death penalty

College Search & Selection
41

<p>Hi No imagination.
Thank you for your response.</p>

<p>I wanted to address one of your points.</p>

<p>“But those families are not getting any useful information from the rankings anyway. It’s all a farce even if the numbers are accurate.”</p>

<p>Here is where we disagree. Let me start by defining what a farce is (wikipedia):
" In theatre, a farce is a comedy which aims at entertaining the audience by means of unlikely, extravagant, and improbable situations, disguise and mistaken identity, verbal humor of varying degrees of sophistication, which may include word play, and a fast-paced plot whose speed usually increases, culminating in an ending which often involves an elaborate chase scene. Farces are often highly incomprehensible plot-wise (due to the large number of plot twists and random events that often occur), but viewers are encouraged not to try to follow the plot in order to avoid becoming confused and overwhelmed."</p>

<p>I believe that this definition of ranking is not as useful to thinking about the importance of rankings to our country as another term. Let me see if I can persuade you. I hope you might agree with this premise, but if not, then please tell me in which way you do not and we can see if we can arrive at common ground on our definitions.</p>

<p>Rather than farce I would introduce another term from theatre: tragedy.
“the term tragedy often refers to a specific tradition of drama that has played a unique and important role historically in the self-definition of Western civilization.[3] That tradition has been multiple and discontinuous, yet the term has often been used to invoke a powerful effect of cultural identity and historical continuity—“the Greeks and the Elizabethans, in one cultural form; Hellenes and Christians, in a common activity,” as Raymond Williams puts it.[4]”</p>

<p>While this is pedantic, perhaps, it underscores the role of cultural identity as key. The role of rankings in our current consciousness is significant and given what is happening as a result of them, I would say tragic in their consequences.</p>

<p>Increasingly, parents and students are willing to take on huge amounts of debt because they mistakenly believe that a school near the top of the rankings will determine future success. A great deal of data exists that demonstrates that the level of student debt is the biggest financial crisis since the great depression. It makes the banking crisis look like small potatoes. If this data is correct, and if the debt overwhelms this country, I would then propose that the ensuing meltdown of education and the economy would fall very neatly into the definition of tragedy.</p>

<p>If my reasoning is wrong please let me know. I will try to find data to support anything I have said here.</p>

<p>Thank you.</p>

42

<p>Hi mathmomvt,</p>

<p>I thought you might be interested in something posted by Princeton Review (I have seen others post links on CC to this site so I think this ok),</p>

<p>[Want</a> to Get into Emory? It Might Not Be as Tough as You Think - In - Your Guide to College Admissions from The Princeton Review](<a href=“http://in.princetonreview.com/in/2012/08/want-to-get-into-emory-it-might-not-be-as-tough-as-you-think.html]Want”>http://in.princetonreview.com/in/2012/08/want-to-get-into-emory-it-might-not-be-as-tough-as-you-think.html)</p>

<p>The main point of the post is to say it might not be as hard to get into Emory this year. But here is where I am stumped. Drawing attention to the possibility of it being easier to get in Emory may in fact encourage more applicants. Why? Strategy. If the point for so many is to get into a highly ranked school, then many counselors, private or not, will encourage this school. I know this as I just talked about this yesterday with a student whose first choice is Emory.</p>

<p>A few years back a disturbed individual took the lives of many people on a college campus. One would suppose that this would have led to a dramatic drop in applications. It did not. Applications skyrocketed. Whether this is proof that there is no such thing as bad publicity I do not have the knowledge to say, but the data is there to support the double digit increase.</p>

43

<p>Whether the publicity will help them in the end or not, I have no idea. But nothing USNews could do with its rankings would mitigate that in any way, as far as I can tell.</p>

44

<p>Actually, much debt is incurred by families sending their kid to Brand X colleges, in the mistaken belief just making it through is good enough, that the diploma is a magic talisman.</p>

<p>The fact that you, as you said, have traveled to many places around the globe over the past 3 decades and met many parents and students who think this ranking matters most, does not make US News the “gold standard” around the world. </p>

<p>US NEws is a profit venture and, like many sources, including NYT and WSJ, seeks attention and revenue from an audience that does not approach information with critical thinking.</p>

