<p>Should a school like Emory, which cheats on its statistics be given an automatic suspension for any rankings? If universities level sanctions for athletics recruiting violations why not for cheating . Automatic 20 drop on US News? It seems a slap on the wrist will not encourage others to quit what is increasingly happening to schools under intense pressure to move up.</p>
<p>That was not a good title choice for this thread…</p>
<p>To answer your question, I don’t think so. They were the ones who found out, they were the ones who announced it, and they are the ones who are correcting it.</p>
<p>Who would enforce this “death penalty?” There is no regulatory body that oversees the rankings business.</p>
<p>The death penalty will occur when readers finally accept the fact that like any subjective assessment, rankings are rife with biases and manipulation. Don’t blame the rankings because you’re a sucker.</p>
<p>I wouldn’t care either way. The rankings are a pretty big joke when you consider the methodology encourages a lot of them to send out apps to people they know have no chance of getting in, just to lower admit rate. Way too much emphasis on entering freshman stats, rather than actual quality of the education and output data, like employment and grad school admits.</p>
<p>Who cares?</p>
<p>To the who cares question I would have to say the great majority of people in the world. If you don’t believe me let me try a thought experiment.</p>
<p>In last month’s Harvard Business Review there is a short piece on the best programs in the country for entrepreneurship. The one singled out for praise is University of Miami.(Not available on-line, only on paper)</p>
<p>So now we have the word of an expert of Harvard. Now a student applies to Dartmouth and U Miami and gets into both. He or she is interested in entrepreneurship. If you were this he or she would you really go to Miami? Harvard says it is the best, not some magazine. I have asked this question to over 100 students in the last month. Not a one has said Miami.
Who cares? Just about everybody. We do not approach this process rationally. Or just about anything else either for that matter.</p>
<p>
What do you mean, “Harvard says it is the best” ? What was the basis for this ranking?</p>
<p>ZombeDante,</p>
<p>The title refers to what the NCAA should have done to Penn State. It is what they did to Texas A&m a while back for recruiting violations Apparently child rape does not quite rise to that level.
As for your comments, I have worked in PR for a university. No University ‘voluntarily’ gives out this information. Someone gave them a heads up and they went out first before it hit the press. This is the way the world works.</p>
<p>Secondly, because they admitted they cheated for many years we should say all is forgiven? Is that the way our legal system works? Even at my old school, which has an honor system, conscientious retraction does not mean the student still receives the grade they originally received. They get an F. </p>
<p>I am not sure I follow your logic on this.
If I stole money from someone and years later said I did it does this mean I don’t have to worry about paying the person back? Nice deal if you are a criminal. Sorry, but I am irked that schools get away with things like this. It will encourage more schools to follow the lead in fudging numbers as long as people say no harm no foul. (switching sports metaphors).</p>
<p>I have been told, I think, that I cannot reprint things on this site. It is a column by an ‘expert’ at Harvard. you would have to contact him.</p>
<p>The death penalty was given to SMU, not Texas A&M.</p>
<p>1st it was SMU
2nd giving penn state the death penalty was not appropriate action</p>
<p>the death penalty for Penn State is a debatable issue I think. What is your defense?</p>
<p>i apologize for mixing up schools.</p>
<p>As an aside, I competed as captain of division I athletic team and learned a great deal of what I now know about life from the experience.We were ranked as one of top 20 teams in the US so I know about competitive athletics. Please do not assume that I am against athletics. The opportunities granted to me changed my life.</p>
<p>When I get home tonight I will get the name of the writer and the column from Harvard Business Review and post it here.</p>
<p>Wikipedia info on author of the Harvard article… He is a nationally known author and one of he visionaries in the field of entrepreneurship.</p>
<p>Carl J. Schramm is an American economist, entrepreneur, and former President and CEO of the Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation, a private philanthropic foundation. The Economist has named Schramm the “evangelist of entrepreneurship”.</p>
<p>^ You miss my point…the only thing that matters when looking at a ranking is the methodology used to construct it…</p>
<p>Thank you for your reply Noimagination.</p>
<p>I think we agree in theory but unfortunately theory at times does not follow practice. That is what I think the case is here. You may well disagree and I hope you will set me straight. </p>
<p>If you read (or have read) Malcolm Gladwell’s article on the US News methodology in February’s New Yorker, then you may agree with him that the factors that go into the rankings are not very useful at all when assessing a University. Lloyd Thacker and others have been saying this for years, but Gladwell is a media darling. So, according to your post, if the methodology is flawed, since it is all that matters, then all of us should simply dismiss it and move on. Would you agree this would be the rational thing to do?</p>
<p>But as I have said, humans are anything but rational when making choices, from houses to spouses to colleges. We go with our gut (actually our neural networks and genetic predispositions) and our gut tells us what to think. We may think it rational but it isn’t. I could cite a whole stream of books on this but if you will grant this premise then let me move on. If not, I will cite sources and methodology.</p>
<p>But my survey demonstrates that despite a rather summary execution of the US News methodology, schools like Emory feel compelled to cheat to move up in the rankings. If what you say is correct, what on earth would they do this for? It is not in their best interest.</p>
<p>But the reality is, it is, and does. The US News is the gold standard around the world. I have traveled to many places around the globe over the past 3 decades and parents and students alike think this ranking matters most. It does no good to say it does not have a scientific basis. It is a brand. It sells. It is what looks good on the back of a car when you drive around town. As a brand, or let’s say a commodity, it has a huge cachet. It opens doors to graduate school and jobs. Not because it is accurate but because, like a Channel bag, it reeks of class. </p>
<p>There is a wonderful book called Status Anxiety that details our obsession with designer goods. Again is it rational to pay several thousand dollars for a bag manufactured at the same sweatshop as another bag that costs half or a tenth as much? Not if one thinks it matters based on the methodology. Same factory, same materials, same cost to make. It is the label you are paying for. And if it is the label that matters then it is not the methodology.</p>
<p>Am I completely missing your point?</p>
<p>I should, in the interest of full disclosure, say that the late Al Sanoff, a great man, who helped design the US News first college issues was a friend of mine. We traveled together for a week once and he helped publish an article he wanted me to write. I have nothing against US News for doing what any business is in business for: to sell stuff.</p>
<p>Giving them the death penalty for an administrative issue would have been a horrible idea especially when you look at the fact that the football team probably pays for every other athletic team</p>
<p>They should have instead made penn state donate 15-30% of their ticket earnings to a fund for the victims (they ended up doing neither)</p>
<p>Not to mention the fact that the death penalty would not have affected anyone that was involved in the scandal (all dead or no longer with the university) and instead would have hurt those who had nothing to do with it (O’brien and his staff + all the players)</p>
<p>Defending a ranking system you know is stupid simply because it’s popular is rather pusillanimous.</p>
<p>Hi
Bob, Can you explain what you mean? Who is defending the ranking system? Defining is, to me at least, different than defending. If it is directed my way I guess I would have to question your use of the word “pusillanimous”. According to the dictionary this is what you are saying: “lacking courage and resolution : marked by contemptible timidity”. Just who is demonstrating these traits?</p>