Rankings and University Decision Making
Reader Comments
Graduate School and undergraduate rankings
Which School is better ?, a program that admits students in the 95th percentile of test scores (GRE), GPAS and ability, but their graduates end up in the 90th perrcentile of quality in the work force, and by their impact in academia or industry Or a program that admits students in the 80th percentile of same performance and ability and makes them better by making them employed/employable and productive with impact at the 90th ranking of acadenmic or competitive parameters ?.
The concept of ranking is most welcome, but it is bedevilled by methodological flaws. The training institutions to be ranked, should ideally have comparable input, and the OUTPUT ( the graduates and their accomplishments in academia and the work force) will be a more accurate measure of the QUALITY of the institution attended. This approach may be pedantic and is not feasible or practical in the real world. Alumni networking and other non-meritious or 'reputational factors" are known to determine job and other opportunities.
The quality of a program's academic staff as reflected by their academic distinctions, awards, prizes, publications and patents
as well as the quality of their graduates and postgraduates, as indicated by where they get employed and what they achieve is the best measure of acadermic rankings. More of these parameters which are not easily obtained are needed for more accurate rankings. Further, rankings need not be done annualy for all disciplines, as the the impact of changes in institutional recruitment or policy may have a longer gestation period, than the one year interval of the annual rankings.
Who and What Defines Success?
I'm not sure anyone would dispute the idea that rankings could be a valuable tool for students and educators alike, if and only if there were such things as objective standards for a successful institution or for the best fit for each student. In the absence of such universal standards, it is not the existence of rankings which is questioned, but the methodology and implementation of such information. Too many students (and advisers) do not view these rankings with a critical eye, but instead treat them as a gold standard. They feel pressure to get into a top-10 school, whether it's the best learning environment for that individual or not. I'd rather see a student attend the 82nd ranked school if it is the right fit for him or her, than to shoehorn themselves into a more highly ranked school because of an artificial perception that it is somehow better.
