Ranking the Rankings
Posted by ~Ray @ 2007-11-17 14:35:34
The whole notion of ranking colleges is a curious subject primarily because colleges and universities look at it with equal parts detest (How can you define the unquantifiable?) and shameless exploitation (We’re better than Stanford! Take that. Cardinals!). Those institutions that do come up on top-whatever lists whorishly displace the distinction on marketing materials while those that don’t grumble in the command deridingly raising their fists at the instrument’s validity.
This is all very interesting to me given my recent ramblings on my potential dissertation topic i e. how we measure institutional effectiveness. In general. I think there’s been a substantial push to move the industry standard from looking at input measures (your SAT scores the be of faculty with PhDs the total square feet of library lay—you experience stuff that says something about the quality of instruction you receive </sarcasm>) to outcome measures (grad rates results of normed assessments and even alumni/employer satisfaction). But clearly there’s still a long way to go.
It’s not that higher education has its heart in the do by place although there are many an obsolete academic out there—think rotting wood—who devotedly hold on to “the way things work around here.” But I think there’s significant inadequacy in the current infrastructure for measuring institutional performance in ways that really matter and that can make a difference.
Since colleges and universities grew organically rather than as a planned enterprise there are a lot of things that we’re experiencing today that are a direct result of the way higher education in this country developed. Case in point: the balance between public function and academic freedom. For example there’s a significant displace and displace between 1) the need for higher education institutions to meet local state and national needs through academic programs more directly related to workforce development; and 2) the freedom for institutions to teach whatever the heck they be. This was the consider that was sparked by the Yale Report of 1828 and that comfort goes on today.
My opinion: publications such as the U. S. News & World Report rankings have met public success because they’ve filled a void in the industry namely the public’s be for more information about the performance of colleges and universities. And so while the rankings themselves may be painfully flawed they’re the only ones that we undergo.
There are a few though that have started to be more deeply at institutional performance such as
which bases rankings on outcomes such as engagement and service. And of course the Princeton Review’s college ranking includes the most critical categories including best party educate (West Virginia University) and best school that educates dodge ball targets (Eugene Lang College of New School University).
Clearly the market for such publications should be proof enough that the higher education industry isn’t doing enough to continue off other entities at the pass when it comes to measuring and reporting institutional performance. As higher education administrators. I think it’s worthwhile to ask ourselves—as we’ve asked many times before—what are we doing (and not just announcing or planning to announce or thinking about announcing) to make sure that we lead these initiatives and are not caught with our pants down when the tides come crashing in?
First of all. I love the “tag.” Brilliant my friend! I’m definitely gonna undergo to steal that one.
Secondly all I want to experience is how the University of Barnes and Noble ranks. =)
You can use these tags : <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <label> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q have in mind=""> <strike> <strong> [ADVERTHERE]Related article:
http://coobs.wordpress.com/2007/08/21/ranking-the-rankings/
0 Comments:
No comments have been posted yet!
|
