Search News


Browse Archives

News

False Rank

June 28, 2006

Share This Story

FREE Daily News Alerts

Advertisement

One of the multitude of grievances regarding the annual U.S. News & World Report rankings of institutions of higher education is that there are ways to cheat -- something that no individual student would be able to do when applying to, say, law school, without facing some mighty consequences.

A researcher with the magazine says that officials with Baylor University School of Law have repeatedly submitted misleading answers to the magazine’s questions involving LSAT scores and grade-point averages of first-year students. Baylor officials, meanwhile, insist they’ve done nothing wrong.

“We will be scrutinizing their data much more closely,” said Robert J. Morse, director of data research at U.S. News. “We’ll make sure that it doesn’t happen again.”

On two previous occasions, researchers with U.S. News were able to catch the misleading responses before publication. However, in the most recent rankings – in which Baylor Law placed 51st in the magazine's “Top 100 Schools” – U.S. News failed to catch the misreported data. The person who was responsible for catching the error has since left the publication for a new job.

Tom W. Bell, a professor of law at the Chapman University School of Law, in California, was the first to notice some discrepancies. He noted on his blog, Agoraphilia, that Baylor performed remarkably better in the 2007 U.S. News rankings than he expected, based on a model he created using data that schools report directly to the American Bar Association.  He calculates that Baylor should have actually ranked about 58. His model has proven to be on target with the publication’s rankings in a vast majority of cases.

“I’m just curious and I wanted to know how the rankings work,” Bell said Monday. “I’m kind of a geek when you put me in front of Excel.”

After crunching the numbers, Bell determined that it was likely that the magazine ranked Baylor law based not based on the median LSAT and GPA scores of the school’s entire first year class, but rather solely of the first year law students it admitted in the fall. 

For most schools, there would no difference in such numbers. But Baylor allows some students to enroll in the spring or summer preceding the first fall of their law school education.

“Judging from the data published in the ABA's official guide to law schools, Baylor lets students with relatively weak LSAT's and GPA's start early,” Bell wrote in his blog. “It admits students with relatively strong LSAT's and GPA's in the fall.”

“Clever people would have an incentive to throw a lot of data at U.S. News,” said Bell. “Then they could argue that it was the publication that failed to use the data correctly.”

Bell recently decided to contact Baylor Law regarding his concerns. In response, Leah Jackson, an associate dean of the school, responded with a letter that she also shared with Inside Higher Ed.

U.S. News uses the information we provide to them as it sees fit,” wrote Jackson. “We fully comply with our responsibility to accurately and thoroughly report the data that we submit to them; however, if they have in fact not used the data correctly pursuant to their proprietary formula, then we are not at fault.

“Second, all admissions data reported to U.S. News is taken directly from our admissions data reported to the ABA on our annual questionnaire. No changing or manipulating of admission data occurs between the time we report to the ABA and the time we complete the U.S. News survey.

“Third, we do not know how U.S. News uses the information it receives.  Your approximation of their formula indicates what might have happened, but we do not know that for sure…”

Jackson indicated that the onus for the mistake lies with U.S. News, since she says their online forms do not allow for proper clarification on the Internet for schools that operate on a calendar system like that of Baylor; instead, additional information must be submitted via facsimile.

Morse has labeled the arguments from Baylor, “lawyerly,” but he isn’t passing the buck.

“I’m not blaming this on Baylor,” said Morse. “The person at U.S. News shouldn’t have accepted [the school's numbers].” Morse said, too, that law schools and universities with the type of academic schedule Baylor uses have been told how to properly submit their information. 

Bell believes that the  publication’s rankings are given too much weight by applicants. “I want to see this process improve,” he said. “This is just frustrating.”

See all postings »
Advertisement
Advertisement

Matching Jobs

Comments on False Rank

  • Sbocked
  • Posted by Larry on June 28, 2006 at 6:20am EDT
  • Oh, I am so shocked -- shocked -- that a school would want to manipulate the USN rankings.

