I think “impressionistic” data is OK if you take if for what it is. For example, if you surveyed diners, you might find that some rated Wendy’s as an “A” for food quality; if professional reviewers from Zagats visited a range of restaurants, they would probably rate Wendy’s (for example) as better than McDonalds, but not as good as a fine dining establishment. The important thing, though, is that at least those eating at Wendy’s in this made-up example were apparently satisfied with their food, i.e., it met or exceeded their expectations. That doesn’t mean that Wendy’s is better than a fine French restaurant, of course.
We played with the readability thing a bit - a bigger font was easier to read, but harder to follow across and up and down. Any comments on this will be appreciated.
I think that’s the Wendy’s phenomonen - you are asking a group of students attending a school to give their impression of various areas. These students selected that school and arrived on campus with a set of expectations, and the school may have met, or not met, those expectations in different categories. That’s not going to create ratings that are very useful for detailed comparisons between schools. I’d look for gross differences (or extremely good or bad ratings) as potentially indicative of something that requires further research - I’d ignore the fact that one school’s food is a B+ and another’s is B-. Just my opinion, of course.
If you click on the school link you’ll get a bit more background.>>
Roger, You might want to try clicking on the school link if you believe this to be true. I did, and what you get is a sales pitch to buy the College ******* guidebook not a “bit more background.”
I’m all for sharing information about colleges, but students and parents are confused enough. Please consider your responsibility to avoid adding to that confusion and at least clarify on all the pages you’ll be using these “rankings” where the information came from, how it was gathered, and the cautions you have mentioned above. You might not be able to control which guidebooks are in the College ******* series or their methodology, but you can control how the information is presented on your website to avoid spreading more confusion and MISinformation. As one of the largest college discussion forums on the web, I would hope you consider that a responsibilty, not a pain in the butt.
I agree with Carolyn. Users are going to think that either CC created the data (hence, “Why is my school missing?”), or that CC endorses College ******. At the very least call them “ratings”, not “rankings”. There are no comparisons between schools in this data.
You gotta love a ranking, rating, whatever you want to call it, listing that grades the Fashion Institute of Technology and omits the University of Michigan–Ann Arbor.
I totally agree with Carolyn. This is like spreading “urban myths” and calling it valid information. Not what CC is all about in my opinion. This seems like a very poor choice of so-called “information.”
shame on CC - CC should not be authorizing this. It really changes the mission of the site (which is already somewhat suspect since paid counselors moderate subforums…
This is one of the most ridiculous lists I’ve seen and, believe me, over the 15 years I sent four daughters to college, I’ve seen many of them. One of my daughters attended Colgate; another Carleton. For Colgate’s academics to be rated an “A” and Carleton’s a “B+” defies reality and tells me right away that this is not a reliable source. I say pull it. The students who visit this site deserve better than this.
This teaming up is a big disappointment. The information is not reliable, but arbitrary. It’s not as if a single person accumulated this data after multiple visits - but these grades are based on what a student has to say. College professors would cringe over this data and methodology.
I think you guys are reading too much into these ratings. These are subjective comments based on surveys (that probably aren’t statistically valid) of students. Tbey have some value, I’m sure, but I wouldn’t use them to make final school selections. Rather, they are very general indicators of students satisfaction and indicators of potential high and low points.
I’m with carolyn, too. I don’t see any fundamental problem with the list with a big IF: If the source were prominently identified. The way it looks now, it appears as if CC is lending its imprimatur to an enterprise that’s largely commerical and whose goals seem to me slightly at odds with CC’s.
Roger,
The problem is that “ratings” like these merely perpetuate often false stereotypes about schools. It does an injustice to schools that really deserve better.
Also, since there is no apparent validity to these rankings, why would they be worthwhile for kids to consider in their decisions?
I don’t know, I just think kids deserve better information.
