The Obama administration’s proposed rating system for colleges is clearly one of the most important issues facing higher education right now, and getting a White House nominee for a top higher-education post in a room, listening to colleges’ concerns about the ratings, was bound to be a hot ticket at the annual meeting here of the American Council on Education.
Unfortunately, that ticket was so hot that ACE officials banned both the news media and some attendees from entering the room where Ted Mitchell, the nominee for U.S. under secretary of education, was listening to what speakers had to say on that subject.
Thomas Cleary, senior director of government relations at the University of San Diego, was one who was turned away. He huffed off, saying that this was his first ACE meeting and probably his last.
“I appreciate the Obama administration’s efforts to roll out the ratings system,” he said. But as with product ratings, like those of Consumer Reports, he pointed out, an evaluation may not lower the price of the product. Mr. Mitchell’s presence at a session about the ratings system had been the conference’s main draw for Mr. Cleary. “I wanted to hear firsthand how they envisioned this.”
Mr. Mitchell was not there to speak, however. He was in listening mode at the lunch for 130 people, plus those standing.
On the panel of speakers for the session were Martin T. Meehan, who is chancellor of the University of Massachusetts at Lowell and a former member of Congress; Darrell G. Kirch, president of the Association of American Medical Colleges; Jamienne S. Studley, acting U.S. under secretary of education; and two top ACE officials. One of them, Terry W. Hartle, the council’s senior vice president for government and public affairs, has criticized the proposed rating system.
Many college leaders have also expressed concern that the ratings, meant to assess colleges on affordability and performance, will have unintended consequences.
Timothy J. McDonough, ACE’s vice president for communications and marketing, said the session had been reserved for chief academic officers. “This is a private meeting, and ACE wants the meeting closed,” he told reporters outside the room. “They want the discussion to be freewheeling.” He added that ACE always reserves the initial days of its meeting for closed sessions with top college administrators.
Potential Hazards
After the session ended, college officials said that the event had been an opportunity to sound off on the hazards a college-ratings system could pose, with an audience of government officials who could influence the outcome.
“This was just a good place for all of us to verbalize what our concerns are,” said Michael A. Gealt, executive vice president and provost at Central Michigan University.
Steve O. Michael, provost of Arcadia University, said one of the great things about American higher education was its flexibility in serving a diverse population. To measure outcomes “doesn’t lend itself to simplistic measures,” he said.
Mr. Hartle said he reiterated a few of his concerns—that it wasn’t clear if the rating system was being built for accountability or as a consumer tool, that the task of comparing similar institutions would be more complicated than government officials expect, and that “they are going to have to do this with the data they have, not the data they want.”
He said that Mr. Mitchell, who declined to comment because his appointment is pending approval by the Senate, probably had heard most of the concerns before.
But, Mr. Hartle noted, the nominee might have “picked up some insights” from Dr. Kirch, of the Association of American Medical Colleges, who spoke about the lessons learned in the health-care industry.
Dr. Kirch, for his part, said there were a few salient consequences of government and consumer ratings in health care: Ratings can create more noise than signal and also can produce unintended consequences. For example, a hospital can be dinged when a patient is readmitted, even if that situation has more to do with the patient’s health or circumstances than the hospital’s performance.
Also, he said, ratings need to be transparent and reflect the diversity of institutions. “One size does not fit all.”
