<p>
[quote]
The list's real purpose is to "exacerbate the status anxiety" of prospective students and parents.
[/quote]
Your</a> Annual Reminder to Ignore the U.S. News & World Report College Rankings - John Tierney - The Atlantic</p>
<p>Tierney hits every nail soundly on the head.</p>
<p>The most troubling has to be the inference that the USNWR has been and is complicit–unwittingly or not—in the rising price of college tuition, thanks to its rewarding schools that spend more money.</p>
<p>Atlantic just wishes they had the idea first. Not perfect but adequate for most uses. Many protest too much. USN has stood the test of time and various attempts to compete that very few are buying. Until the Feds perfect their rankings in about 3010 USN will own that space.</p>
<p>sorry, but I strongly disagree with the OP.</p>
<p>Barron’s is correct.</p>
<p>USNews serves an extremely useful purpose (and is the best value out there, IMO). IPEDS is next.</p>
<p>But just for fun, I also disagree with the author’s summary points:</p>
<p>1) Tinkering can be good and is available for free (most folks don’t need the minutiae and so won’t need to purchase the mag.
2) Yes, let’s blame the messenger if folks (foolishly) mis-interpret minor differences in rankings.
3) Again, blame the messenger if a few academics have no morals or ethics.<br>
4) Spending more money on students is a bad thing?
5) Asking for outcomes data is a nice sound-bite (and political at that), but just a stupid idea since it is not pracitcable. (But to even try to track it, will require more college administrative expense.)
6) PA can serve a useful purpose for those students who desire an academic career – isn’t that outcomes? 
7) Another blame the messenger for something out of its control; Americans just love rankings.</p>
<p>USNews could put out its list every five years and it would be just as useful. It is mildly useful–but any decent college guide will be much more useful.</p>
<p>This article might very well be one of the weakest on this issue. Actually, we should remember that the Atlantic attempted to steal Morse’s thunder in the past (and probably had a pretty good idea for a ranking.)</p>
<p>Unfortunately, this author misses the boat entirely by quoting the following sources:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Except for the participation of Colin Diver, those articles range from the utter clueless to the entirely misguided (and hypocritical.) Paying attention to the lunatic opinions of Vedder and Gladwell on EDUCATION is hardly a good idea.</p>
<p>The USNews is NOT perfect, but it remains the most valuable tool … when used properly. Forget the “numbered” ranking and build your own criteria. For some that means to place more importance to the elements decried by Diver. For others that means to pay more attention to the “more” objective criteria and let the abject and gamed PA on the sidelines. </p>
<p>Morse could do a lot better, but he will do it only gradually as to not topple his apple cart. He DOES fully know what to do to keep the playing field level by including INTANGIBLES. And, if that was not clear, the direction of USNews is NOT to focus on the undergraduate education that fascinates THIS forum. It is to align his publication to the garbage produced by the pseudo-scientists in London and China, and grab some of that international payola by recognizing the graduate schools and their dedication to … research. </p>
<p>If there was one warning needed, it would be to tell the 16-17 years old to pay closer attention to who will impart knowledge for 4 to 6 years, and realize that the “prized” schools will mostly rely on “teachers” who will be just a couple of years older than they are.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Yep, since the tuition charged is hardly directly related to the expenditures, I would like to know how much will be spent on MY education. Will I be canned as a sardine in a 300+ plus study hall while the institutions spend lavishly on parking spaces for Nobel winners who spend their time a few miles away toiling on issues that have little impact on the UGs? Will MY money support the diva lifestyles of tenured professors who consider UGs a nuisance? And will I be taught by a deeply accented GSI/TA who was never trained properly nor had the qualifications to teach at a … US middle school but is good enough to teach at the university level?</p>
