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