College Rankings: Defending the Indefensible
August 17th, 2010Economist Richard Vedder recently published a piece titled “In Defense of College Rankings,” in the Chronicle of Higher Education, 08/06/1).
Here he defends the soon-to-be-released U.S. News rankings, anticipating that “many in the Education Establishment will [trash] them… They will be labeled as non-scientific, elitist, poorly constructed, etc. etc.” even though they are “meeting a human need.”
I can’t agree with much in Mr. Vedder’s piece, except that the rankings are popular and that they sell. But I’m happy to be among those who will trash them—not for Mr. Vedder’s reasons, but rather because they are pernicious.
He cites Consumer Reports as a model. But colleges do not lend themselves to consumer-reports-style rankings, where measurements of quality are known in advance and can be quantified: for example, how clean a washer will get your clothes and how often on average it will need repair.
Much of what makes colleges effective cannot be measured in numbers. Every college is a unique amalgam with its own personality and community that places its stamp on education—on faculty who teach there and on students who go there. And more than anything, it is these subtleties that shape students’ attitudes, learning, and experiences.
These are considerations that rankings can’t even attempt to deal with, let alone compare from college to college. Moreover, the non-quantifiable part, the “reputational survey,” is a not only a joke, but there is also clear evidence that contributors try to manipulate it.
Let’s take Mr. Vedder’s example: “If you are paying $50,000 a year to send your kid to either Harvard or George Washington U, other things equal, the quality of education is likely to be superior at Harvard.”
He offers no basis for this statement other than the implication that because Harvard is ranked higher, Harvard is inherently superior. Is teaching better? Rankings won’t tell you that, because good teaching depends on a blend of factors, many of which are subtle and can’t be quantified. Just ask colleges; they’ve struggled forever to measure teaching effectiveness as part of tenure and promotion.
Yes, rankings sell. And since colleges mostly don’t change rapidly, to have a rankings farrago annually, U.S. News has to tweak the formula annually so that rankings will remain in the forefront and they can present a picture of colleges battling it out to move up the ladder.
But rankings are not merely imperfect because formulas are manipulated or because they are unscientific or whatever. They are pernicious because, although they may be attractive, they are not a good tool to help answer questions that at bottom matter most to a student: which schools will be the best match in terms of my needs and plans.
None of their fatal shortcomings would matter much if ranking if colleges were a harmless pastime. But they are not harmless. They have transformed how trustees and the public judge a college’s effectiveness. They encourage students to make prestige the centerpiece of their college search instead of figuring out what they truly want for themselves. And they are the foundation of the marketing engine driving multi-billion dollar enterprises that have transformed applying to highly-ranked schools from a ‘best match’ process into a trophy hunt.
Some have unfairly lumped independent educational consultants with those enterprises. It’s true that educational consultants are flourishing in this new climate, but that’s because we are part of the solution, not part of the problem.
Our job is to help families sort through the hype and reduce anxiety by focusing on basics: helping students figure out what they want in a college, and then figure out who has it. And then help students master the skills of showing their best selves to colleges so that good matches can take place.

Dear Dodge, It is unfortunate that so many people put so much emphasis on rankings such as these. Thus adding ...
Dear Dodge, As a relatively new educational consultant and a 30-year experienced college admissions officer, I couldn't agree with you more. ...
Dear Dodge, Thank you for so clearly presenting the issue and clearing up the smoke and mirrors that rankings truly throw ...
Wonderful article, Dodge! What a great president we have!