> Skip to content
FEATURED:
  • The Evolution of Race in Admissions
Sign In
  • News
  • Advice
  • The Review
  • Data
  • Current Issue
  • Virtual Events
  • Store
    • Featured Products
    • Reports
    • Data
    • Collections
    • Back Issues
    • Featured Products
    • Reports
    • Data
    • Collections
    • Back Issues
  • Jobs
    • Find a Job
    • Post a Job
    • Find a Job
    • Post a Job
Sign In
  • News
  • Advice
  • The Review
  • Data
  • Current Issue
  • Virtual Events
  • Store
    • Featured Products
    • Reports
    • Data
    • Collections
    • Back Issues
    • Featured Products
    • Reports
    • Data
    • Collections
    • Back Issues
  • Jobs
    • Find a Job
    • Post a Job
    • Find a Job
    • Post a Job
  • News
  • Advice
  • The Review
  • Data
  • Current Issue
  • Virtual Events
  • Store
    • Featured Products
    • Reports
    • Data
    • Collections
    • Back Issues
    • Featured Products
    • Reports
    • Data
    • Collections
    • Back Issues
  • Jobs
    • Find a Job
    • Post a Job
    • Find a Job
    • Post a Job
Sign In
ADVERTISEMENT
News
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • Show more sharing options
Share
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • Facebook
  • Email
  • Copy Link URLCopied!
  • Print

Changes in Annual College Guides Fail to Quell Criticisms on Their Validity

By  Michael Crissey
September 5, 1997

The controversial college guide prepared by U.S. News & World Report has a new methodology, but critics say that the rankings remain unreliable and arbitrary.

Administrators said they saw the same leap-frogging and yearly tinkering in this year’s issue, which hit newsstands last week, that they say have plagued the No. 1 selling college guide since the magazine introduced it in 1983.

“Obviously schools like Harvard, Stanford, and Princeton do not change dramatically in a year or two -- it takes decades,” said Alex Huppe, the director of public affairs at Harvard University. “Everyone has a question about the beauty contest aspect of it.”

We’re sorry. Something went wrong.

We are unable to fully display the content of this page.

The most likely cause of this is a content blocker on your computer or network. Please make sure your computer, VPN, or network allows javascript and allows content to be delivered from c950.chronicle.com and chronicle.blueconic.net.

Once javascript and access to those URLs are allowed, please refresh this page. You may then be asked to log in, create an account if you don't already have one, or subscribe.

If you continue to experience issues, contact us at 202-466-1032 or help@chronicle.com

The controversial college guide prepared by U.S. News & World Report has a new methodology, but critics say that the rankings remain unreliable and arbitrary.

Administrators said they saw the same leap-frogging and yearly tinkering in this year’s issue, which hit newsstands last week, that they say have plagued the No. 1 selling college guide since the magazine introduced it in 1983.

“Obviously schools like Harvard, Stanford, and Princeton do not change dramatically in a year or two -- it takes decades,” said Alex Huppe, the director of public affairs at Harvard University. “Everyone has a question about the beauty contest aspect of it.”

J.J. Thompson, deputy director of data analysis for the “Best Colleges” issue at U.S. News, said the slight changes in methodology that occurred this year primarily reduced the “magnifications” between colleges’ rankings.

The magazine revised the index number used to give colleges their total score by rounding to a whole number rather than to a decimal. The new index numbers are fairer representations because institutions are not penalized for minutiae, Ms. Thompson said. The top 10 list this year actually has 13 institutions because of four sets of ties.

ADVERTISEMENT

This year’s rankings also brought a variety of changes from the previous edition. Emory University vaulted from No. 19 to No. 9 in the “national university” category. Texas A&M University at College Station tumbled from No. 48 to the non-ranked second tier of universities.

In addition to questioning the fluctuations, educators criticize the entire system used by the magazine. Alan J. Stone, president of Alma College, said the data collection and weighting “simply missed the mark.” Alma’s ranking did not change from last year’s, in which it was placed in the third of four tiers.

Mr. Stone, who led an unsuccessful effort to rally 480 liberal-arts institutions to boycott information requests from U.S. News earlier this year, said the magazine’s methodology, even in its revised form “was so subjective, it is ridiculous.”

“I don’t think they have a clue as to what quality is,” he said.

Mr. Stone particularly criticized two aspects of the rankings, the “reputational” section of the survey, which asks college administrators to rate institutions in their region on a scale of one to four, and alumni giving, which was calculated as a two-year average percentage of living undergraduate alumni who donate.

ADVERTISEMENT

The two sections, which make up 30 per cent of a college’s ranking, do not reflect what is critical to learning, Mr. Stone said.

U.S. News should look at such factors as study-abroad programs, the use of faculty members as mentors, and volunteer opportunities, Mr. Stone said.

Ms. Thompson said the magazine stood behind its system.

While the most prestigious institutions tend not to see the impact of the rankings on their application pools, many other colleges say that the comparisons matter.

An annual survey of college freshmen released in January by the Higher Education Research Institute, based at the University of California at Los Angeles, reported that rankings in magazines do have an impact, but on a subset of applicants.

ADVERTISEMENT

Of the 251,232 freshmen surveyed, 8.6 per cent responded that colleges’ rankings in national magazines were very important when selecting a college.

Despite the controversy surrounding U.S. News, other publishers appear to be cashing in on the lucrative college-guide market, and these new entries, too, are attracting criticism.

