Performance Ratings drive unintended consequences at Colleges

["Ketan Varia" <ketan.varia@cspi-associates.com>]

A great article from the economist last week.. I love the quote
"rankings create powerful incentives to manipulate data and distort
institutional behaviour." 
Ketan Varia

College education
The ladder of fame
Aug 24th 2006 | WASHINGTON, DC

>From The Economist print edition

Not on it? Then seethe, or make your lifts smell of lemons
ON AUGUST 18th US News & World Report released its 2007 rankings of
America's top colleges. The survey began in 1983 as a simple straw poll,
when the magazine asked 662 college presidents to identify the country's
best places of learning. It has since mutated into an annual ordeal for
reputable universities. A strong showing in the rankings spurs student
interest and alumni giving; a slip has grave consequences for public
relations.

University administrators deeply dislike the survey. Many reject the
idea that schools can be stacked up against one another in any
meaningful way. And the survey's methodology is suspect. The rankings
are still based partly on peer evaluations. They compare rates of alumni
giving, which has little to do with the transmission of knowledge.
Besides, the magazine's data are supplied by the schools and
uncorroborated.

But whether the rankings are fair is beside the point, because they are
wildly influential. In the 1983 survey barely half of the presidents
approached bothered to respond. Today, only a handful dare abstain. 
Most, in fact, do more than simply fill out the survey. Competition
between colleges for top students is increasing, partly because of the
very popularity of rankings. Colin Diver, the president of Reed College
in Oregon, considers that "rankings create powerful incentives to
manipulate data and distort institutional behaviour." A school may game
the system by soliciting applications from students who stand no chance
of admission, or by leaning on alumni to arrange jobs for graduates.
Reed is one of the few prominent colleges that dares to disdain to take
part in the US News survey.

In some ways, the scramble to attract applicants has helped students.
Universities such as Duke in North Carolina and Rice in Houston are
devoting more money to scholarships. That seems a reasonable response to
the challenge of the rankings, as the National Centre for Education
Statistics reckons that roughly two-thirds of undergraduates rely on
financial aid. 

Other colleges, though, are trying to drum up excitement by offering
perks that would have been unheard of a generation ago. Students at the
University of California, Los Angeles now appreciate weekly maid service
in the dorms. "The elevators", enthused a respondent to an online
survey, "smell lemon fresh." Students at Pennsylvania State University
enjoy free access to Napster, the music-sharing service. Multi-million
dollar gyms have become so common that they are unremarkable. 
University officials, defending this strategy, often imply that they are
only responding to student demand. Discouraging words for those who
believe that a college's job is to educate, not coddle.


Ketan Varia
kinetik solutions
bebetter@kinetik.uk.com
Tel: 08701 997132(office)
Tel: 0780 3009053(mobile)
www.kinetik.uk.com