New method for comparing graduation rates

[collegehelp]

<p>Based on a recent article in the Chronicle of Higher Education...</p>

<p>Two economists at Wm and Mary will be publishing an article that they think improves on the "overperformance/underperformance" in US News.</p>

<p>Here is the link to a draft of the article:
<a href="http://www.wm.edu/economics/wp/cwm_wp24.pdf%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.wm.edu/economics/wp/cwm_wp24.pdf&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>It is pretty hard to understand, but basically they compare graduation rates after adjusting for four things:
(1) SAT 25th percentile
(2) percent of freshmen in top 10% of HS class
(3) percent of faculty who are full-time
(4) expenditures per student</p>

<p>They ranked 187 schools based on how well they exceed expectations in getting students to graduate. They produce a "technical efficiency" score for each school that tells the actual graduation rate divided by the expected graduation rate (determined by the four inputs above). For example, a technical efficiency score of .95 means that the actual graduation rate is 95% of the expected graduation rate.</p>

<p>This is, in effect, a ranking based on "value added". How well do schools do given the students they enroll?</p>

<p>But, some important schools are missing from their list...
They ignore the public/private distinction, which I hope is simply bad judgement. They say there is no theoretical reason to expect a graduation rate difference between publics and privates. Well, how about a 50% tuition break? That might encourage students to stay. Duh. They say privates have a higher grad rate anyway. Well, privates might look even better if you consider debt burden. So, their work is flawed. Note: they are at Wm and Mary, a public university. (But, maybe someone out there who understands this better than I do can enlighten me about the public/private oversight.)</p>

<p>The article states that US News and their method is biased against technical schools. Interesting discussion about that...</p>

