When Reed's former president Steven Koblik decided to stop submitting data to U.S. Because the rankings depend heavily on unaudited, self-reported data, there is no way to ensure either the accuracy of the information or the reliability of the resulting rankings. Third, rankings create powerful incentives to manipulate data and distort institutional behavior for the sole or primary purpose of inflating one's score. Second, the rankings reinforce a view of education as strictly instrumental to extrinsic goals such as prestige or wealth this is antithetical to Reed's philosophy that higher education should produce intrinsic rewards such as liberation and self-realization.
The urge to improve one's ranking creates an irresistible pressure toward homogeneity, and schools that, like Reed, strive to be different are almost inevitably penalized. First, one-size-fits-all ranking schemes undermine the institutional diversity that characterizes American higher education. It has three primary reasons for doing so. News & World Report ranking system for ten years, and assumed the presidency of Reed College, one of a handful of American institutions of higher education that refuse to cooperate with that system.įor ten years Reed has declined to fill out the annual peer evaluations and statistical surveys that U.S. I left the University of Pennsylvania, where, as dean of its law school, I had lived under the U.S. Three years ago I experienced a form of liberation denied to most of my peers in higher education.
0 kommentar(er)