<p>I wouldn’t send my kid to UMiami over Dartmouth for plenty of reasons that have to do with specifics of education there, no matter which intellect told me that, for now, he thought it was “the best” for entrepreneurship. There are many factors that go into a right match.</p>

45

<p>As for NoImagination’s use of the word farce, I assumed he/she meant: a ludicrous, empty show; a mockery.
As in believing Williams is really superior to Amherst. Empty.</p>

46

<p>Hi looking forward,</p>

<p>Your redefinition of farce still seems to me not all that useful in what happens in the world of admission and enrollment management. Statistics demonstrate beyond any reasonable doubt that rankings are not ‘empty’. Quite the opposite. </p>

<p>The single most important factor students list on country wide surveys of hundreds of thousands of people demonstrate that the reputation of a school is at the top of the list of why students enroll. I have said this before, but I guess it bears repeating, since I must not be clear (that is a problem I must have given how some of the responses on many of my posts seem to stray far from my original questions), the ratings are ‘empty’ if by this you mean they do not contain statistically valid information; on the other hand, as the scandal at Emory demonstrates (and at a law school recently), schools are willing to lie, fudge, and hire lots of media people at millions of dollars to improve on the rankings. Given the potential for scandal and the current funding crises at most schools, it must seem important to them. Either that or they are simply wasteful and stupid, and for this they should be fired. I actually think they are being cagey and smart, but you may disagree.</p>

<p>They know that despite the reality of rankings being ‘empty’ in terms of content, it still matters in terms of what I will call here form. By form, in this instance I am talking about the label attached. My analogy in another post on this thread was a purse. The materials are the same, the sweatshop is the same, the workers and production values are the same, but the LV on it signifies it is ‘better’. And people buy it, literally and figuratively. </p>

<p>Am I missing your point?</p>

47

<p>Hi looking forward,</p>

<p>I think your post #44 actually supports what I have already said.
You say:
US NEws is a profit venture and, like many sources, including NYT and WSJ, seeks attention and revenue from an audience that does not approach information with critical thinking.</p>

<p>In a previous post I say:
"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. "
What I say here and earlier in that same post seems to be what you echo here. Am I incorrect?</p>

<p>In your post you say:
I wouldn’t send my kid to UMiami over Dartmouth for plenty of reasons that have to do with specifics of education there, no matter which intellect told me that, for now, he thought it was “the best” for entrepreneurship. There are many factors that go into a right match. </p>

<p>In a previous post on this thread I say:
“I always tell students never go to the best school you get into. Go to the best match.”</p>

<p>Isn’t the ‘right’ match a match for what we are saying here? If not, how are we at odds? It appears to me we are on the same team (sports metaphor is purposeful) on both of these points.</p>

<p>Please let me know how we differ on this. Thank you so much.</p>

<p>I have been very impressed with how many people at the senior level pay very close attention to my posts. I have had lots of feedback and have learned much about edits, blogs, and what is and is not appropriate on CC. You volunteers spend a great deal of time and effort on this site and the fact that so many of you are looking over my shoulder to make sure I learn the ropes is a great tribute to you all.</p>

48

<p>My inclusion of an alternate def of farce was to support another poster- not at all in consideration of an additional category for discussion.</p>

<p>Re: “reputation” ranking high as a reason to matriculate: do the surveys ask, “reputation as calculated by USNWR?” Was it your experience that UVA looked to their rank in US News and Forbes to assess/define their relative reputation? Or, were other considerations, other institutionally significant rankings or feedback more critical to the direction of the U? </p>

<p>I do not care (allow me to use that word) how “statistically valid” a media ranking can purport to be for colleges. What they determine to be valid and how they weight those elements- is their construct. How prettily USNews or others explain/defend their methodology…is marketing. </p>

<p>That is where I will end this, for tonight.</p>

<p>ps. I am not sure what ropes you are learning. It would be productive for many to pick your mind- in terms of your experience.</p>

49

<p>

</p>

<p>Kinda off topic, but thanks for saying this so elegantly. This is exactly why I, probably un-popularly, think that US News is actually a helpful tool (obviously, not the only tool).</p>

<p>Personally, I don’t think there should be any ranking penalty for schools who falsify information. I think US News’ current system - in which they qualify the school’s rank with an asterisk - is fine. If they started penalizing schools’ position, that would mess with the integrity of the ranking (yes, I realize how that sounds…); USNWR purports to be as objective as possible when it comes to something as inherently subjective as ranking universities, and it would betray that if they “punished” Emory by artificially lowering the school’s position.</p>

