<p>
[quote]
Education deans from some of the top research universities in the United States have called on U.S. News & World Report to rethink its plans for evaluating teacher education programs. In a joint letter, the deans questioned not only the methodology to be used, but also the magazine's plan to say that institutions that don't participate have "failed" to meet certain standards. Such an approach is "inconsistent with professional journalistic practices," the deans wrote, adding that they "worry that this implied coercion will cast doubt on the results of the entire evaluation."
<p>
[quote]
The methodology developed by the council focuses on a range of measures, such as the selectivity of the admissions process, how well teachers are trained to teach certain subjects, and the quality of classroom management skills.
<p>I am of two minds on this issue. I can certainly understand the dean’s reluctance to be put under a microscope, or even a magnifying glass, but they should be embarrassed that the lack of ratings for teacher education programs has provided a profitable publishing opportunity for USNWR to exploit. If it weren’t profitable, USNWR wouldn’t bother.</p>
<p>There are certainly some teacher ed programs that need to be exposed for graduating teachers lacking basic math, English, and subject area skills. The institutions protesting the rankings aren’t in that group, but are likely concerned about the rankings at the top of the spectrum.</p>
<p>This new survey reminds me of how ridiculous their ranking of “the top high schools” in the US is compiled. To say that a school should be considered “better” than another school based only on the number of students who take AP courses is ludicrous. Yet look at how many people tout their HS based on that ranking.</p>
<p>Rankings serve a useful purpose: they sell magazines, prompt discussion, and create controversy. The debates about methodology and comparative rankings sell more magazines. In addition, those institutions lucky enough to be highly ranked provide free advertising. Other than Consumer Reports, just about every magazine is happy to have advertisers say, “Ranked #1 by ____.”</p>
<p>That’s the cynical view. Rankings can be somewhat useful IF the metrics used relate to your needs and if they are transparent enough to extract the data you want.</p>
<p>There are certainly some teacher ed programs that need to be exposed for admitting future teachers lacking basic math, English, and subject area skills. </p>
<p>Here’s my methodology: First, identify the top teachers based on an aggregate of student test scores. Second, ask the teachers, “Where’d you go?”</p>
<p>Of course, sub-par schools are unlikely to respond. I guess the idea is that schools that have nothing to hide will be likely to reply, although it does seem unfair to give, say, Columbia Teachers College an “F” if they don’t respond.</p>
<p>Roger, I am a big believer in transparency. If the USNWR thinks their system is great, they should not be afraid to seperate the NRs from the Fs.</p>
<p>USNews is not an accreditation organization.
They are not even an * educational* organization.
They are in business to make money- I admit I do not know how well they are accomplishing that goal- perhaps they are doing better than the Wall Street Journal, which lost $80 million ( which possibly explains why they are printing more educational stories with a controversial slant).</p>
<p>UsNews is not transparent with the criteria they use to rank schools, severely limiting it’s usefulness for students who have their own criteria to determine possible choices- but good for people who want someone else to decide for them.</p>
<p>My daughter who graduated from a college that had it’s own issues with USNews
[It wouldn’t cooperate- so they were punished, because if no schools cooperated- there wouldn’t be anything to sell](<a href=“Reed Magazine: November 1997 > News of the College”>http://web.reed.edu/reed_magazine/nov1997/news/3.html</a>) :rolleyes:
She is also currently enrolled in a two year M.A.T. program through a private university. Most of her coursework is off campus, or should I say " off the university campus", because she is considered staff at a K-8 school where she is working with a mentor teacher in a looped classroom. She has all the duties of being a full time teacher, including parent conferences & curriculum meetings, as well as her coursework.
Very intensive, & she is working very hard & learning a lot.</p>
<p>Quite a bit more work & time involved however, than the TFA programs that USNews seems to like.</p>
<p>Looks like the State of Ohio already beat USN&WR to the punch. It also sounds like the Ohio public and private colleges have bought into the assessment methodology. I could be wrong, of course, as this is the only article I have seen and I live no where near Ohio.</p>
<p>“This new survey reminds me of how ridiculous their ranking of “the top high schools” in the US is compiled. To say that a school should be considered “better” than another school based only on the number of students who take AP courses is ludicrous. Yet look at how many people tout their HS based on that ranking”</p>
<p>That is NOT actually how USNWR does their HS rankings. It sounds more like how a well known educational columnist does HIS rankings, though.</p>
<p>Now some folks involved in it are controversial - the Gates Foundation among the funders, Michelle Rhee and Ed Hirsch on the advisory board, for ex. Wendy Kopp from Teach for America and folks from Hoover and AEI.</p>
<p>But this looks to me like its about the school reform wars, not the “USNWR exploits the world by publishing rankings” wars.</p>
<p>How high is the need for teachers right now? How high will it be in four years? How easy will it be to get a job if you graduate from a high ranking public institution such as Michigan State?</p>