No one is really surprised that colleges lie when they self-report this data, this is probably just the tip of the iceberg...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/educ...story.html

Quote:In some of the recent cases, college officials said an employee intentionally submitted inaccurate data. In others, it was unclear whether the mistake was intentional. GWU attributed its errors to a flaw in data-reporting systems that dated back a decade.

A survey of 576 college admissions officers conducted by Gallup last summer for the online news outlet Inside Higher Ed found that 91 percent believe other colleges had falsely reported standardized test scores and other admissions data. A few said their own college had done so.

“There’s definitely a widespread feeling that this goes well beyond those that have been caught or come forward,” said Scott Jaschik, Inside Higher Ed’s editor.

Precisely why the APR will fail. When there is an incentive for people to cheat they will cheat - it's just that simple.

I guess my question is who were the nine percent that were not false reporting? Either those folks are complete idiots or they we lying when they filled in their respective surveys. I suspect that it was the latter.

I remember hearing a man who knew what he was talking about saying to my father that a good bit of the academic ratings was all about the paperwork. So this doesn't surprise me at all...

A couple years ago Arkansas State bumped up in US News. My son writing for the school paper interviewed the new chancellor about it. His answer was he had found the person responsible was taking the past year survey results and did nothing to it other than update the enrollment, tuition and some financial date and had failed to include updated programs or changes to the admission standards.

(02-06-2013 12:19 PM)Dr. Isaly von Yinzer Wrote:  I guess my question is who were the nine percent that were not false reporting? Either those folks are complete idiots or they we lying when they filled in their respective surveys. I suspect that it was the latter.

I think you misunderstood the quote. It said "91 percent believe other colleges had falsely reported standardized test scores and other admissions data." The question didn't ask whether they themselves had falsely reported. It was whether they believed other colleges had. Now, the 9% that said they didn't think others were falsely reporting are surely giving the naive answer.

(02-06-2013 01:35 PM)apex_pirate Wrote:  

(02-06-2013 12:19 PM)Dr. Isaly von Yinzer Wrote:  I guess my question is who were the nine percent that were not false reporting? Either those folks are complete idiots or they we lying when they filled in their respective surveys. I suspect that it was the latter.

I think you misunderstood the quote. It said "91 percent believe other colleges had falsely reported standardized test scores and other admissions data." The question didn't ask whether they themselves had falsely reported. It was whether they believed other colleges had. Now, the 9% that said they didn't think others were falsely reporting are surely giving the naive answer.

My first suspicion is that those 9% are lying their asses off and don't want any attention at all brought to the scam.

Then again, I did go to GW, one of the schools that admitted that some of their old data was flawed and got kicked out of the USNWR ratings for it.

This has to do with US New Rankings and not the APR which is actual grades and graduation rates. If kids don't graduate and leave mid-semester than that stuff is more than just paperwork.

USNWR is pretty flawed in many ways.

It basically assumes that Harvard and Yale are the ideal and then reverse engineers so that the more you are like them the better you are and the less like them you are, the worse you are.

Ever wonder where JD Power gets all the data for its "awards?" You guessed it. You pay your money, send them some numbers and they will make an award just for you.

like this is news; several years ago, the president of U of Florida was busted giving higher than deserved scores to other SEC schools

(02-06-2013 04:30 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  USNWR is pretty flawed in many ways.

It basically assumes that Harvard and Yale are the ideal and then reverse engineers so that the more you are like them the better you are and the less like them you are, the worse you are.

Yup. One year, Caltech came out #1 in their rankings, and USNWR then went back and re-rigged their formula to make sure that Harvard, Yale, or Princeton would always be #1 after that.

(02-06-2013 07:05 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(02-06-2013 04:30 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  USNWR is pretty flawed in many ways.

It basically assumes that Harvard and Yale are the ideal and then reverse engineers so that the more you are like them the better you are and the less like them you are, the worse you are.

Yup. One year, Caltech came out #1 in their rankings, and USNWR then went back and re-rigged their formula to make sure that Harvard, Yale, or Princeton would always be #1 after that.

My son says

He's almost 5.

(02-06-2013 06:59 PM)Theodoresdaddy Wrote:  like this is news; several years ago, the president of U of Florida was busted giving higher than deserved scores to other SEC schools

Clemson and Emory have been caught sending in false data. I've got to wonder about Alabama and Auburn. They are close to the top of the SEC (well behind Florida and Vanderbilt but close to or ahead of the rest) in USNWR. Other rating systems have them near the bottom of the SEC.

Take these rankings with a grain of salt. Along with false data, failing to even submit a survey to US News will get you a bad ranking as well.

This is why whenever ranking systems start to get wide publicity, they begin to go wrong as institutions try to game the rankings. Same problem that happened with the credit ratings agencies leading up to the financial crisis in 2007.

If you're really interested in an unbiased rankings system for anything, I suggest checking the obscure rankings that no one else pays attention to. Or check one that doesn't rely on self-reported data.

(02-06-2013 07:15 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(02-06-2013 07:05 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(02-06-2013 04:30 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  USNWR is pretty flawed in many ways.

It basically assumes that Harvard and Yale are the ideal and then reverse engineers so that the more you are like them the better you are and the less like them you are, the worse you are.

Yup. One year, Caltech came out #1 in their rankings, and USNWR then went back and re-rigged their formula to make sure that Harvard, Yale, or Princeton would always be #1 after that.

My son says

He's almost 5.

that better not be beer in his sippy cup them

(02-06-2013 04:30 PM)10thMountain Wrote:  USNWR is pretty flawed in many ways.

It basically assumes that Harvard and Yale are the ideal and then reverse engineers so that the more you are like them the better you are and the less like them you are, the worse you are.

This really is the perfect way to describe the rankings

(02-07-2013 09:40 AM)VA49er Wrote:  Take these rankings with a grain of salt. Along with false data, failing to even submit a survey to US News will get you a bad ranking as well.

Its our Chancellor's policy to not even fill out these surveys. He's on record saying these rankings are nothing more than popularity ranks and have little to do with the academics.

People need to keep U.S. News in perspective.

It is likely that their #20 school is better than their #200 school. But if you're going to say the #75 school is definitively better than the #76 school, you're a fool.

As stated above, take them with a grain of salt and some common sense.