Detail, east Portland photo, courtesy Miles Hochstein / Portland Ground.



For old times' sake
The bojack bumper sticker -- only $1.50!

To order, click here.







Excellent tunes -- free! And on your browser right now. Just click on Radio Bojack!






E-mail us here.

About

This page contains a single entry from the blog posted on October 13, 2005 1:54 AM. The previous post in this blog was I want one of these. The next post in this blog is Curious cross-pollination. Many more can be found on the main index page or by looking through the archives.

Archives

Links

Law and Taxation
How Appealing
TaxProf Blog
Mauled Again
Tax Appellate Blog
A Taxing Matter
TaxVox
Tax.com
Josh Marquis
Native America, Discovered and Conquered
The Yin Blog
Ernie the Attorney
Conglomerate
Above the Law
The Volokh Conspiracy
Going Concern
Bag and Baggage
Wealth Strategies Journal
Jim Hamilton's World of Securities Regulation
myCorporateResource.com
World of Work
The Faculty Lounge
Lowering the Bar
OrCon Law

Hap'nin' Guys
Tony Pierce
Parkway Rest Stop
Utterly Boring.com
Along the Gradyent
Dwight Jaynes
Bob Borden
Dingleberry Gazette
The Red Electric
Iced Borscht
Jeremy Blachman
Dean's Rhetorical Flourish
Straight White Guy
HinesSight
Onfocus
Jalpuna
Beerdrinker.org
As Time Goes By
Dave Wagner
Jeff Selis
Alas, a Blog
Scott Hendison
Sansego
The View Through the Windshield
Appliance Blog
The Bleat

Hap'nin' Gals
My Whim is Law
Lelo in Nopo
Attorney at Large
Linda Kruschke
The Non-Consumer Advocate
10 Steps to Finding Your Happy Place
A Pig of Success
Attorney at Large
Margaret and Helen
Kimberlee Jaynes
Cornelia Seigneur
Mireio
And Sew It Goes
Mile 73
Rainy Day Thoughts
That Black Girl
Posie Gets Cozy
{AE}
Cat Eyes
Rhi in Pink
Althouse
GirlHacker
Ragwaters, Bitters, and Blue Ruin
Frytopia
Rose City Journal
Type Like the Wind

Portland and Oregon
Isaac Laquedem
StumptownBlogger
Rantings of a [Censored] Bus Driver
Jeff Mapes
Vintage Portland
The Portlander
South Waterfront
Amanda Fritz
O City Hall Reporters
Guilty Carnivore
Old Town by Larry Norton
The Alaunt
Bend Blogs
Lost Oregon
Cafe Unknown
Tin Zeroes
David's Oregon Picayune
Mark Nelsen's Weather Blog
Travel Oregon Blog
Portland Daily Photo
Portland Building Ads
Portland Food and Drink.com
Dave Knows Portland
Idaho's Portugal
Alameda Old House History
MLK in Motion
LoveSalem

Retired from Blogging
Various Observations...
The Daily E-Mail
Saving James
Portland Freelancer
Furious Nads (b!X)
Izzle Pfaff
The Grich
Kevin Allman
AboutItAll - Oregon
Lost in the Details
Worldwide Pablo
Tales from the Stump
Whitman Boys
Misterblue
Two Pennies
This Stony Planet
1221 SW 4th
Twisty
I am a Fish
Here Today
What If...?
Superinky Fixations
Pinktalk
Mellow-Drama
The Rural Bus Route
Another Blogger
Mikeyman's Computer Treehouse
Rosenblog
Portland Housing Blog

Wonderfully Wacky
Dave Barry
Borowitz Report
Blort
Stuff White People Like
Worst of the Web

Valuable Time-Wasters
My Gallery of Jacks
Litterbox, On the Prowl
Litterbox, Bag of Bones
Litterbox, Scratch
Maukie
Ride That Donkey
Singin' Horses
Rally Monkey
Simon Swears
Strong Bad's E-mail

Oregon News
KGW-TV
The Oregonian
Portland Tribune
KOIN
Willamette Week
KATU
The Sentinel
Southeast Examiner
Northwest Examiner
Sellwood Bee
Mid-County Memo
Vancouver Voice
Eugene Register-Guard
OPB
Topix.net - Portland
Salem Statesman-Journal
Oregon Capitol News
Portland Business Journal
Daily Journal of Commerce
Oregon Business
KPTV
Portland Info Net
McMinnville News Register
Lake Oswego Review
The Daily Astorian
Bend Bulletin
Corvallis Gazette-Times
Roseburg News-Review
Medford Mail-Tribune
Ashland Daily Tidings
Newport News-Times
Albany Democrat-Herald
The Eugene Weekly
Portland IndyMedia
The Columbian

Music-Related
The Beatles
Bruce Springsteen
Seal
Sting
Joni Mitchell
Ella Fitzgerald
Steve Earle
Joe Ely
Stevie Wonder
Lou Rawls

E-mail, Feeds, 'n' Stuff

Thursday, October 13, 2005

Rank incompetence

Most academics loathe the U.S. News & World Report rankings of colleges and universities. This annual exercise purports to take a look at nearly every undergraduate and graduate school progam in the country, and to rank them all, from the "best" to the "worst." In the lower echelons, the rankings are just large groups, listed alphabetically, but at the top, there's a precise-looking Top 40 countdown that would make Casey Kasem proud. The publications that include the rankings make U.S. News a ton of money every year.

