What is
your “case” or chief example to explore in order to illustrate your argument?
My
argument:
College rankings are not a true
indicator of a college’s quality. A
school ranked higher on a ranking list is not necessarily a “better” school
than a school ranked lower on a ranking list.
My
“case”/chief example to explore in order to illustrate this:
The business of college
rankings has become an example of consumerism.
If a school is more concerned about its reputation/how it’s viewed to
the consumer, and ultimately, if the consumer will buy it, data will be altered
in such a way that the odds are in their favor.
Even if the data used to calculate ranking is not untruthful, it may not
be relevant as a deciding factor as to whether or not a college should be
considered more valuable, or if it should be placed higher on a list.
Briefly
summarized:
College rankings have been
driven towards appealing to a consumer audience, where privatization also has a
part. College rankings may be untruthful
in their data. However, it is still presented, as people base their decisions
on what is presented to them, rather than question and search for other options
as to how to judge and compare the quality of institutions. People trust what is shown to them, so they
buy it. Privatization also plays a role in this insufficient data. Ultimately, college rankings are “selling”
their quality or reputation to the consumer. The question is what it is
ultimately that students want to “buy” from the college, which is its name or
reputation, as they assume it is a determiner of the quality of education they’ll
receive, and the respect it is given by future job hirers. College rankings have to be viewed as
business advertisements, rather than true facts, as colleges use these as a way
to grab the consumer’s attention and display the best qualities of the
university in a way that might cause the consumers to view other colleges as
inferior to them.
How
does it speak to the debate you have identified in your proposal?
The debate I have identified in
my proposal is that most people value college rankings, as they rely on them as
true indicators as to whether or not colleges are of good quality. However, it seems as though people are very
ignorant as to what goes in to creating these rankings. It can be assumed that people trust college
rankings and do not consider them to be unreliable or examples of business
advertising. It speaks to this debate in
that by students and parents relying on college rankings to the point where
they are using them as a determining factor as to whether or not they should
attend (or even apply), they are acting like consumers of a business choosing
whether or not to buy a product.
What
research have you got on the case?
Through my research I have
discovered how college rankings are made and how based on the process there is
a great chance of unreliability. First,
people who work in admissions offices in higher institutions are the ones who
submit the school’s data. They can
choose what to include or not include. They
can also even choose whom or whom not to include. For example, they might choose to share only
good statistics, so that what people are seeing are the very best of their
data. They might also choose to share
only the data of students with a higher score on something, and not include
data of students with lower scores, or in a particular program, etc. . Second, they can also choose how to calculate
certain aspects such as acceptance rates.
They might put a certain amount of students on a waiting list, so they
can more accurately account for who was accepted, and who was not. However, if students from a waiting list are
accepted after a certain period of time, they might not choose to include them
in the data, as this would make them appear less selective. Third, they can spend a lot of money on
advertising, or pay more than other schools to College Board, so they can reach
out to more students, and in turn possibly have more students apply. With a bigger application pool, they can make
it look as though they accepted fewer students, and make themselves look more
selective. In reality though, they might
not reveal how many students applied, or more importantly, how many spots were
available in the first place (how many students they intended on having in a
class). Fourth, admissions directors of
Ivy League schools are likely able to get away with the most, as Ivy League Schools
are always regarded as being valuable, so they are not as carefully watched or
questioned. Fifth, there are some years
that might have more applicants than another year based on the success of a
sports team, or recognition of a professor, and this in turn might result in
more applicants. These determiners are
of course not mentioned, but admissions directors are quick to use this in
their statistical data. If more people
apply, there is a greater pool of students who are rejected, so the admission
directors can say that there was an increase in selectivity, making it seem as
though the college is becoming more competitive. Fifth, schools can appear high on a list of a
ranking regarding specific programs, when their program cannot be well compared
to school’s programs, as they have different credentials. Some programs at one school may not even
exist at other schools. Sixth, data might be presented in an order that appeals
to the consumer, but not in one that particularly makes sense, or is even
relevant to the school. Seven, people who control college rankings do not and
also most likely cannot prove statistics of colleges to be untrue. There is no way for them to ultimately check
on their data, and more importantly, there is no law that states one cannot
submit false information to college rankings.
What
other details might be useful to know?
In sum, college rankings are
reported to be data that is measured selectively. The research presented above are seven examples
in which admissions directors use students’ ignorance to their advantage and
choose to also submit selective data.
Something also to keep in mind is that even college rankings that are
100% truthful (if there are such) might only include data of program offerings,
not data of program outcomes, or only include data of student success on SATs,
and not data of student outcome and performance.
If
there are online materials related to the case (including online articles,
websites, or videos), please give those links in your post to help your readers
and me learn more:
This article displays an example of how some colleges are misrepresenting
exam scores, such as the SATs:
This article discusses how some view college rankings as
unreliable.
This article explains that students should not use college
rankings as a determining factor to where they will attend or even apply.
This article discusses how some colleges only include data
of offerings, rather than include data of the outcomes.
No comments:
Post a Comment