Search News


Browse Archives

News

The Best University?

June 9, 2009

Share This Story

FREE Daily News Alerts

Advertisement

Clemson University officials took great umbrage at last week's assertion by a fellow administrator that they had rated "all programs other than Clemson below average" in the peer evaluations they filled out for U.S. News & World Report's annual rankings of colleges and universities, as part of a larger (successful) institutional strategy to send the South Carolina institution soaring up higher education's version of the Billboard charts.

On Monday, in response to reporters' requests for those peer assessment forms, Clemson released (in modified form, with the names of individual colleges excised) several recent peer evaluations submitted to U.S. News by the university's president and provost. The forms, a Clemson spokeswoman wrote in an e-mail accompanying the documents, show "that there was no collusion to tell people how to vote (their surveys are different -- until last week they had never talked about them), and that they do not rate everyone except Clemson below average."

That's true, and Clemson's provost, Dori Helms, rates 29 "national universities" as better than or equal to the "strong" mark (4 on a 5-point scale) she gave to Clemson in 2008.

But the university's president, James F. Barker, took a very different approach in his peer assessments. Barker, too, rated his institution as "strong" -- but he gave no other university in the country that high a mark, handing out 18 "good"s (3's), 94 "adequate"s (2's), 126 "marginal"s, and 21 "don't know"s in the 2009 ranking. Because U.S. News's "national universities" category includes not only well-regarded public institutions such as the Universities of California at Berkeley, Michigan, and North Carolina at Chapel Hill, but also private universities such as Harvard, Stanford, and Yale, Barker has rated his institution more highly than all of those.

In an interview Monday, he defended his approach. "The request from U.S. News is to measure the academic quality of undergraduate programs," Barker said. "It did not say research programs, it did not say prestige. It did not say size of endowments, or anything other than undergraduate education. And I took that charge seriously, measuring what I would think would be the full package of the undergraduate experience," including faculty-student ratio, relationships between faculty and students in and out of class ... do they spend time having lunch together.

"I believe that Clemson does that better than anyone," he said. "That's why my ranking for Clemson is where it is. You'll notice I did not give anyone a 5, because I did not believe any of us had reached that level.... I'm a hard grader."

Pressed on whether he truly believed Clemson affords its students a better undergraduate experience than do Princeton and the University of Virginia, Barker acknowledged that the question of colleges' "efficiency" has probably "crept into my thinking." In other words, he was asked, those institutions have a lot more money than Clemson and therefore have a natural advantage that his own personal rating system sought to account for in some way? "Other schools would bring a great deal to the table, and I was adding that component of fiscal discipline on top of the quality of what's going on," he said.

Barker said he was "absolutely not" trying to game its standing in the college rankings, -- as critics have alleged in the wake of last week's revelations about Clemson's aggressive approach to U.S. News. "There are hundreds of forms that are submitted each year, and one form doesn't move a school one way or the other," he said. "To use one form to game the system is impossible." (U.S. News in fact tosses out the highest and lowest peer ratings for each institution it ranks, to try to eliminate outliers, according to its officials.)

Asked if he regretted rating Clemson higher than 259 of its public and private university peers, Barker was unapologetic. "I think a university president needs to believe in what the school is doing. Clemson is my alma mater, but also my school. I would not deny that I have some bias, but what I'm doing there is my reflection on what's happening in undergraduate education."

See all postings »
Advertisement
Advertisement

Matching Jobs

Comments on The Best University?

  • Let's move beyond pathetic explanations to the real problem
  • Posted by Patrick Mattimore , Teacher at Retired on June 9, 2009 at 8:15am EDT
  • Okay. President Barker's explanation is pathetic. He sounds like one of those fellows caught in the crosshairs of a particularly brutal 60 Minutes expose.
    But the real problem is that the public allows itself to be gamed by USN&WR, gobbling up its most popular issue and then believing that they've just read something objective and valuable. Here's my response.
    http://www.opednews.com/articles/Clemson-Steps-into-a-USN-W-by-Patrick-Mattimore-090606-541.html

  • Bias
  • Posted by SRM , Director/College and Career Center at North Penn HS on June 9, 2009 at 8:45am EDT
  • I think Clemson is onto something here! If US News encouraged all 259 presidents of "national universities" to take President Barker's approach, they could help students and their families evaluate all of the data their magazine presents by ranking schools in a new category: Best (Most) Biased!!

  • What's the big deal?
  • Posted by Martin on June 9, 2009 at 9:00am EDT
  • I don't see what the hub-bub is all about. So Clemson's President thinks his university is the best in the country, I would think he should be fired if he thought otherwise. Like the former poster, however, I do think this is an indicator of a much larger problem in higher education and that is the degree in which the public "gobbles" this nonsense up.

    I have worked at both the large public university and the small, private university, and there are pros and cons for each. My measure of success is how well our graduates are doing in the job market, both upon graduation and ten years out.

