the ranking phenomenon
19
www.petersons.com
little has changed since then, he argues. Admissions staffs, the very people
who have the most at stake in the ratings game, are usually responsible for
compiling data requested by U.S. News. It's their job to promote the
college and bring in qualified applicants. Since a college's ranking will
either help or hinder their work, the temptation to make the institution
look as good as possible is understandably strong. Outright fabrication of
data may be less common but, cautions Rothkopf, "There's a lot of game
playing out there," especially in the reporting of admissions data. There
are ways to increase the number of applications, and ways to make the
applicants look smarter than they really are.
A common strategy, for example, is to arbitrarily decide that certain
types of applicants won't be counted. The University of Pittsburgh, for
example, had the perfectly legiti-
mate policy of admitting some
students who did not meet the
usual academic standards, but
did create a more diverse student
body. That's a defendable admis-
sions strategy, but presented a
special problem for the univer-
sity. These students brought
down the average SAT score, making the institution appear less selective
and, thus, less competitive. So the university purged these "special ad-
mit" students from the data sent to U.S. News. When the SAT score was
calculated, these students simply did not exist. Problem solved.
Real or Reputation?
For all its numerical precision, most rankings are based on highly subjec-
tive information. In U.S. News' rankings, one quarter of a school's final
score is based on its "reputation." Looking for new ways to increase its
standing in the rankings, at least one university engaged in aggressive
"There's a lot of game playing out
there," especially in the report-
ing of admissions data. There are
ways to increase the number of
applications, and ways to make
the applicants look smarter than
they really are.