  • Where Else Would a "C" Yalie Go?
  • Posted by librarian3 on June 28, 2006 at 7:45am EDT
  • So, what? Baylor is simply demonstrating that they deserve the Bush library. When Bush bragged at Yale that even a "C" student can be President, Baylor saw no reason not to cook the books a bit. (see article on competition between Baylor and SMU).
    http://www.commondreams.org/views06/0510-23.htm

  • U.S. News rankings
  • Posted by Jerry Pattengale , AVP for Scholarship & Grants at IWU on June 28, 2006 at 9:20am EDT
  • Rob,

    Thanks for your balanced report on this issue. That is, both the magazine (via former employee) and the school have a voice in your coverage. I'm not sure of the current USN position on this. Also, the USN forms are electronic and flag any variation beyond statistical expectations. In order for a form to be accepted, USN looks at each of these and weighs such responses before you can lock. The same is true of IPEDS submissions. From interaction with several scholars and administrators at Baylor during the past few years--I believe it to be a strong program, and the people have integrity. Of course, my data is qualitative and not quantitative. Perhaps this is the issue with USN as well. It remains subjective in some ways--the deans' votes, the selection of questions used, etc. Yet, quantifies responses in most others. However, I've had numerous discussions with the USN staff over the past few years and have found them very helpful and certainly congenial in assisting our university with this process. We should all keep in mind that this report (one of several now from USN) is optional. On the one side, you can see it as free advertising to the largest market. On the other side, a real money-maker for USN. Baylor, like many schools, could have selected not to report. They have a strong marketing team that could have carried the day. However, from my limited knowledge of this, they attempted to apply. Also, the cost to each university to attempt to subject such forms is enormous (taking an IR person's and staff's time divided by the days it takes). It appears that this story surfaced in an honest dialogue about such matters from a former employee. And, there is admittance that USN made a mistake, in his opinion, by printing it. There remain difficult questions: What really is private or "client" privilege? and What is the HR policy at USN on such matters--in contracts? At the least, your story reveals the difficulties of fair ranking and rating systems. I would hope that more universities (and accrediting systems) begin to use the thorough approach now in its second year at the Policy Center for the First College Year (Brevard, NC). It's likely not an either-or ranking that will win the day. I think that USN has won a place in the American (and global) marketing mindset. My hat's off to its staff. I also hope that like any assessment cycle, that such cases give cause for constant improvement. Once again, thanks for representing both sides.

  • Always Amusing
  • Posted by Christine on June 28, 2006 at 10:55am EDT
  • Re Baylor and their U.S.News ranking: academics never disappoint. Librarian 3 takes a story about Baylor possibly cooking data and U.S.News falling for it and turns it into an anti-Bush rant. Is Karl Rove involved? Has the Common Dreams News Center teased out that connection yet?

  • Is anyone Surprised?
  • Posted by Rob on June 28, 2006 at 1:05pm EDT
  • I used to work at a small Midwestern School that broke into the top tier of USN&WR by blatantly falsifying data on its accepted class. They changed SAT scores, GPAs and decided to hold off on admitting questionable students (that they needed to make the numbers) until after they'd reported to NSN&WR. Then they went back and changed everything back. The net result was that they cracked the top tier and have stayed there ever since.

    I'm not at all condoning this. Rather, I deplore it and it's one of the reasons I'm glad not to be associated with that school in anyway at all anymore.

    I don't expect that this is all that uncommon.

  • Falsfifying data
  • Posted by Patrick Mattimore , Teacher on June 28, 2006 at 2:00pm EDT
  • Rob,
    This is a very serious charge. Frankly, though, I don't think there is any legal prohibition against schools sending USNWR falsified data. It would also seem to me that it would be fairly easy to pay USNWR data collectors under the table to elevate rankings. There is, of course, no payoff for USNWR to reveal any malfeasance that might occur since hints of improprieties/scandals would reflect badly on the magazine itself.

  • Posted by Harry on June 28, 2006 at 2:05pm EDT
  • Librarian:

    Waaaaaah. Stay on topic or go reshelve something.

  • Librarian3 must be a Texan. . .
  • Posted by Amy on June 28, 2006 at 5:45pm EDT
  • and thus the comment. For those of y'all unfortunate enough to reside elsewhere, the fight for the library for 'Shrub' is fierce - and not without reason - College Station is NOT the center of the universe (except to Aggies) and they get GREAT folks to come speak at commencement, etc. thanks to the patronage of the Bush clan & other politically connected apparatchiks! So, Librarian's comment is well founded, & this article may well be taken into account in the final reckoning of the 'library race'!

  • MORE OF THE STORY
  • Posted by Law Dog on August 1, 2006 at 9:30pm EDT
  • For those who are truly interested in this subject and not just looking to take pot shots, here's a link to Tom Bell's follow-up post. Tom concludes that the problem appears to be much more on USNWR's end of the data stream than on Baylor's: http://agoraphilia.blogspot.com/2006/06/baylor-explains-data-it-reported-for_27.html.