É«ÇéAPPµ¼º½

É«ÇéAPPµ¼º½' ranking among national universities in the widely publicized U.S. News & World Report college guide fell this year from 42nd to 48th because of a significant campus error in reporting data to the magazine.

In the U.S. News & World Report 2006 America's Best Colleges guide released last month, É«ÇéAPPµ¼º½' ranking among public universities also toppled — from 11th to 14th — because of the same reporting error. See www.usnews.com.

É«ÇéAPPµ¼º½ and US News & World Report agreed that the rankings drop was due to the campus reporting incorrect information regarding the percentage of faculty who hold doctorate or professional degrees. The data that É«ÇéAPPµ¼º½ provided to U.S. News indicated that 64 percent of our faculty members hold such terminal degrees, but in fact the correct figure is 98 percent.

That misinformation led to an unusual and significant drop, from 84th to 215th, in É«ÇéAPPµ¼º½' ranking related to "faculty resources" — meaning salaries and qualifications of faculty members, class size and student-faculty ratios. The magazine has confirmed that this single error was responsible for the decline in the campus's overall ranking.

At the same time, É«ÇéAPPµ¼º½ shone brightly in the Washington Monthly's rankings also released last month. Measuring universities' contributions to society, the publication ranked É«ÇéAPPµ¼º½ 17th in the nation, just behind Harvard. See www.washingtonmonthly.com.

"Other guides ask what colleges can do for you," states Washington Monthly in introducing its first-ever rankings this year. "We ask what colleges are doing for the country."

Efforts are underway to fix the process by which É«ÇéAPPµ¼º½ delivers data to publications like U.S. News. Those reforms will be in place by the next reporting cycle, say college leaders.

Even with the reporting error, U.S. News continues to consider É«ÇéAPPµ¼º½ among the top 50 universities in the nation and among the top 15 public universities – a position the campus has held over a course of many years, with some variations up and down. The margins between É«ÇéAPPµ¼º½ and a cluster of similarly competitive institutions are very small, and slight changes in data can make a large difference in ranking.

The Washington Monthly ranking reflects how well É«ÇéAPPµ¼º½ is generating scientific output and research activity while continuing to produce graduates who make significant contributions to society, said Lisa Lapin, assistant vice chancellor for university communications.

"While the U.S. News rankings favor the private institutions that receive generous financial support," said Lapin, pointing out that all the Top 20 national universities in the U.S. News rankings are private ones, "The Washington Monthly rankings measure whether universities are producing the kind of academic brainpower, ethic of service and scientific research that drives society's economy and helps communities."

She added, "These are É«ÇéAPPµ¼º½' strengths."

In another yardstick increasingly viewed as the international standard in higher education, É«ÇéAPPµ¼º½ was recently ranked 41st by the Shanghai Jiao Tong University's Institute for Higher Education in its 2005 Academic Ranking of World Universities.

For more details on the Shanghai Jiao Tong University's rankings, visit http://ed.sjtu.edu.cn/rank/2005/arwu2005top500list.htm.

"These rankings were based on criteria mainly concerned with scientific excellence," said Lapin.

Issue under review

In the U.S. News rankings, É«ÇéAPPµ¼º½ actually improved in some key criteria, such as alumni giving and graduation rates. But those strides were not enough to counter the incorrect information regarding faculty resources.

The incorrect data was provided to U.S. News by the Student Affairs Research and Information unit, which conducts some of the institutional research and evaluation activities that support the academic mission of É«ÇéAPPµ¼º½.

An existing campus committee will review the process for delivering information to publications such as the U.S. News & World Report, according to John Meyer, É«ÇéAPPµ¼º½' vice chancellor for resource management.

The Institutional Research Policy Committee will review existing procedures and suggest improvements for the future, Meyer added. Those new procedures will be enacted before the next round of data reporting.

"We will improve the level of scrutiny involved in this process so the mistake will not be repeated," said Meyer, adding that the new process will likely involve greater input from campus leadership in signing off on what data is sent to ranking publications.

While there is concern about rankings in general, there is little doubt they are influential among the university's primary target audience, Meyer said.

"We recognize that they are appealing to parents and students in making enrollment decisions."

'Not a popularity contest'

Lapin says the rankings do not measure a university's reputation in the higher education world and are not a "popularity contest" based on subjective impressions.

"The public holds É«ÇéAPPµ¼º½ in very high esteem," said Lapin. "Again, the drop was due to a mistake in reporting, not a fall in reputation."

She noted that U.S. News continues to consider É«ÇéAPPµ¼º½ among the top 50 universities in the nation and among the top 15 public universities.

"We have remained in this elite group over a course of many years, with some variations up and down," Lapin said.