<p>Does anyone besides me suspect that the numbers to USNEWS were cooked? Maybe collegeboard? </p>
<p>How far can schools go? NYU is admitting more and more kids into its alternative program -- are they including those kids in their reported numbers?</p>
<p>To answer your question: probably. </p>
<p>Having been an insider for too long at two different top business schools playing the Business Week ranking game…it’s long been very obvious to me that these rankings absolutely have to be taken with a grain of salt (or a truckload). Cooking books or falsifying data, who knows? Cynical me says of course but I have no proof of that. But I can tell you there is simply a TON of room for interpretation and “creativity” by which to report your numbers without ever feeling like you are being dishonest. And administration spends a huge amount of time with this issue.</p>
<p>Of course if you step back and think about it, it’s kind of absurd that we assume and trust colleges to just be objective and honest with the data they report. I mean they are universities after all! But while they might be called “non-profit”, the incentive is HUGE for them to move in the rankings. And there is an even stronger incentive for head administrators to move up in the rankings, since they will be personally judged on how well they perform in ranking games and it will have a direct impact on their career.</p>
<p>It’s not like they are breaking a law, or being audited or there is some third party overseeing the process (and we know how well THAT works in other industries, lol).</p>
<p>The temptatition to fudge with the numbers must be great when officials realize that agencies and private companies such as USNews pretty much accept numbers without much double checking.</p>
<p>Schools have reported percentile of SAT scores that are not expressed in a possible format. (it has to be a multiple of 10) and been allowd to report ESTIMATES of top ten percent ranks. Other schools have been allowed to obfuscate entire sets of admitted students. For instance, Middlebury must be the poster chlld of the number fudge as they have creatively reported their SAT scores until finding the maximizing formula and are continuing to report their entire application numbers but only reporting their Fall admits to underreport their true admission rate. USNews also accepts Berkeley’s partial numbers and estimate ranks without hesitation. </p>
<p>And then you have Columbia’s reporting numbers that defy all logic considering the selective nature of its applicant class from schools that do not report class ranks.</p>
<p>It is doubtful that schools will change such practices soon! It works too well for some! Lee Stetson used to joke about how his numbers would resist an audit. There are no reasons to believe it is better in 2011.</p>
<p>^ Xiggi, how you do get such details!?</p>
<p>I have always wondered about this. What is the method of verification of reported scores, ranks, etc.? Is it all on the honor system?</p>
<p>And speaking of Stetson, will we ever find out what happened that led to his resignation? Talk about well-kept secrets. I used to dismiss conspiracy theories, because I never believed a group of people could keep a big secret over time. Penn might be having me reconsider “Oswald did not act alone”, the Trilateralists, et al ;)</p>
<p>xiggi, one HS near me has the ultimate in creative % of class. They do not report rank., unless kid is in top 20 of class. They do indicate % of class, BUT they run the numbers about 10 ways, weigthed, unweighted. Weighted with one point for honors, two for AP v weighted with one point for H and AP. Weighted with/without art and music. Then they put the highest % on the kids applications. Apparantly over 20% of the class was in top 10% and over 65% was in top 25%.</p>
<p>If I remember correctly, the book “Crazy U” that recently came out covers this subject of schools being “creative” with their admission statistics. The author researched the subject and found that some (a lot of?) schools fudge the admissions numbers - arbitrarily decide to exclude athletes SAT scores, etc.</p>
<p>Someone would have to take a look at the book to find out what his research showed. I do not recall the details, but I do recall that I found it very interesting.</p>
<p>Similarly, I noticed a couple of years ago that our HS only lists the schools attended by the LAST graduating class in its profile, despite the fact that listing schools for the 2-4 years would make them look much better. The HS in the town next door does the latter: it enables them to say that their graduates are attending more Ivies and the like. Schools can also play this game by listing schools to which kids were accepted, rather than just schools they are attending. One kid who is accepted to 6 top schools can make them look just great, although s/he can obviously attend just one. :)</p>
<p>Colleges that are SAT-optional routinely report the SATs of those who submit them, obviously skewing the figures upwards. Same thing with class rank.</p>
<p>^Our high school has a listing of colleges the last class was accepted to, not where they are attending. </p>
<p>As to the Iona College question, I actually think this is good news. They have a new president and I am really impressed with the new administration. Last all two employees were fired for embezzlement. They’ve cancelled plans for a high rise dorm that had the neighborhood up in arms. I’m actually hopeful this will be good for the college in the long run.</p>