Time magazine and the Princeton Review also released a college guide last week that features Florida A&M University as its first “College of the Year.” Five other colleges and one university system received honorable mentions.

A 10-member panel of professors, administrators, and other education experts formulated the criteria and forwarded the candidates to the guide’s editors.

Some university officials criticized the selections, noting links between members of the panel and various institutions. One member was Marvin Pomerantz, former president of the Iowa State Board of Regents, which governs the University of Iowa, one of the honorable mentions.

ADVERTISEMENT

Another member of the panel was Israel Tribble, Jr., president of the Florida Education Fund, a non-profit organization that provides doctoral fellowships to minority students to attend institutions in Florida. Florida A&M is a historically black institution that has worked with his organization.

Barrett Seaman, special-projects director for Time magazine, denied that there was any favoritism. “It is true that Dr. Tribble suggested we look at [Florida] A&M,” he said, “but there was no regional push there or in other areas.”

Not all the debate over rankings involved contests that colleges want to win. The Princeton Review last month released its 1998 The Best 311 Colleges, which has been dubbed “The Party School Book” because of the popularity of a list of the top colleges for social life.

West Virginia University “won” that title this year, but has no intention of promoting the ranking. “If it implies that we have a substance-abuse problem here greater than another college or American town, that is not true,” said David C. Hardesty, the president.

To refute the ranking, the university created a World-Wide Web site that promotes the academic achievements of its students.

ADVERTISEMENT

Emory University also appeared on the list, for the first time, in the No. 7 party-school position. Bill Chace, Emory’s president, said, “We can’t make head or tails of this.”

Dr. Chace said he distrusted the standards used for most college guides. “I am afraid that U.S. News is the best in a bad lot,” he said.

NEW RANKINGS IN COLLEGE GUIDES

U.S. News & World Report:
“Best National Universities”

1. Harvard U.
1. Princeton U.
3. Yale U.
3. Duke U.
5. Stanford U.
6. Massachusetts Institute of Technology
7. Dartmouth College
7. U. of Pennsylvania
9. Brown U.
9. Columbia U.
9. Emory U.
9. Northwestern U.
9. California Institute of Technology

Money Magazine:
“Best College Values”

ADVERTISEMENT

1. California Institute of Technology
2. Rice U.
3. U. of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
4. State U. of New York at Binghamton
5. Spelman College
6. New College of the U. of South Florida
7. College of New Jersey (formerly Trenton State College)
8. Truman State U.
9. State U. of New York College at Geneseo
10. U. of Florida

Time/The Princeton Review:
“College of the Year”

Winner: Florida A&M U.

Honorable mentions:

DePaul U.
DePauw U.
Trinity College (Conn.)
U. of California System
U. of California at Los Angeles
U. of Iowa

ADVERTISEMENT

Mother Jones:
“Top Activist Campuses”

1. U. of Wisconsin at Madison
2. Mount Holyoke College
3. U. of Massachusetts at Amherst
4. U. of Minnesota at Morris
5. Stanford U.
6. State U. of New York at Binghamton
7. New School for Social Research
8. U. of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
9. U. of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
10. Howard U.

The Princeton Review:
“Top Party Schools”

1. West Virginia U.
2. U. of Wisconsin at Madison
3. State U. of New York at Albany
4. U. of Colorado at Boulder
5. Trinity College (Conn.)
6. Florida State U.
7. Emory U.
8. U. of Kansas
9. U. of Vermont
10. Louisiana State U. at Baton Rouge

We welcome your thoughts and questions about this article. Please email the editors or submit a letter for publication.
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
  • Explore
    • Get Newsletters
    • Letters
    • Free Reports and Guides
    • Blogs
    • Virtual Events
    • Chronicle Store
    • Find a Job
    Explore
    • Get Newsletters
    • Letters
    • Free Reports and Guides
    • Blogs
    • Virtual Events
    • Chronicle Store
    • Find a Job
  • The Chronicle
    • About Us
    • DEI Commitment Statement
    • Write for Us
    • Talk to Us
    • Work at The Chronicle
    • User Agreement
    • Privacy Policy
    • California Privacy Policy
    • Site Map
    • Accessibility Statement
    The Chronicle
    • About Us
    • DEI Commitment Statement
    • Write for Us
    • Talk to Us
    • Work at The Chronicle
    • User Agreement
    • Privacy Policy
    • California Privacy Policy
    • Site Map
    • Accessibility Statement
  • Customer Assistance
    • Contact Us
    • Advertise With Us
    • Post a Job
    • Advertising Terms and Conditions
    • Reprints & Permissions
    • Do Not Sell My Personal Information
    Customer Assistance
    • Contact Us
    • Advertise With Us
    • Post a Job
    • Advertising Terms and Conditions
    • Reprints & Permissions
    • Do Not Sell My Personal Information
  • Subscribe
    • Individual Subscriptions
    • Institutional Subscriptions
    • Subscription & Account FAQ
    • Manage Newsletters
    • Manage Your Account
    Subscribe
    • Individual Subscriptions
    • Institutional Subscriptions
    • Subscription & Account FAQ
    • Manage Newsletters
    • Manage Your Account
1255 23rd Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20037
© 2023 The Chronicle of Higher Education
  • twitter
  • instagram
  • youtube
  • facebook
  • linkedin