College Guide
Blog
The latest issue of the Washington Monthly is now live.
Today the magazine releases its annual College Rankings. This is our answer to rankings like U.S. News & World Report, which rely on easily manipulated measures of wealth, exclusivity, and prestige to determine college quality. Instead, the Monthly rates schools based on what they are doing for the country—on whether they’re improving social mobility, producing research, and promoting public service.
All of the features in this issue are about higher education. Check out Ben Miller and Phuong Ly’s piece on colleges that are fundamentally dropout factories. Another feature, Eric Hoover’s “Campus Tours Go Disney ,” looks at how campus tours manipulate potential students and their parents. I’ve also got a piece in this issue, about how George Washington University is one of the best up-and-coming colleges in America, and why that’s the problem.
Check out the new issue here.
Facebook
Twitter
Marc Zawel on August 23, 2010 2:32 PM:
Rankings � whether from US News, Washington Monthly or any other publication � are helpful in giving applicants a sense of where colleges fit, compared to one another, with respect to standardized test scores, admission rates, reputation and graduation rates; some even rank party schools, beautiful campuses and accessible professors.
But for high school students and parents to nitpick between a college ranked #32 and, say, #42, on any list is silly at best � and plain stupid at worst. Applicants need to visit colleges and get a feel for campuses, current students and surroundings. They should talk to friends or ask their school counselors for advice. And then create their own rank of colleges that are best for them.
Marc Zawel
Co-founder, EqualApp
Jason on August 23, 2010 11:34 PM:
I'm curious why the service categories in Washington Monthly seem so slanted to public universities. For example, ROTC hurts many top private institutions which removed ROTC from their campuses in the 60s and 70s. Of course, that's not to say that ROTC is not valuable, it is to say that as an overall picture of civic engagement and citizenship is perhaps poorly represented at many top schools with this measure. The inclusion of the Peace Corps but not TFA, City Year, or other popular Americorp service positions is similarly troubling.
Finally, I find the disagreement with the composite scores you have for these categories and this list at USNews is disconcerting: http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-colleges/service-learning-programs .
Generally, data is better than no data, and data with qualitative information to help translate that data into the real world is even better. Even if these experts at USNews ("These choices were made by an expert panel who reviewed formal nominations. ") are biased as heck, you have to believe they're not way off the mark.
What about the number of people working in government or the non-profit sector?
I just question the usefulness of the specific and limited data being used to assess a very important and interesting question.
Ugh on August 24, 2010 10:51 AM:
Yet another ridiculous attempt to turn the college experience into a formula.