  • Egotistical Academics
  • Posted by Frizbane Manley on June 9, 2009 at 10:00am EDT
  • There is no doubt in my mind that the “leaders” of the vast majority of colleges and universities in the United States know practically nothing about the general concept, “culture of learning,” and damned few of them know much about the culture of learning as it exists on their specific campus. That is true, not only of a majority of the academic leaders, but of virtually all of the managerial “leaders.”

    Among a very large number of ways academics fool themselves is by grossly exaggerating the importance of the classroom experience to the educational process. Speaking only of undergraduate programs – which are apparently President Barker’s specialty – peer interaction is far-and-away the most important dimension of a young person’s education, so the mix of students who find themselves on the campus of any college or university is bound to be of the utmost importance to the educations of all.

    I give you the following thought experiment. Suppose on the first day of their matriculation at Yale, I call a meeting of the freshman class. I announce that (1) there will be no formal classes for the next four years, (2) all faculty will be expected to have office hours for twenty hours per week, and (3) students will be expected to choose a “major,” schedule their time and effort however they want, and test-out four years hence. I conjecture that the “product” of that learning environment would differ very little from what will eventually be Yale’s Class of 2014.

    Now imagine doing that at Auburn University or at Clemson. If you think the results would be the same ... well I know you’re not that naive. I don’t deny that the school spirit at Auburn and Clemson is quite exceptional ... and I don’t deny that some university presidents have difficulty distinguishing between academic excellence and school spirit ... and I don’t deny that the U.S. News & World Report rankings are theoretically and practically vacuous ... and I am truly not denigrating the “Clemson experience” one iota, but I challenge you to line up the top 25% of the returning sophomores at Clemson next fall and offer each one the same economic package s/he has there at either Cal Tech or Stanford ... and see what happens. What the Hell, offer James F. Barker the presidency of MIT and see what happens. Putting it as kindly as I can – and ignoring the absurdity of the USN&WR rankings for the moment – the guy is simply out to lunch.

    I have spent a considerable amount of time in Alabama (and at Auburn), Connecticut (and at Yale), and South Carolina (and at Clemson), and this is my “on-average assessment” of the excellence of the undergraduate experience (culture of learning) at the three universities ... where 10 is exceptional. Oh yes, I threw Swarthmore in for good measure.

    0.....1.....2.....3.....A.....5.....C.....7.....8.....S.....Y

  • Who IS the best?
  • Posted by Monk , Clerk at Retired on June 9, 2009 at 11:15am EDT
  • Forget USNWR and Newsweek, the real question is why the NRC rankings have been delayed so long. Could it be that Clemson finished higher than Harvard and Yale? Could it be that were such a finding to be published that Harvard and Yale--perennial winners in NRC rankings--would unleash a withering campaign to discredit the NRC? Could it be that the NRC is re-jiggering the real findings? Just asking.

  • Brilliant !!!
  • Posted by Data Dog on June 9, 2009 at 7:15pm EDT
  • WOW! That Pres. Barker, he must be a real savant. He actually knows that many universities so well that he can have only 21 "Don't Know's" out of 260 schools in his category! Oh please, Pres. Barker, give us all a better performance than that. And not to mention that fully 53% of the national universities in America that he rated received the very bottom rating from this guy? And no one, not one at all, as good as Clemson? Clemson? Come on Barker, you can come up with something better than the utterly lame "explanation" above, can't you? I'd like to see the list of the 126 bottom of the scale schools according to this guy. That would be interesting.

  • Not really news
  • Posted by Dr. Su , Former admissions professional on June 10, 2009 at 11:30am EDT
  • I have blogged about the topic of rankings and gaming on several occasions, including this recent post:
    http://refractedhighered.wordpress.com/2009/06/08/more-fun-with-rankings/

    People may be shocked, uncomfortable with, or completely understanding of institutional representatives who attempt to manipulate the ratings of other institutions in an effort to make their own look more distinguished, but it's not news. It's been going on for years, and as long as USN&WR or any other 'ranking' system includes peer assessments (based on what? I can honestly say that in my experience with the the peer rankings, there were many schools I had never even heard of before) of supposedly similar or competitor institutions, it will probably continue.

  • Will Yale professors have larger offices?
  • Posted on June 11, 2009 at 4:45pm EDT
  • Frizbane Manley notes: " Suppose on the first day of their matriculation at Yale, I call a meeting of the freshman class. I announce that (1) there will be no formal classes for the next four years, (2) all faculty will be expected to have office hours for twenty hours per week, and (3) students will be expected to choose a “major,” schedule their time and effort however they want, and test-out four years hence. I conjecture that the “product” of that learning environment would differ very little from what will eventually be Yale’s Class of 2014."

    Hmmm. So, by next year every professor and every student will be on one another's schedules without any planning, scheduling, or coordination? Brilliant! I can see the book now: "Managing Through Miracles." Professors should be happy with their larger offices and the luxurious living room furniture they will get out of this. After all, who needs to waste time on class prep and in stinky labs?

    This is indeed a worthy plan that could only hatch from the minds of a forward thinking college administrator.