<p>Why</a> U.S. News' college rankings hurt students - CBS News</p>
<p>Amen, amen, amen.</p>
<p>There are rankings out there done by other groups that I think have some value. Such as the ones that show how many kids actually graduate within 6 years.</p>
<p>“U.S.News runs a beauty pageant.”</p>
<p>So true.</p>
<p>I am troubled how many people are obsessed with rankings. so many students go to a school based on a name and miss out on what may have been a much better happier experience if they just were willing to take off the blinders when they were looking at schools.
that said me thinks CBS news is jealous of USNEWS.</p>
<p>I think the mistake is thinking that a better ranked college is “better” for all applying students. Any ranking service is only one data point. Our nation is in a phase that is obsessed with “ranking” things often to the exclusion of the underlying information and data.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I agree. My son chose Brown over several schools that US News rates higher, but the flexibility of Brown’s open curriculum was a big draw for him. For others who do not yet have a clear idea of what they want to major in, a school with a core curriculum might well be a better choice.</p>
<p>OK, picking Brown over higher ranked schools is just a really extreme use of USNews. Anybody that makes decisions based on a choice among Top 15 schools based just on USNews ranking is being ridiculous. But it is good and useful for putting schools in general groupings of overall quality. Especially for those without a clue about colleges like many non-college educated parents trying to understand things. Most of these authors are way over-estimating the real impact of USNews on how the colleges operate. Overall colleges do what they do for many reasons of which I doubt USNews impact is even in the top 10.</p>
<p>Good article, it makes some excellent points, such as the rankings don’t include employment results after graduation nor do they measure student learning once enrolled as opposed to mere selectivity in acceptance. </p>
<p>I think the current rankings penalize colleges that try to give a chance to more low-income and minority students, and students who may be the first in their families to attend college. Those students may be more likely not to return after freshman year or graduate within 5 years for factors that the university can’t entirely control and the university is then penalized in the rankings.</p>
<p>We should be measuring, if possible, how much the students are learning in college - are they really graduating with much better critical thinking skills and practical skills than they entered with, or are schools turning out competent graduates merely because they had the wherewithal to select the best students to begin with?</p>
<p>How many high school students even know the USNews rankings even exist? I’d guess less than 15%, on top of that the majority of High School students just go to local public schools/community colleges (or no college at all) so I don’t think there is really a huge number of people making decisions based on USNews rankings.</p>
<p>From the article:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>This! There are other rankings which take into consideration what a particular university does with this raw material and measures the end output. There are opposing strong view points when it comes to how to measure outcomes…if salary/employment is measured some (esp. on CC) will consider this crass because the supposed goal is not employment but rather growth and pursuit of knowledge/passion for its’ own sake. Yet, this article also states that students themselves wish to have some financial gain/stability at the end of their college years.</p>
<p>Part of human nature is to know where one fits in a certain hierarchy or pecking order. All rankings feed this fire.</p>
<p>"Institutions have been focused on devoting more of their revenue to attract students with higher test scores, class rankings and grade point averages. That’s to impress the rankings king.</p>
<p>Consequently, public and private colleges and universities have been pouring a growing amount of money into merit scholarships for affluent students at the expense of students who desperately need financial help. "</p>
<p>I don’t think I can agree with this statement. Any money paid out based on a students merit is a good thing. Rich or poor. I’m not rich and I am very happy with the playing field. I’ll gladly take merit money based on test scores and GPA. Use my scores how you want, just give me the education.</p>
<p>"Consequently, public and private colleges and universities have been pouring a growing amount of money into merit scholarships for affluent students at the expense of students who desperately need financial help. "</p>
<p>easy choice great student on merit or a poor student on need? merit wins. now if the student needs and deserves merit then double awesome. but, need is secondary to merit.</p>
<p>I have no problem with the ranking as a guide. It’s people who don’t know how to match their ability with a school that causes disappointment and difficulty.</p>
<p>They blame a ranking system for way too many things when the problem is people and their obsessions.</p>
<p>It’s hard not to believe that selectivity is not a good barometer of the outcome. To go back to the hospital analogy that was used. If ranking two hospitals, one gets many very sick patients - some die, some stay very sick and some go home better, we are not surprised if more of their patients die and stay very sick than a hospital that starts with patients that are not as sick. The selectivity of the second hospital practically ensures a better medical outcome. Highly selective schools achieve more outstanding outcomes.</p>
<p>Anyway, the only real outcome of college is whether you get to do what you love and since most kids have no idea at that age, outcomes are scattered and a meaningless measure. I love what I do but my boss is a jerk who makes it torture. The focus on outcomes is ridiculous.</p>
<p>A modest scholarship to attract 4 high quality 75% pay student nets more cashflow for the U than 1 full scholarship to a 0 EFC student. That’s what it’s mostly about. Net tuition Income.</p>
<p>My son goes to a university that is highly rated by US News, but had chemistry classes with 600 students (he is happy there except for that experience). </p>
<p>Meanwhile, my daughter goes to a college that is rated very low by US News, but it is perfect for her, and she has no class bigger than 30 students. She was admitted to some universities that were more prestigious and much higher rated by US News, but this college had everything she was looking for, regarding the factors that mattered to her. The most important factor was the quality of the program in her major.</p>
<p>I worked with her to do a numeric matrix to rate each of the 10 colleges where she was accepted according to the many factors that mattered to her, and one college came out way above the rest (the lowly rank college she now attends). </p>
<p>It just highlights the importance of fit, not prestige.</p>
<p>The rankings should be used as a guide. The only ranking that really matters is how you rank the college.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Uh . . . well, good analysis up to a point, but wrong conclusion. People who are not very sick are for the most part going to get better regardless of which hospital they go to. Similarly, studies have shown that highly capable students are going to do well regardless of which college they go to. The college that admits only highly capable students isn’t doing a better job by virtue of having a high graduation rate among students who would have graduated regardless of which college they chose. It’s only cherry-picking by associating itself with those who will succeed in any event. That can’t be an argument for selecting such a school.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Not exactly. As bclintonk mentioned, this very question has been studied-- does an education at an elite school result in a better outcome (as measured by income)? The answer, it turns out, is “No”. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>[Who</a> Needs Harvard? | Brookings Institution](<a href=“http://www.brookings.edu/research/articles/2004/10/education-easterbrook]Who”>http://www.brookings.edu/research/articles/2004/10/education-easterbrook)</p>
<p>las ma , the school does not make the person, of course lots of people who go to Harvard are successful…they are hyper competitive and of at least above average intelligence. many from rich families to start. but a biology class at Harvard has no secret information that a biology class at say…rollins college does not have. Harvard has a name . but I would much rather go to a school in a supportive non completive happy setting.</p>