Rankings face increased scrutiny

Author: Brian Fung

It is a sign that the college admissions gloves have really come off when even your best friend jumps on your future alma mater.

That's what Patrick Knise '11 discovered when his best friend, now a first-year student at Bowdoin College, opened up the August 20 copy of U.S.News and World Report, which contained a list of the nation's most prestigious liberal arts schools.

"He was talking about how Middlebury's so similar [to Bowdoin], and that they're such great schools," said Knise with a laugh. "As soon as the rankings came out, he suddenly turned completely argumentative, trying to tell me how much better Bowdoin was than Middlebury."

The rankings, which last month rated Middlebury at number five among liberal arts schools for a second consecutive year, were the result of a complex annual evaluation of colleges and universities conducted by U.S.News and World Report.

Since 1983, when it first began surveying American institutions, U.S.News has seen its influence in the college admissions process skyrocket. The newsmagazine's growth over a quarter-century spurred competitors to publish their own college guides. Today, most rising high school seniors, if they have not already pored over their products cover-to-cover, are at least familiar with Kaplan, Fiske and The Princeton Review.

College guides owe much of their popularity to a society that knows not only the value of information, but information that is readily accessible, digestible and quotable.

"It's basically a consumer guide," said Dean of the College Tim Spears. "It's like Consumer Reports. I want to know as much as I possibly can about this particular thing. I think that's the way a lot of people buy a new car, a washing machine, a digital camera - and now that you've got the Internet, you just Google it to death, you go to Amazon and so on and so forth."

Few administrators question the value of the information contained within college guides. But some institutions have openly criticized the guides in recent months for their methodology. Ranking schools by award or on a scale, according to some academics and officials, provides an unreliable picture of colleges and fails to help prospective students evaluate schools on their individual, sometimes intangible merits. Moreover, they say, U.S.News's heavy emphasis on the so-called "reputational survey" -peer reviews of an institution written by other college presidents - can lead to an inappropriately subjective final list.

"I think it's safe to say that many presidents are concerned with it," said Provost Alison Byerly of the reputational survey. According to Byerly, who in June attended an annual convention of representatives from 124 liberal arts colleges known collectively as the Annapolis Group, "any kind of ranking has the potential to encourage people to take a superficial look at certain parameters and not pay attention to the overall educational experience."

The Annapolis Group released a statement following the convention expressing uneasiness with college rankings, and pledged to find an alternative method to provide useful information about its members to prospective students. A number of other college organizations, including the National Association of Independent Colleges and Universities, as well as the Council of Independent Colleges, have also agreed to work with the Annapolis Group this fall to find an alternative to the U.S.News rankings.

Meanwhile, some schools have since taken a proactive stance on rankings, including Middlebury. In a September 7 letter co-written by 18 other college leaders, President of the College Ronald D. Liebowitz called school rankings part of an "admissions frenzy" and promised to post the same information the College has historically provided to U.S.News on the Middlebury Web site. According to the letter, the College will make data such as class size and graduation rates widely available to the public. Though the same information may still be provided to ranking services, none of the College's new literature will mention them.

"Such lists mislead the public into thinking that the complexities of American higher education can be reduced to one number," wrote Liebowitz.

Some students applauded Liebowitz' efforts, and those of his counterparts at other institutions.

"I could see some definite benefits, I think, if there were no rankings," said Daniel Khan '11. "A number is a number, as far as that takes it, but it says nothing about this being the place you're going to live at for the next four years, the place you're going to be learning at for the next four years."

Khan's suitemate, Sam Hoar '11, agreed.

"There's so much more to the college process than just being a number," Hoar said. "It's really tough to read into that."

Still, as institutions begin to discuss the notion of alternative college rankings, it appears as though publications such as those sponsored by U.S.News are here to stay - at least for now.

"U.S.News will publish the survey whether we choose to participate or not," acknowledged Byerly.

Knise, meanwhile, has taken the rankings - and his friend's ribbing - in stride.

"It doesn't always even out the right way, but the competitiveness is good," he said. "It keeps schools on their toes."

Student Government Association President Max Nardini '08, who said he applied to Middlebury when the College was ranked number 11, reminded prospective students not to lose sight of the big picture in their approach to college admissions.

"To think that the level of education you'll be receiving at the 'best' school in the country or the fiftieth 'best' school in the country is a wide margin," said Nardini, shaking his head, "no, these are all fantastic educations, the best. What's important is that you find the school that's number one for you, really."