Is It Time to Stop Ranking Colleges and Universities?

With a rich experience of nearly two decades in managing data submissions for ranking purposes at two nationally and internationally renowned institutions, my conviction is that we should cease ranking colleges and universities. However, the data published by ranking organizations can still serve a critical role in helping prospective students make informed choices. The onus should be on the data and the students to create their personalized rankings based on diverse criteria. Let’s explore the nuances and contradictions inherent in the current system and suggest a way forward.

The Importance of Transparency in Rankings

One way to address the shortcomings of the current ranking systems is by clearly stating what each ranking entails. For instance, if a prospective student is considering UCLA, Berkeley, and Georgetown for their studies in psychology, the rankings might show Berkeley at the top, followed by UCLA in second place, and Georgetown in the 30–40th positions. Additionally, in broader world rankings, Georgetown might be positioned much lower, in the 300s. Yet, this doesn't tell the full story. It is crucial to understand that rankings often measure research outputs and faculty achievements, which might have little impact on undergraduate education.

The Disconnect Between Rankings and Undergraduate Education

Professorship-centric rankings often fail to reflect the quality of undergraduate teaching. Many top-ranked institutions are heavily focused on research, which can lead to a dilution of the teaching experience. At the University of California (UC) system, classes are frequently taught by Teaching Assistants (TAs) and graduate students, rather than professors. This model, while beneficial for research, may not provide the same level of personal engagement and hands-on learning that undergraduates seek. Consequently, if education is the priority, as it was for the author who chose Georgetown, the higher focus on research can sometimes be a drawback.

A Balanced Perspective on Rankings

While rankings can obfuscate the true quality of undergraduate education, they serve a vital function for international students who might be unfamiliar with the nuances of different institutions. Rankings offer a standardized metric to compare schools, which can be particularly useful for prospective international students navigating the complex landscape of higher education.

Limitations of Current Rankings

Rankings, as they stand today, also have significant limitations. For instance, the use of "reputation" (accounting for 20% of the methodology in US News World Report) is questionable. Reputation can be subjective and may not accurately reflect the actual offerings of an institution. Moreover, small increments in rankings are often meaningless, leading to an inflated sense of competition among universities. These incremental differences are often exaggerated in reports to create a more competitive environment, which can be detrimental to less visible institutions striving to attract the best students.

Conclusion: Embracing Personalized Rankings

For the sake of authenticity and student choice, we should minimize the reliance on rankings. Institutions like USNWR should focus more on data transparency and less on creating a competitive ranking system. Students and prospective students should be encouraged to evaluate colleges and universities based on several criteria, such as faculty expertise, campus life, resources, and personal goals. Let the data serve as a foundation, but allow students the freedom to create their personalized rankings. This approach can lead to a more fulfilling and satisfying educational journey, regardless of where one attends.