Showing posts with label Rankings. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Rankings. Show all posts
16 September 2010
New World University Rankings Put Big Ten Schools High Up
In new rankings released today by both QS and THE, Big Ten universities fared very well. In QS, Michigan did the best at number 15 in the world, followed by Northwestern and Wisconsin, and in THE, Michigan did the best, followed by Northwestern and Illinois.
19 August 2010
Steps to Restore Ranking Greatness
Alright, we've heard the arguments on both sides about why rankings are or aren't important, but let's just pretend for a second they are. The fact of the matter is that most public schools, and therefore most schools in the Big Ten, have been declining in national rankings in the last few years. Here is my point by point plan on how to fix it.
1. Go more out of state. The school I attend, Michigan, is roughly 1/3 out of state. This is very high for a public school, but consider this: Wisconsin, another highly regarded school in the Big Ten, is roughly 35% out of state and growing, Penn State is roughly 30% out of state, and Illinois is roughly 20% out of state and growing rapidly every year. At my school, the state contributes about 20% of the operating cost every year, and 1/3 of the applicants come from within the state, but 2/3 of the eventual students do. Actual enrollments should more accurately reflect where applications come from. This will also provide more revenue to the school in terms of tuition, and encouraging more out-of-state students to apply will increase competitiveness in admissions.
2. Look overseas. There is a rapidly growing middle class in many third-world countries that would be extremely eager to send their children to an American university. These students often pay more than out-of-state students, and do a lot to increase the diversity of schools. This is also a good way to get students for schools that don't quite have the cachet to increase out-of-state students. Many Big Ten schools offer programs in which foreign students are extremely interested, such as engineering and business. Schools should be proactive in recruiting these students, because many countries are putting a lot of money into their own education system in order to keep their best students.
3. Less is more. Many public schools are either being forced to offer less educational opportunities or hold steady, but overall student enrollment is increasing. This is generally not a good thing. This probably means that universities should try to reduce the number of people enrolling by reducing the number of people they accept. For example, Michigan over accepted by 1,000 kids this year, and Iowa over accepted by roughly 400. This creates housing issues, as well as teaching issues. The main plan to deal with this is to hope that enough kids drop out that space is cleared for everyone else. This is generally bad news, because it is generally a bad idea to hope for someone's failure so everyone else can have enough. By reducing the number of kids a school accepts, acceptance rates, a key measure of institutional quality, will go down.
4. Offer better financial aid. By accepting fewer kids, a university will have the same amount of financial aid to spread out over fewer people, meaning everyone can get more, and the school will have more full-rides to give out to the most coveted students.
1. Go more out of state. The school I attend, Michigan, is roughly 1/3 out of state. This is very high for a public school, but consider this: Wisconsin, another highly regarded school in the Big Ten, is roughly 35% out of state and growing, Penn State is roughly 30% out of state, and Illinois is roughly 20% out of state and growing rapidly every year. At my school, the state contributes about 20% of the operating cost every year, and 1/3 of the applicants come from within the state, but 2/3 of the eventual students do. Actual enrollments should more accurately reflect where applications come from. This will also provide more revenue to the school in terms of tuition, and encouraging more out-of-state students to apply will increase competitiveness in admissions.
2. Look overseas. There is a rapidly growing middle class in many third-world countries that would be extremely eager to send their children to an American university. These students often pay more than out-of-state students, and do a lot to increase the diversity of schools. This is also a good way to get students for schools that don't quite have the cachet to increase out-of-state students. Many Big Ten schools offer programs in which foreign students are extremely interested, such as engineering and business. Schools should be proactive in recruiting these students, because many countries are putting a lot of money into their own education system in order to keep their best students.
3. Less is more. Many public schools are either being forced to offer less educational opportunities or hold steady, but overall student enrollment is increasing. This is generally not a good thing. This probably means that universities should try to reduce the number of people enrolling by reducing the number of people they accept. For example, Michigan over accepted by 1,000 kids this year, and Iowa over accepted by roughly 400. This creates housing issues, as well as teaching issues. The main plan to deal with this is to hope that enough kids drop out that space is cleared for everyone else. This is generally bad news, because it is generally a bad idea to hope for someone's failure so everyone else can have enough. By reducing the number of kids a school accepts, acceptance rates, a key measure of institutional quality, will go down.
4. Offer better financial aid. By accepting fewer kids, a university will have the same amount of financial aid to spread out over fewer people, meaning everyone can get more, and the school will have more full-rides to give out to the most coveted students.
Rankings: Meaningless but Important
While I usually find myself agreeing with most of what Andy and Matthew have to say, and this time is no exception, there are also points on which I disagree with them, so I will offer my own viewpoint. First, I will state where I agree with them.
For the most part, these rankings can be considered meaningless, with the person at school number 30 not receiving any different of an education than the person at school 29 or 31. Also, there are many arbitrary factors that these rankings consider that don't seem like they would really affect the quality of education, and schools also have intangible factors that make them right for some people and not others.