<p>rank, school, "technical efficiency"</p>

<p>1 Auburn University, 1.
1 Bowling Green 1.
1 Brown University 1.
1 Florida State 1.
1 Fordham 1.
1 Harvard 1.
1 Howard 1.
1 Illinois State 1.
1 Indiana State 1.
1 Indiana University Bloomington 1.
1 Johns Hopkins 1.
1 Louisiana State Baton Rouge 1.
1 Louisiana Tech 1.
1 Mississippi State 1.
1 new school University 1.
1 Oklahoma State 1.
1 Pace University 1.
1 Pennsylvania State University 1.
1 St. John's University 1.
1 SUNY Albany 1.
1 Syracuse University 1.
1 Texas A&M University commerce 1.
1 University of Akron 1.
1 University of California Davis 1.
1 University of California Irvine 1.
1 University of Colorado Denver 1.
1 University of Georgia 1.
1 University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign 1.
1 University of Louisville 1.
1 University of Missouri, St. Louis 1.
1 University of New Hampshire 1.
1 University of Notre Dame 1.
1 University of Vermont 1.
1 University of Virginia 1.
1 University of Wisconsin Milwaukee 1.
36 Clemson University .999.
36 University of California Riverside .999.
36 University of Northern Colorado .999.
39 University of Wisconsin Madison .995.
39 Miami University Oxford .995.
41 tops University .994.
42 Georgetown University .992.
42 Ohio University .992.
44 Lehigh University .991.
45 College of William and Mary .989.
46 Yale University .987.
47 Northwestern University .985.
48 Pepperdine University .984.
49 University of Michigan in Ann Arbor .981.
50 seat in Hall University .980.
50 Virginia Tech .980.
52 Dartmouth University .979.
53 University of Missouri Kansas City .976.
53 University of Delaware .976.
55 Stanford University .975.
56 Michigan state University .973.
56 a Paul University .973.
58 Duquesne University .972.
59 Colorado State University .970.
60 Columbia University .969.
61 Wake Forest University .968.
62 University of California at Los Angeles .967.
63 University of Pennsylvania .964.
64 University of Connecticut .963.
65 Marquette University .961.
65 Duke University .961.
67 University of Houston .960.
68 University of North Carolina Chapel Hill .958.
68 University of California Santa Barbara .958.
70 Washington University in St. Louis .954.
71, University of Denver .952.
71 University of Chicago .952.
73 Massachusetts Institute of technology .948.
74 SUNY Binghamton .945.
75 University of California San Diego .944.
76 West Virginia University .942.
76, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute .942.
78 University of South Carolina Columbia .940.
78 University of Central Florida .940.
80 University of the Pacific .935.
80 Texas A&M University college station .935.
82 Rice University .934.
82 Brandeis University .934.
82 Vanderbilt University .934.
85 University of Southern California .933.
86 North Dakota State University .931.
87 University of Massachusetts Amherst .929.
86 University of San Francisco .925.
89 University of New Mexico .924.
90 Emory University .923.
91, University of South Dakota .917.
92 Purdue University West Leslie at .916.
93 University of California Berkeley .915.
94 University of Iowa .914.
94 University of Florida .914.
96 University of Washington .913.
97, George Washington University .909.
98, Worcester Polytechnic Institute .908.
98. California Institute of technology .908.
100 University of Oregon .905.
101 Western Michigan University .902.
101 Iowa State University .2902.
103, Northern Illinois University .899.
103 American University .899.
105 University of Texas Austin .898.
106 University of Alabama .896.
107 New York University .893.
108 Loyola University of Chicago .889.
108 Kent State University .889.
110 University Rochester .888.
111, St. Louis University .887.
112 University of San Diego .886.
113 Carnegie Mellon University .884.
114 Baylor University .882.
115 Clark University .888.
115 University of Montana .881.
117 University of Texas at Dallas .8820.
118, University of Maryland College Park .876.
119 University of Maine or no .876.
119 Tulane University .876.
121 Hofstra University .873.
122 University of Toledo .872.
123 University of Nebraska Lincoln .871
124 University of Southern Mississippi .870.
124 Case Western Reserve University .870.
126 University of Pittsburgh .865.
127 Boston University .865.
128 Clarkson University .864.
129 Catholic University of America .861.
133 Brigham Young University Provo 859.
131, University of North Carolina Greensboro .858.
132 Washington state University .856.
133 University of Maryland Baltimore County .855.
134 Oregon State University .854.
135 northeastern University .848.
136 University of Miami .846.
137 Stevens Institute of technology .844.
138 University of Rhode Island .842.
139 University of Missouri Columbia .841.
140 Ohio State University Columbus .837.
140 Illinois Institute of technology .837.
142 Texas Christian University .836.
143 Andrews University .828.
144 University of Tennessee Knoxville .825.
145 University of Idaho .819.
145 University of California Santa Cruz .819.
147 Wichita State University .818.
147 North Carolina State University Raleigh .818.
149 University of Wyoming .816.
150 Temple University .809.
150 Northern Arizona University .809.
152 University of Kansas .807.
153 University of Mississippi .804.
154 University of Kentucky .801.
155 University of Utah .799.
156 University of Oklahoma .794.
157 SUNY Buffalo .792.
158 University of Alabama Huntsville .791.
159 Old Dominion University .790.
160 Drexel University .789.
161, Montana State University .788.
162 Nova Southeastern University .779.
163 Texas Tech University .774.
164 Florida Institute of technology .765.
165 Michigan echnological University .762.
166 Ball State University .759.
166 SUNY Stony Brook .759.
168 Virginia Commonwealth University .758.
179 University of Arizona .755.
170, Middle Tennessee State University .744.
171, University of South Florida .736.
171 University of North Texas .736.
173 University of Hawaii at Manoa .726.
174 Arizona State University .719.
175 Southern Illinois University Carbondale .712.
176 University of North Dakota .706.
177 University of Missouri Rolla .702.
178 University of Arkansas Fayetteville .701.
179 University of Minnesota Twin Cities .700.
180 Indiana University of Pennsylvania .693.
181 Wright State University .681.
182 University of Tulsa .679.
183 Polytechnic University .676.
184 New Jersey Institute of technology .667.
185 University of Texas Arlington .660.
186 University of Illinois at Chicago .647.
187 University of Alabama Birmingham .564.</p>

[collegehelp]

<h1>41 should be Tufts, not tops</h1>

[hoedown]

<p>
[quote]
They ranked 187 schools based on how well they exceed expectations in getting students to graduate

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I don't think this is quite the right way to state it. The reason they're promoting this technique (which I happen to think is really interesting) is not whether or not colleges exceed expectations, but how they do compared the the institutions that are the exemplars. But I don't mean to nitpick--I was hoping someone was going to discuss this article and I'm glad you brought it up.</p>

<p>Like you, I thought it was very odd for them to say there was no "theoretical" reason to believe grad rates may be different between public and private. As we've discussed in another thread, there are all kinds of reasons why the population at publics and privates might be different, and in ways that may influence graduation rates. I'm not sure why that wasn't addressed in peer review. However, for all that I think it's very interesting and a thought-provoking article.</p>

<p>I think the concepts of slack & efficiciency are good additions, too. Sometimes people tend to glorify the colleges with lots of resources and huge expenditures, but this model suggests that this may represent inefficiency as it relates to an institution's ability to get people successfully graduated. That is, you may be "overspending" if someone else is spending less and still getting the same results as you. That's an interesting thing to inject into the discussion.</p>