50

<p>Hi lookingforward,
Thank you again for taking such time with this thread. I certainly did not mean to get off topic with the introduction of genres here so I will instead focus on your other remarks.</p>

<p>As I am no longer associated with any university, I think it is not my place to comment about methodology. I know some members of admission offices contribute to this site. I would encourage you to direct the question to them.</p>

<p>I will, however, answer in a way that I think is appropriate. I agree with you 100% about your marketing comment. I tried to say this when I invoked Gladwell’s New Yorker piece: a quick and deadly dismissal of the methodology of US News earlier in this thread.</p>

<p>But it really is not what US News does that matters. They are simply doing what any market driven business does: give the people what they will buy. And they have been great at doing this. It is the only thing that has kept them from being a web only operation in recent years.</p>

<p>And whether the schools think US News is accurate does not matter either. They know, beyond any reasonable doubt, a phrase I used before, that even very bright people who should know better, put virtually all their stock into this rating.</p>

<p>I use the word stock here on purpose. I would ask that you google a Wall Street Journal opinion piece by Paul Tutor Jones on the mess that affected his university this summer. In it, he cites the sinking ranking in the US News as the one significant factor that would justify some pretty rash actions on the part of some people. I give his name as he is famous. Not all that long ago he was identified as not only having the biggest house in Greenwich, CT, but as also earning more on Wall Street than any other trader in a particular year. And yet this man, clearly gifted when it comes to stocks and therefore very much aware of how much data is needed to make decisons, cites only this single statistic to justify his point. If the guy in the whole US who whose job it is to look far and wide for useful data in his field simply pushes forward one ranking to prove his point, then I am afraid there are quite a large number of people who do much of the same. In fact, I am sure of it. I have seen it again and again.</p>

<p>I would comment much more on this but I am helping my daughter move into college. I am so proud of her and so happy too. What a great kid!</p>

<p>In addition, last night I posted in another place some advice to all parents and students about what they need to do as they start at university that is based on a number of speeches I have made. It is getting lots of feedback so if I am going to be on-line today it will have to be with that. You can google me to find it I think. </p>

<p>I will try to get back to this thread tomorrow.</p>

<p>Thank you so much again for all your help. As I said before, I am simply amazed at how my paltry few posts have been given so much attention by senior members on this site. I hope you and others will pick my brain with things I know something about. It would be a challenge and an honor.</p>

51

<p>Why, parkemuth, do you care so much about this? Why do you want a University that educates thousands of people to suffer such a severe consequence to the point where it’s possible that they cannot attract the same quality of people they once used to educate?</p>

<p>Quite frankly, if you didn’t attend Emory or have kids or other loved ones that goes to the school, it’s none of your business.</p>

52

<p>“Why, parkemuth, do you care so much about this? Why do you want a University that educates thousands of people to suffer such a severe consequence to the point where it’s possible that they cannot attract the same quality of people they once used to educate?”</p>

<p>Perhaps it has something to do with ethics? It seems that more than a few privates schools are playing games with the so called “objective” numbers so they can climb the ladder at USNWR rankings.</p>

53

<p>Again, who cares?</p>

54

<p>

</p>

<p>I AM SHOCKED!!!</p>

<p>Next you’ll be telling me politicians lie and that men puff up their accomplishments around beautiful women.</p>

55

<p>I agree with Fickle. There should be no equivalent to the “death penalty” in rankings, because it doesn’t serve a purpose, and would end up being misleading.</p>

<p>The death penalty as used in NCAA sports is meant not just as a punishment, but an admonishment that “you are not welcome on the playground anymore.” The equivalent in the academic world would be to strip a school of accreditation (which incidentally, Penn State could still face, over the Sandusky situation).</p>

<p>Those who rank schools have a few choices: They can allow the school to continue to be rank as usual, but now based on accurate figures. Assuming these figures made any difference, it will result in a drop in ranking. People may or may not notice and react to that drop. and set a trend with the school. Secondly, they use an asterisk to inform readers that there were issues witht he previous rankings, and draw attention to the problems. Third they could change the way they rank schools, to unclude some mearsure of integrity, which may or may not result in a change to the rankings.</p>

