University of Michigan is 29th in U.S. News Best College rankings, Harvard is No. 1
The University of Michigan placed 29th on the U.S. News and World Report's annual Best Colleges rankings this year, leading all of Michigan’s public universities.
And among public universities, U-M is No. 4.
Havard took the top spot, while Princeton nabbed No. 2.
As a policy, U-M doesn’t comment on rankings.
On a walk around the University of Michigan campus, you might see the water fountain called Sunday Morning in between the Michigan League and Hill Auditorium.
File photo
This Best Colleges listing, in its 27th year, has generated controversy, with some claiming the rankings are rigged and based too heavily on an institution's reputation.
“It's that day again,” wrote a Washington Post campus blogger. “The day everyone in higher ed acts like they don't really care about. Yep, it's rankings day.”
Inside Higher Ed explored the U.S. News methodology today, and last year exposed ways college presidents worked to game the U.S. News system and downgrade their competitors. U.S. News and World report doesn't keep its previous lists online, making it tough to see how universities move up and down the list.
“For years, critics have noted that such rankings tend to reward institutions that used to be strong (even if they aren’t as strong now) and that many presidents end up ranking institutions about which they know relatively little,” writes Scott Jaschik in Inside Higher Ed. “Many colleges spend large sums of money sending materials to other presidents to try to influence them, and last year, Inside Higher Ed documented that some presidents appear to give unreasonably low rankings to their competitors and in some cases to all colleges but their own."
Michael Bastedo, a researcher who works in the U-M Center for the Study of Higher and Postsecondary Education, co-authored "Getting on the Front Page: Organizational Reputation, Status Signals and the Impact of U.S. News & World Report on Student Decisions" with Nicholas Bowman of Notre Dame's Center for Social Concerns. Their findings were published Research in Higher Education.
Bastedo previously told AnnArbor.com the rankings "aren't an indication of what you learn. They're an indication of how well students did in high school. It doesn't really rate the college as much as it does the admissions profile."
But they still matter to universities. Schools that move up or down in the top-50 see a correlation in the number of applicants, Bastedo's study found. Essentially, a higher ranking means a better applicant pool for the university.
What do you think of the annual list? Does it influence you? Tell us what you think in the comments section below.
Comments
Dylan
Wed, Aug 18, 2010 : 9:37 a.m.
This is just a great example of why transparency matters.
trespass
Wed, Aug 18, 2010 : 6:39 a.m.
The UM is happy to brag when they do well in the rankings/ Were thrilled with the rankings because they demonstrate continued excellence and quality of care in all measures, Pescovitz said. I think they affirm the outstanding quality of our faculty and staff. 'U' Hospitals and Health Centers earn spot on U.S. News and World Report Honor Roll but when they drop in the rankings they question the significance; While University officials are pleased that U-M consistently is ranked as one of the nations finest universities by U.S. News & World Report, they also note that this type of strict ranking of schools is not the most accurate measure of the quality of an institution, the press release stated. The UM has been declining in quality because their Administration has spent the last 20 years stripping away the rights of faculty and students and destroying shared governance in order to increase the Administration's own power. Universities do not thrive as dictatorships. Perhaps we need to vote out the incumbent Regents in November and vote in someone who is dedicated to restoring the role of the faculty and students.
Charley Sullivan
Tue, Aug 17, 2010 : 2:55 p.m.
The single best example of a University gaming the system is Penn, ranked at #5. Not even close, and certainly not better than Brown, Dartmouth, or, for that matter, Virginia or Michigan. But their administration, along with Carnegie Mellon's, have taken some of the largest moves to increase their profiles on the very specific characteristics that gain schools points. I did my undergrad work at Princeton, and I work at U-M now, and, the quality of education is very similar. The only difference for undergrads is that my Econ 101 class was taught by a Nobel Laureate, and the section was taught by the University president, which I think happens at very few of the schools on the list in any case. Set up a "grading system," and some people will focus on learning and teaching, while others will focus on making the grade.
Roger Roth
Tue, Aug 17, 2010 : 1:33 p.m.
You can go to the best school in the land (if it's even possible to determine that rating) and still turn out to be an average Joe, which is fine. This is about as important as which movie led the box office take last week. We're so obsessed! (And I graduated from one in the top 25.) So what? No one really cares. You kids out there, go to an inexpensive state school, if you can afford it, do the best you can, try to get through with minimum debt, get a job if you can after graduating and have a good life. (Try not to put all your eggs in one employer's basket.) You're as good as anyone else and you're not defined totally, if at all, by where you went to school. It's a myth. Some people have done extremely well in life with a high school education, only. Learn to think for yourself. Learn to create and exercise options and be ready for anything that may come your way, because it probably will. One more thing: try to find happiness in less. Less is fast becoming more. We're in a new world.