LSU President F. King Alexander has long been a proponent of a federal ratings system for the nation’s colleges and universities, which he maintains would provide a more accurate portrayal of each institution’s true value for students and serve as a counterbalance to private rankings such as the popular U.S. News & World Report rankings.
In a new guest column featured in The Chronicle of Higher Education, Alexander says a plan from the Obama administration to begin publishing new college ratings before the 2015 school year—of which some higher education officials have been very skeptical—should be embraced as a good first step “toward developing more-comprehensive ways to measure colleges’ value.”
“The U.S. Department of Education’s Postsecondary Institution Ratings System (PIRS), a continuation of the existing College Scorecard, will be complex for many reasons, including the diversity of our higher-education institutions and our well-documented limitations on data,” writes Alexander. “But we should start by considering ways to make PIRS more effective, rather than immediately devaluing it and viewing it with suspicion and disapproval.”
Alexander notes there remains a wide discrepancy between student-based federal spending on higher education (about $170 billion) and state support ($74 billion).
“And there are no straightforward reporting mechanisms to determine which college or university best fits a particular student’s needs. It is not only a right of the federal government but an obligation to ensure that taxpayer dollars support a system that provides real value and benefits to those who invest in it,” he writes in the column. “The U.S. News & World Report rankings measure few, if any, metrics of a college’s actual value. In fact, those pursuing college degrees in the United States do not have a single, clear, consistent source of information allowing them to differentiate between high-quality programs and those of questionable value.” Read the full column.