<p>bluebayou, could you make the argument that international students/ families are more in love with rankings than Americans?</p>
<p>“I strongly disagree with the OP”</p>
<p>Thanks, but I can’t take credit for the article! ;)</p>
<p>“Until the Feds perfect their rankings …”</p>
<p>I don’t think this can be done, either.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Probably not, and this because the number of internationals evaluating an undergraduate education in the US is still low. On the other hand, the (ab)use of the basic ranking that translates into a prestige ranking is probably the biggest element used by first and second genration of immigrants, especially when coming from education systems where the social status of one depends highly on the prestige of the college attended. </p>
<p>Education seen as social climbing device is relevant to recent US families.</p>
<p>It’s a rather hypocritical of The Atlantic to trash college rankings, because back in 2003 they tried to get into the ranking game themselves:</p>
<p>[Atlantic</a> unveils new ‘rankings’ | The Chronicle](<a href=“http://www.dukechronicle.com/articles/2003/10/15/atlantic-unveils-new-rankings]Atlantic”>http://www.dukechronicle.com/articles/2003/10/15/atlantic-unveils-new-rankings)</p>
<p>But their own ranking having flopped, they now rail against the evils of rankings, especially the rankings of their competitor, the USNews, which crushed them in the marketplace of ideas back when they made their attempt.</p>
<p>Does anyone think USNEWS decides their ranks based on CC arguments?</p>
<p>Penn Vs Duke</p>
<p>100 posts of arguments and they both get a 7.</p>
<p>Chicago intellectual vs Stanford whatevers</p>
<p>Both ranked 5.</p>
<p>^ lol</p>
<hr>
<p>^^ THERE you go–NOW you’ve spilled the beans. :mad:</p>
<p>[Although in fairness, I haven’t seen anyone on CC trying to argue that Penn is superior overall to Duke. ;)]</p>
<p>45 percenter - I just remember that thread where a kid was asking recently about applying early to one or the other!</p>
<p>I forgot what you said about Morse - not a Penn Alum?</p>
<p>Well, Xiggi, with the news that adjuncts make better teachers than tenure-track faculty maybe everyone’s presumptions about UG ed quality at various schools have to go into the trash now. ;-)</p>
<p>^^</p>
<p>Perhaps, as it is not surprising. Then, are adjuncts to be compared with … TAs or GSIs?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>That is exactly what I mentioned in Post 6! To add to the story, one should also remember that James Fallows once was the editor of US News & World Report, and knew the imperfections of its college-ranking system. So much that he hired Amy Graham, who came to US News to try to clean up the rankings only to depart and write critical stories about the methodology still used by Morse. </p>
<p>Of course, one could think that Fallows purposedly created “his” rankings to remind us of the power of irony. Too bad that his ranking that was actually not bad all was followed by a poor decision to endorse the “works” of the Washington Monthly. </p>
<p>PS Just as Coureur probably did, I paid attention to the Atlantic Monthly rankings. For people who like the history of admissions, the 2003 rankings underscore how one school can change its admissions by … become an active player in creative reporting of data. Check where Chicago was ranked by Fallows in 2003!</p>
<p>Many of them have been replaced by Adjuncts–cheaper and many grad schools cutting back on Phds students.</p>
<p>Barrons, that should be good news, especially if it leads to the next big thing: the necessary DRASTIC reduction in the deadwood (read tenured research faculty) by attrition and non-replacement. </p>
<p>Cutting back on PhD programs that lead to NOWHERE should also be good news, as the bulk of those programs are mere self-fulfilling prophecies of self-preservation and a life filled with publishing of articles that are only read by insiders.</p>
<p>
Nope:</p>
<p>[Speakers</a> and Panelists](<a href=“http://ncsue.msu.edu/conf2005/bio-morse.asp]Speakers”>Speakers and Panelists)</p>
<p>But Mort Zuckerman, US News owner, has an MBA from Wharton (along with an LL.M. from Harvard and a BA and B.C.L. from McGill). I assume that’s the basis for the old myth about a Penn grad somehow favoring Penn in the US News ranking. :rolleyes:</p>