However, just because these rankings may be meaningless, does not mean they are not important. This might seem like splitting hairs, but, as I'm sure most of you are aware, whether something is meaningful, and whether it is considered to be so are often two very different things.
First, I think we can all agree that these rankings are all about image. However, in this case, image is very important. How a school is perceived by prospective students plays a large part in recruiting students. For example, Wash U in St. Louis was not considered a very good school even 15 years ago. However, it has come up a lot in the rankings, which has attracted more students, which has allowed them to be more selective, which has pushed up their rankings even further, etc., etc., etc. This also gives their students more prestige, and more ability to get jobs in later life.
Second, as many people have pointed out, rankings turn into something that is used any way that anyone wants. For example, if a school does well in the rankings, the administration will say, "Oh, look how well we've done in the rankings," but if a school does poorly, they'll say, "Oh, well, rankings don't matter anyway." A school has to decide if their rankings matter or not, and stick to their decision. It can't be important to the school in the good times, and unimportant in the bad ones.
I think many people will agree that we have become an increasingly winner take all society, and while rankings don't really say much about the actual quality of an institution, they do affect the perception of whether you are a "winner" or not, which could have a very important effect on your later life.
For the most part, these rankings can be considered meaningless, with the person at school number 30 not receiving any different of an education than the person at school 29 or 31. Also, there are many arbitrary factors that these rankings consider that don't seem like they would really affect the quality of education, and schools also have intangible factors that make them right for some people and not others.
However, just because these rankings may be meaningless, does not mean they are not important. This might seem like splitting hairs, but, as I'm sure most of you are aware, whether something is meaningful, and whether it is considered to be so are often two very different things.
First, I think we can all agree that these rankings are all about image. However, in this case, image is very important. How a school is perceived by prospective students plays a large part in recruiting students. For example, Wash U in St. Louis was not considered a very good school even 15 years ago. However, it has come up a lot in the rankings, which has attracted more students, which has allowed them to be more selective, which has pushed up their rankings even further, etc., etc., etc. This also gives their students more prestige, and more ability to get jobs in later life.
Second, as many people have pointed out, rankings turn into something that is used any way that anyone wants. For example, if a school does well in the rankings, the administration will say, "Oh, look how well we've done in the rankings," but if a school does poorly, they'll say, "Oh, well, rankings don't matter anyway." A school has to decide if their rankings matter or not, and stick to their decision. It can't be important to the school in the good times, and unimportant in the bad ones.
I think many people will agree that we have become an increasingly winner take all society, and while rankings don't really say much about the actual quality of an institution, they do affect the perception of whether you are a "winner" or not, which could have a very important effect on your later life.
18 August 2010
The Problem With Ratings
Alex asked me to write something controversial a few days ago and I hope this will spark a bit of discussion on the subject. I would like to say that I believe college rankings to be mostly meaningless. And while this is only a brief summary into why I believe this, my hope is that we can use this summary as a diving board into the issues that each of these points represent. Now without further discussion, let us begin with methodology.
Methodology plays a big role into these ratings systems but which one is the best way to rank the quality of a school? Why do so many organizations use different ratings systems? Why do organizations even change their ratings systems from year to year? I think it is obvious to state that every student at the 32nd ranked school is not going to be less capable in ability than the students at the 25th ranked school. I also think a better measure of each of these colleges is to explore the whole college experience and the immeasurable like how each of these schools have affected the lives of their students. These are factors that looking at a school’s selectiveness and ACT scores are incapable of.
Next I am going to ask what the numbers mean in relation to each other. For example Michigan often places somewhere within the top 10% of top rated schools. What about all the schools that are not rated? If we were to consider the number of schools not even making it onto this list, we can basically reduce these top college lists to a bickering war among the top 1% of colleges.
Finally I want to say that the most important factor in any of these college lists is you. No matter how many doors the name of your college opens up, it is still up to you to make something of these opportunities. It is also up to you to make your own opportunities. People are going to care less and less which college you went to as time goes on. They are going to care more about what you have done since then.
Michigan Daily Article About US News Rankings.
There is an interesting article today in the Michigan Daily about its rankings in US News and World Report, discussing how it has been declining in the last few years. Almost more interesting than the article itself, however, are the comments of some of the readers.
17 August 2010
ARWU
Missed this from last week, but Shanghai Jiao Tong University put out its Academic Rankings of World Universities last week. Wisconsin is the highest ranked Big Ten school, followed by Michigan, Illinois, Minnesota, and Northwestern.
US News and World Report Rankings Out
The USNWR College Rankings, the bane of every college student's existence are out today. Overall, Big Ten schools seem to have slipped just slightly in the rankings, with Northwestern down to 13 from 12, and Michigan down to 29 from 27. What is also interesting is that many Big Ten schools made the list of "A+ schools for B+ students."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)