<p>All the known problems of the PA surveys can be traced to that purported “confidentiality” that allows the respondent to (by their own admission) help their friends and punish their foes. </p>
<p>In this case, the President of UF stayed VERY much in the real of the acceptability, safe and except pretending to know EVERY school in the survey, and the petty manipulation in his own state. </p>
<p>It is exactly that kind of behavior that would (and SHOULD) be eliminated by opening the results to the … public. Presidents and other officials would not be judged negatively for having different opinions, but would be forced to have a modicum of integrity in answering a survey that IS given an enormous weight in the annual rankings. </p>
<p>Why would (well) paid officials decide to jeopardize their good name and integrity? Because the US News rankings have consequences that were NEVER anticipated by USNews, such as having an impact on … bonds rating and donations from alumni! </p>
<p>However, the biggest reason is that the purported confidentiality also gives a green light to manipulations, and something that is not available in many OFFICIAL surveys. </p>
<p>Like it or not, the impact of manipulation and direct or inverse cronyism is EXACTLY what some of us have been lamenting about for … years. Now that the proverbial cat is out of the bag, you can expect a few things in the next future … more and more “unveiling” of questionable PA surveys, considerable changes in the results of the 2011 PA, and a continuous drop in the response percentage of this survey. And, fwiw, you can also expect Morse and his people to reinvent themselves and continue to see “replacements” for the lost “experts” they have been relying on for their own “playing field” … reengineering.</p>
<p>It’s not supposed to be, is it? Don’t Dartmouth and Brown have better graduate programs than Montana and Auburn too? Montana is not even known for any sports teams.</p>
<p>“To get a 4.5, you have to get many people to think your school isn’t a 5.0, or some that just hate you.”</p>
<p>You have to assume there is a lot of “thinking” going on. How could anyone “think” they are able to assess the present academic caliber of more than perhaps a half dozen schools? (I doubt most folks can do even that - they might be able to do so with a half dozen departments…)</p>
<p>“Peer assessment (weighting: 25 percent). The U.S. News ranking formula gives greatest weight to the opinions of those in a position to judge a school’s undergraduate academic excellence. The peer assessment survey allows the top academics we consult—presidents, provosts, and deans of admissions—to account for intangibles such as faculty dedication to teaching. Each individual is asked to rate peer schools’ academic programs on a scale from 1 (marginal) to 5 (distinguished). Those who don’t know enough about a school to evaluate it fairly are asked to mark “don’t know.” Synovate, an opinion-research firm based near Chicago, in spring 2008 collected the data; of the 4,272 people who were sent questionnaires, 46 percent responded.”</p>
<p>Research expenditures are in a WHOLE different category: Financial Resources.</p>
<p>Dstark, the CURRENT survey is not worth the price of the paper it is printed on. In its current form, the quicker it dies the better we will be. </p>
<p>Worth repeating, people often confuse what the PA survey opponents are saying. While not speaking for everyone in “that camp” please allow me to repeat that I WANT a PA survey. But I want one that is clearer in its metrics and expanded to included WELL-DEFINED categories. A survey that does not allow anyone to answer with any kind of whimsical positions. You cannot blame the officials to feel entitled to answer as loosely as they want when considering how nebulous the instructions are, … and probably by design. </p>
<p>In the meantime, when the rate of response to this boondoggle drops below 40%, I’ll applaud. When it gets too low for USNews to keep pretending it is valuable, I’ll send you a memorandum plaque! ;)</p>
<p>“You have to assume there is a lot of “thinking” going on. How could anyone “think” they are able to assess the present academic caliber of more than perhaps a half dozen schools? (I doubt most folks can do even that - they might be able to do so with a half dozen departments…)”</p>
<p>Conspiracies don’t change the basic picture of cancellation between competing manipulators making it hard to affect the overall PA ranking. It’s not the size of the conspiracy that counts, but the differences in size between rival conspiracies. </p>
<p>The question remains how the PA ranking could be “easily cooked” by a single school, whether or not it is willing to bear the risk of organizing conspiracies.</p>
<p>Sorry, Dstark, but people could not care less about YOUR opinion about BMW or Mercedes --alebit your opinion would be extremely valuable to yourself! Potential buyers do read the opinions of journalists who toil at a number of publications. Their reviews do not simply consists of “I give BMW a 5 and Mercedes a 3.”</p>
<p>The journalists compare MANY elements and shed light on the differences in performance, comfort, price, gas mileage … name it. There has to be “some” basis behind the opinion. </p>
<p>We are talking about an “educated” opinion. Pun intended!</p>
<p>Did you disagree with bclintonk’s very interesting analysis? Machen was pretty much in the mainstream with most of his responses. A few schools are inexplicable to me–Georgetown, Brown and Dartmouth, I think that he gave answers for some schools that I doubt he knew much about and I believe that his own schools are rated too highly (Utah and UF actually because I think that Michigan is a great school and deserves its ranking). However, on balance, not so bad and certainly not a contemptible attempt at ranking.</p>