Hmmmm?
Mike Offerman Says:
Paul and Jeff, thanks for taking time to post your comments. I agree that smaller, non-brand-name institutions are leading the way in terms of outcomes.
Mike
Nnamdi Says:
Mike,
Capella is a relatively young brand in comparison to the top-ranked well-known universities. I think that Capella should break the mold by joining the AACSB schools as the first all-online university member of the group. This action would not only elevate the Capella brand, increase the university raking, but also, it would increase the enrollment. Currently, there is a glut of online programs and universities; hence, there are subtle noticeable differences between one online university and another. This is an opportunity for Capella to differentiate itself and position the university as online Ivy League. Given a choice, the other 85% would choose an online Ivy League over a generic online university. Perhaps, we can learn one or two things from Steve Jobs.
Nnamdi
Leave a Reply
Let us know what you think. All comments will be reviewed prior to going live. Comments that are profane or obscene, or unrelated to the topic of the post will not be published.
Welcome to The Other 85 Percent. So what does "the other 85 percent" refer to? Research has shown that only about 15 percent of higher education students still fit the traditional definition of young adults age 18 to 22 who live on campus and go to school full time. more
- February 2010
- January 2010
- December 2009
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- December 2008
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- February 2008
- January 2008
-
Capella University
Changing Higher Education
eLearning Roadtrip
The Presidents’ Forum
Transparency By Design
Paul Says:
Interesting. Like a lot of prestigious awards or rankings, this appears to be another that is sort of gamed by the participants each time it comes around. Concerning making the judging for this ranking based on learning outcomes, I think it’s certainly something to aim for. Getting the magazine to change its rankings would be easy compared to the work needing to be done with colleges. I think that the movement toward measuring outcomes may rest with smaller isntitutions and their use of it first. I see the bigger more prominent schools being the last to adopt the method(s) due in part to size, and in part to traditionalism.
October 30th, 2009 at 1:07 pm