<p>Did the cheating actually impact the teaching at the school? I doubt it. The rankings are purported to be about the relative quality of education offered at these schools. If the quality of education is impacted by the ranking, then consider a penalty. But what is the purpose of the penalty? The bans faced by PSU football are meant to “level the playing field,” but is that what we want here? Is it even necessary? They didn’t fudge their acceptance rate, they fudged data about tin enrolled class. If anything, it made it look like the average student was stronger, and may have ended up discouraging potentail applications, who though they “weren’t good enough.”</p>

56

<p>Hi barrk123,</p>

<p>I have tried, when you have asked this question several times on this thread, to give you some reasons about why people might care. Clearly I have not been persuasive. I apologize for wasting your time. </p>

<p>Instead, I will simply point out there are two other threads on the Emory cheating scandal. The number of people who have viewed them amounts to over 13,000. Add that to the over 1300 on this thread and we are getting close to 15,000 total.</p>

<p>These people care enough to come on this site, find the thread, and read the comments. Would you agree this amounts to a significant number who care?</p>

<p>Thank you for asking.</p>

57

<p>Every time someone clicks it, it gets a view</p>

<p>Those views could be one person clicking 15,000 times or 15,000 people clicking 1 time</p>

58

<p>Thank you barrk123,
You are correct. The philosophers out there and the data guys will tell you there is a very slight chance the scenarios you paint could happen. In fact, it is just this sort of reasoning which they use to ‘prove’ there is no such thing as truth. I actually agree with them. I am a Rortian pragmatist. I think the search for truth is not useful. The best thing to do, Rorty said, again and again, is to engage in rational conversation and try to persuade the other person or group of the usefulness of one’s point of view.
My question then: is there any data (ip addresses for example) or other analytics,or a room full of people at Nacac perhaps, or some other way that I might persuade you? </p>

<p>If so please give me details and I will attempt to do so. If not, then there is no further usefulness in pursuing this from where I sit in rainy Virginia. </p>

<p>I am not giving up. I am willing to keep trying but you need to give me a framework which I can work with.</p>

<p>Thank you for your continuing interest in this issue. I am glad you care so deeply about it. I do too.</p>

59

<p>

</p>

<p>CC’s “what are my chances” threads generally might provide reassurance, but for the top schools no one on here (or perhaps not most) is an expert wrt admissions. We can provide a good guess (perhaps an educated one?) but certainly not determine whether someone will be admitted or not. Similar things can be said of private counselors.</p>

<p>Schools like Princeton are largely exceptions in that their admissions are hard to determine, and they get many qualified applicants every year. My point still applies that the people who apply to schools like Princeton are a small minority. Chances are there’s a large overlap between the people who apply to the ivies + Stanford, Duke, MIT, Chicago, etc. The same might be said about people applying to the top LACs. (i.e. SWAMP) These students are a small minority of the 2000 institutions i listed in my OP in this thread. The private counselors probably get their clients from this base as well.</p>

60

<p>beyphy,</p>

<p>Thank you for your great reply. I think, again, the tail wagging the dog is the issue. The most selective schools get the most attention.
Whether I am right about this or not I cannot be sure. </p>

<p>I would propose that someone who knows enough about analytics to volunteer and do a survey of CC. I will see if I can find someone if I can get the go ahead from the powers that be. I have lots of computer science guys who would do this.</p>

<p>Just how many threads and comments concern the 5% of schools that are impossible to predict wrt admission would be the question? Or is there another you think would be more useful?</p>

<p>This would help quantify what is going on here, and I think serve to be a microcosm of what goes on in the world today of admission.</p>

<p>Perhaps, if it is clear that way too much attention is given to this tiny group, there might be a push to encourage visitors and responders to avoid, whenever possible, entering the fray. If it is virtually impossible for anyone on here to predict with certainty who will get into Princeton (or any very selective school) why not make this a part of the ethos on CC? Forget chancing and advice for the top 5%. The site would be serving the vast majority more usefully instead of responding to things that are too unpredictable to be meaningful? Utilitarian argument philosophically.</p>

<p>Just a thought. Not much thought behind it so please don’t pound its flaws too strongly.</p>

<p>I thank you for your willingness to share your insight. Again, I am struck at how much time and effort people put in to helping people here.</p>