<p>The authors did a reasonably good job of constructing this poll. However, here are some of the problems with this report.</p>
<ol>
<li> This is a measure of desirability. Desire is comprised mostly of emotion. This report fails to acknowledge the reasons behind each student’s desires. In other words, not enough data was collected in their questionnaire. The authors did ask a few pertinent questions and it is interesting to see the most reliable indicator for a student’s desires was his/her’s sibling’s choice of school. Here is their data:</li>
</ol>
<p>Indicator: Is Dad’s College 70.458
(29.450)
Indicator: Is Mom’s College 34.432
(24.797)
Indicator: Is a Sibling’s College 94.743
(25.290)
Indicator: College in Home State 25.646
(38.033)
Indicator: College in Home Region 15.191
(20.533)
Distance from Home (Hundreds of Miles) 4.276
(2.137) </p>
<p>Other important indicators that should have been reported are: number of friends already matriculated at college, amount of financial aide received from top rated college, perceived experience for students from the same demographic, and the number of years each student “desired” said college (some students become indoctrinated from an early age to prefer a particular college). </p>
<p>There are likely many more indicators that will heavily sway the results of students’ desires. I am sure that you can think of a few more. The point is that the questionnaire is based on emotional decisions but assumes that the students are making a logical choice. </p>
<ol>
<li> The sample of students is terribly flawed. The so-called ‘top students’ were identified by each high school. It boiled down to the top 10-20% percent of students in the senior class. However, only ten students were selected from each high school. The counselors were asked to randomly select the students. Therein lies an enormous bias. Why weren’t these students randomly selected by a third party? Or, better yet, a computer program? Or, even better, why weren’t all of the top students included?
The sample of students were selected in a very biased method. I am surprised that he authors chose this method.<br></li>
</ol>
<p>However, I will say that the authors’ intentions were honorable. I think that college rankings are based mostly on bunk. The authors are particularly focussed on the reported matriculation rates. They do a good job of criticizing this often used factor in college rankings. Of course, emotional desirability is probably not much better. </p>
<p>I would like to see a national effort to create a standardized testing system to evaluate what college students learn in four years. I think that it would be useful to see which colleges do the best job of educating their students. Simple math and language testing would not suffice. Testing would have to include critical thinking and cultural awareness as well.</p>
<p>Additionally, colleges can be ranked according to the career success that their students have post graduation. Factors such as political and family connections can be weeded out to make the rankings a little more useful. </p>
<p>In conclusion, this poll is interesting but void of useful information. The only true conclusion that can be made is that over 90% of students prefer to attend the college that their siblings attended.</p>