Dive Brief
-
Citing a “recently discovered issue with data,” Temple University asked that its online master of business administration program not be considered for U.S. News & World Report's annual ranking of best online programs, reports Insider Higher Ed. Earlier in the year, U.S. News & World Report removed the Temple M.B.A. program from its 2018 Best Online Programs list because its ranking was discovered to be based on inaccurately submitted data.
-
Temple's Fox School of Business joins a list of business schools to catch hot water over imprecise data submissions. George Washington University in 2016 and Tulane University in 2013 confessed to supplying erroneous data to U.S. News & World Report for its annual ranking. Additionally, the Financial Times removed Spain-based the IE Business School from its ranking because of irregular survey data.
-
Data flaws are not the only the problem plaguing M.B.A. rankings. A group of 21 business school professors published a paper calling for changes in the way the schools are ranked. Questions have also been raised about the value such rankings and the pressure university officials may face to fudge data.
Dive Insight
Parents and students typically do not question the value of educational rankings laid out by publications, although insiders say they should. In a blistering critique of M.B.A. rankings, 21 business professors from private and public institutions across the United States said that M.B.A. rankings tended to give little attention to learning or public benefits, focusing instead on the short-term economic gains of graduates. According these experts, rankings bypass critically relevant details, such as ability to pay back student debt that make a big difference in person’s quality of life.
Naturally, similar concerns extend to college accreditors who also have been the target of criticism. In 2006, a U.S. Department of Education commissioned report claimed “a remarkable absence of accountability mechanisms to ensure that colleges succeed in educating students,” saying there was widespread uncertainty “over which institutions do a better job than others not only of graduating students but of teaching them what they need to learn.”
Lately there's has been a lot of conversation about how to improve how college accreditors asses school quality. Experts disagree with the tendency to reduce student success to employment outcomes. Student learning should be a leading sign of value, but some say accreditors and the system weigh too strongly aspects that are divorced from learning.
As the old guard no longer suffices, experts say assessment measures are changing, and data and technology are having a major impact. Furthermore, accreditors are examining how better communication, information sharing and collaborations can overcome the absence of information that aggravate concerns about value assessments.