Editorial: UNH right to opt out of U.S. News' survey; others should follow

An article published Monday in the Washington Post discusses the growing number of college presidents that are boycotting the now-common practice of sending glossy promotional material to peer institutions in an attempt to lobby for a higher spot in the annual rankings of colleges and universities compiled by U.S. News & World Report.

While many of the factors that go into the "Best Colleges" rankings are based on objective facts such as a school's rate of admission or its average class size, the reputation survey, in which college leaders are asked to rank other institutions, depends solely on opinion. The results of the reputation survey makes up 25 percent of a school's ranking.

The movement against the reputation survey stems from a letter signed in May of 2007 by 12 college presidents and sent to hundreds of others. It asked them to refuse to fill out the reputation survey and to refrain from referring to the rankings as an indication of the quality of their college or university.

That letter has since been signed by President Huddleston, along with 53 more college presidents. We can only hope that even more college presidents will follow his example, and applaud his efforts to address the problems associated with the reputation survey.

First of all, having college presidents rank other colleges, when they're clearly going to be most concerned with their own institution's ranking, is ridiculous. Think they're too professional for that? In June, the Washington Post reported, a Clemson University official admitted at a public gathering that her administrators gave low marks to competitors on the survey to make the school look better. By making the reputation survey part of their rankings, U.S. News & World Report taints the objectivity of their annual feature.

Second, why exactly should a college president be expected to be an expert on the goings-on at other colleges and universities? We imagine that most college presidents have enough to do when it comes to dealing with their own institutions. But administrators in the "national university" category are expected to rank the 260 schools that fall into that category. There's no way they can have the background necessary to report on 260 schools, no matter how much promotional material they're sent, which makes you wonder where their numbers are coming from.

Third, there are much better uses of school funds than sending promotional material to administrators of other colleges. Wooing high school students is necessary to keep enrollment numbers up. Wooing fellow administrators crosses over into vanity. Save the money and concentrate on education, even if you don't get a pat on the back for it.

There's an issue that lurks behind this story, and that's the notion of the rankings themselves. The idea that colleges can truly be ranked is foolish; the ideal school for an individual will always be a personal choice. Not to mention that within each college and university are a host of departments and majors that deserve their own ranking. Some schools have clear specialties that may not translate to overall rankings.

That being said, it's hard to deny the influence that these rankings have, however unfortunate it may be. We don't expect the U.S. News & World Report rankings to cease overnight, but we would like to see some reforms in the rankings. College presidents should continue to sign on to this movement, send a message to the magazine, and spend their money where it really matters. And prospective students should continue to be the rational ones and realize that there's way more to college than numbers.