http://www.npr.org/2013/08/22/214520122/does-the-data-exist-to-make-college-rating-system-work

Seems like a bad idea on the surface... What problem are they solving?

8/22/2013 7:53:11 PM

Quote :

""So really, we're going to have good data on how much students earn seven years later? That's what you need," Baum says. "The question about how much students borrow — are you including students who dropped out or only those who graduate? It's very difficult to do this right.""

Oh man, it should count quadruple for students that drop out.

Having personally had friends who dropped out halfway through with boatloads of debt, I vouch that it affects them more than the people who make it through. People don't often drop out because their debt load - they drop out because they're doing poorly academically. That's a toxic formula. They can get a college degree job, or even start at another school without putting a lot more upfront effort.

There's another issue: does the carrot-and-stick approach work in the first place? It's the same as NCLB in that it sucks resources from schools not doing well. But often these are the places that need those resources. In the free market, they go bankrupt, get bought out, etc. What is the life and death cycle for universities? Without a good answer for that, the entire idea looks real bad.

8/22/2013 9:04:09 PM

Haven't we learned that this kind of system incentivizes going for ratings and not necessarily providing the best education?

8/22/2013 9:17:21 PM

for the most part, anything with ratings incentivizes lots of people/schools/companies/whatever to go for the best rating and not the best _____.

[Edited on August 23, 2013 at 8:02 AM. Reason : ]

8/23/2013 8:01:42 AM

It also makes me uncomfortable because its setting up universities to become "job training programs" instead of places to get a good education (maybe not immediately but it pushes the institutions in that direction)

8/23/2013 8:37:24 AM

yeah, academia should operate independent of job placement. universities get grants to do research, not to train workers. the point about needing a ranking based on the back end results instead of what it takes to get accepted (or what students are saying on rate my professor, or how many bricks the campus has, etc...) is a good point, but I doubt that does anything to reduce tuition and I doubt it reduces loan delinquency by much

8/23/2013 9:32:03 AM

Quote :

"universities get grants to do research, not to train workers."

I don't believe this Obamascore has any bearing on research grants. Those are submitted in a competitive process, although there are a lot of university-related factors that go into those decisions. I think that's quite separate.

I think the idea here is that federal grants for education itself would be tied to the Obamascore. But please correct me if I have something wrong about this. Those grants do have a greater relevancy to job placement.

8/23/2013 9:57:12 AM

i mentioned that only as a reference to the purpose of universities as accepted by the government

[Edited on August 23, 2013 at 10:01 AM. Reason : my point stands]

8/23/2013 10:01:15 AM