Applicant Rights: Responsibilities of those involved with the Common Data Set and Rankings

Applying to College
21

@xiggi if you look at my original post I mention the redundancy of both the US News and the gov collecting the same data. That my belief is that the data should be the same since the definitions have already been set by the feds and adopted by the schools. There is no reason why there should be different data and there is no reason why the public cannot use the government data.

That data the you so desperately want to get your hands on is analyzed and disclosed by the same exact people who report to the govt. And as one of those “unproductive” administrators I can tell that you have no idea what gathering that data entails. Most schools do try to get that data out there through factbooks and the CDS but many IR offices are overwhelmed by never ending request for data from everyone from the feds to the states to the accrediting bodies to the college board to US news. It is a never ending wheel. All entities ask for data in different formats with different definitions. Most IR offices go through lengthy data checking process before release as well. What would help everyone is for all organizations to ask for the same data, defined the same way, at the same time. Now that would be very helpful.

22

2012 Jaschik article noted “. And reporters in New Jersey have recently uncovered several instances in which colleges found ways to not report data on some students, so that overall averages would make the colleges look more competitive.”

This is what I am talking about-that i’ve heard to be true of at least one SUNY. How is this possible if there is such government scrutiny?

And from 2012 The Record, “Ramapo omitted scores from 22 percent of its students when it submitted its data to U.S. News. That maneuver gave a 52-point bump. It left out applicants admitted under the Educational Opportunity Fund for disadvantaged students. New Jersey City University boosted its scores by 41 points and William Paterson by 45.”

So if a school leaves out EOP, Program Advantage scores and scores from Internationals students who submit them even if not required, something I’ve heard happens, how does the public know? And, in terms of who is an applicant, the same thing.

Remember this. How was this possible with government oversight?
Fellman (2011) “Specifically, the academy counts as “applicants” people who have not completed an application but have shown an interest through other means…”, An academy admissions official Dec. 5 used this standard to boast that the school had 18,651 applicants…For example, the Class of 2015, which began training during the summer, had 5,720 completed applications; the academy cited its applicant number as 19,145 — more than three times the number of completed applications."

And Jon Marcus said this “Texas Christian’s dean of admissions says it is the nation’s only university to voluntarily have its admissions data — the number of applicants and their SAT scores, class rank, grade-point averages, and other measures — audited for accuracy. It has done so for the last dozen years – and not just for show.”

So the idea that the data is audited somehow seems unlikely.

At one point Bob Morse indicated overtly that Binghamton wasn’t including score data from all students who submitted is as part of their application. does anyone know if that continues?

An audit of SUNY and particularly those schools that have been caught being deceptive in other ways, as has Binghamton, would be a great way to encourage transparency. Anyone know how to initiate one? What a service that would be to future applicants!

23

LKNomad, Just to be clear, cause I started this, I’ve not suggested the administrators are unproductive. I am questioning the honesty of some involved in admissions at some (but clearly nowhere near all) schools though and creative marketing and cooking the books and wondering how lists with such power can be using data that is filled with error-at least that is my contention.

24

At Binghamton, for example, the number of EOP students was about 5% of those enrolling for the first time. Not a lot! but the EOP scores range from 980-1050 and GPAs are 84-87-a far cry from published stats. If this small sample were not included in overall totals initially but added now, that might not alter the 25%-75% overall figures by much. But now add in Advantage program students, and other program students and scores from international students that have not been included. All of a sudden the picture is quite different. I’d guess that if I am correct about this data not being included in the published data, If added, Binghamton’s objective data would fall below that of places like Stony Brook and Geneseo. They could be doing the same thing but they have not been caught and show to be as corrupt as Binghamton so there isn’t a reason to expect the same level of deception.

25

@lostaccount anyone with talent can skew the data. There is only so much that the checks and balances can do. At that point it is more of the culture of the institution and their wish to be transparent. I worked at a school that strived for total transparency even when things did not look good. That was the culture of my school and the attitude of all around me from IR all the way to the the president. Some schools may put pressure on their staff to find a way, any way, to look good. At some point, with so many discrepancies, someone will hopefully notice. That is what auditing is for. The feds are not the only agencies to examine data.

I had a friend who somehow ended up working for a for profit college that recently was in the news. He was hired at almost the exact same time the gov. finally came down on them. I spoke to him one day and he said that in his opinion they should be shut down, the attitude of those involved led to their current disastrous problems and he was looking for any kind of job just to get out of there. He had come from my school which prided itself on honesty and student centeredness and found himself in a culture of deceit. It varies from school to school. His was worst case scenario. There are bad apples all over, not just at universities. It is unfortunate, but sometimes people cheat.

26

Did your friend work for a certain SUNY? At this one place the lack of transparency was dictated by the top. A win at any cost mentality ruled. The President responsible left in disgrace after a investigation of sports but like in any institution where deception ruled the day, the problems were far more pervasive than just sports. They were in admissions and university wide. It remains to be seen if cooking the books is still a past time with the new president but many of the old administrators remain. I hear there are no obvious changes yet.

27

@lostaccount Nope we are in CA and like I said a for profit. If you look at the news over the past several months you will be able to figure it out. A total disaster including falsifying data.

28

You mean for negative profit now, since it just filed for chapter 11 bankruptcy?

29

@ucbalumnus :smiley: I think you might have figured that one out.

30

Most of the for profit “colleges” are predatory, usually involving pretend colleges and pretend students. (maybe not all but at least many, probably most). Grants and other tax related funds with investments makes legitimate educational institutions possible. Otherwise the tuition would be unaffordable for everyone. So how in the world could you fund a legitimate for profit? So the fraud involved with those is an order above anything I meant to allude to here. Here I intended to discuss the need for transparency about admissions numbers for the established (not bogus) selective colleges and universities in the US. And even at its worst, it doesn’t come close to the overt fraud I’ve heard about regarding the not for profit so-called schools.

31

@lostaccount actually I used to work at a for profit and no we weren’t predatory or bogus!

32

Most but not all are predatory. Not all. most. Take a look at the federal investigations that are ongoing. There aren’t many non profits on the list. there are a lot of for profits tho. Many but not all.

33

Yeah, that’ll make colleges quake & comply, the same way everyone files their taxes on 15-apr and isn’t creative about charactering their income & expenses…