The reasons why many in the higher education business detest this process (and I'm speaking here for myself and other academics individually, not for my employer or any other institution) are many and varied. Many academic leaders have spoken out against the practice. Occasionally a school is brave enough to refuse to submit information to U.S. News for use in its survey. For example, Colin Diver, the president of Reed College here in Portland, has aleady gotten a fair amount of play out of this new commentary in the Atlantic Monthly, blasting U.S. News and explaining why Reed won't send them the data they request from all the colleges. I'll let you read what Diver has to say, and if you're interested in reading other grounds for distrusting the U.S. News ranking "system," you can find a rich literature of criticism just by using some basic Google smarts.

Like it or hate it, though, U.S. News is the 6,000-pound gorilla of college and university recruiting. Schools may turn up their noses at the rankings, but you can bet that they are well aware of where they stand on the charts, and are ever happy to make moves that they think will jump them up. Unfortunately, a lot of game-playing comes out of this, and I doubt that it ever brings about much improvement in the participants' academic programs.

The most notable byproduct of the annual beauty contest is the flood of full-color glossy brochures that the schools send out to all those who are likely voters in the U.S. News surveys. During U.S. News polling season, I get one or two such publications in the mail from different law schools every day. I never look at them any more. Hundreds of thousands of dollars in production, printing, and snail-mail costs, and each brochure goes directly from my mailbox to the recycling bin in the split second it takes me to recognize it as the junk mail it is.

My personal involvement in the U.S. News process has proven to me that it is ludicrous. From time to time, they get my name on one of their lists, and they send me a survey form to rank all the law schools in America. Sometimes the assigned task has been to rank the schools' overall programs, but lately, since I'm a tax professor, they ask me to rate all the law schools based on the educational opportunities they provide in the tax area.

I get the form, and I stare at it in disbelief. There are nearly 200 law schools listed there. How many of them could I possibly know anything meaningful about? O.k., I teach at one of them. I attended another one, 30 years ago. I have friends who teach at maybe a dozen more. I have read recent books and articles by professors at maybe a dozen more beyond that. That totals up to around one eighth of the sample. How does that qualify me to say anything at all about who's the "best" and the "worst" in the much larger group?

And how many law schools have I actually set foot in in the past five years beyond my own? Five at most. How many have I visited recently to teach regular courses in? None. How many other schools' faculty meetings have I attended? None. What do I know about the true atmosphere for learning at other schools? Nothing.

Plus, am I going to say anything good about my school's competitors? Our admissions officers fight tooth and nail for good applicants sometimes, and for better or worse, U.S. News can be a deciding factor in the prospects' decisonmaking. Doesn't that make me just a little biased? It's like sending a survey out to the auto makers and asking them who makes the best car.

The same silliness applies to the other major constituencies that U.S. News polls about the law schools: practicing lawyers and judges. What do they know about the vast majority of the 191 listed schools? Indeed, what does anybody know about the current educational programs of more than a few schools?

This week, though, the U.S. News game reached a new depth in my eyes. In my mailbox was another annual peer survey package from them, and when I opened it, I found this:

Note what they're asking me to rank the schools about: trial advocacy. That's a subject I have never taught in my 20 years in academe, and about which I know precious little. I have coached a moot court team for a while, but that's appellate advocacy, not trial advocacy. And so to send me a trial advocacy survey is the height of incompetence.

Hmmm, what do I do with this form? I guess I'll throw it away. But if I marked it up and sent it in, it would count just as much as every other form being submitted by other academics, including those who had a clue.

My votes would be utterly meaningless. And theirs wouldn't be much better.

Comments (14)

Well said.

I don't mind so much that US News ranks schools; However, their criteria for the rankings is ridiculous.

It is amusing to watch schools invent little tricks to improve their rankings in certain areas. For example, I went to a well-regarded liberals arts college, and our ranking was lower than it should be because we were pretty low in "alumni satisfaction," which USN&WR determined by the % of alumni giving to the annual fund (an absurd way to determine alumni satisfaction, by the way).

Ok, so what the school did was to mail each of its alumni a $1 bill with the annual donation form, telling them that if they could not give, to please just return the dollar. Then they counted that dollar as an alumni gift. So while the total $$$ remained the same, alumni giving went way up.

I would expect that many other categories in the magazine are equally able to be gamed by savvy administrators.

Thanks for an honest assessment of the validity of these surveys. It seems, in reality, they are no more useful to a prospective student than is lawyer advertising for a prospective client. One important caveat however is the extent to which employers value these rankings in making hiring decisions???

Ridiculous. In my (limited) experience, rara is the pre-1L avis that even knows what "trial ad" is, let alone factors the strength of a school's trial advocacy program into his or her decisionmaking process.

And, seriously, how many law schools have more than 1-3 substantive courses in their trial ad programs? A few at most?

Frankly you can't blame USN&WR for this. The blame lies squarely on the shoulders of the leaders of your institution and most of the others around the country who aid and abet and publicize this nonsense. How many university web sites brag about their rankings? A whole lot of them. Yet they would no doubt fire any academic who did such shoddy work in any other area of scientific research.

The only thing that amazes me about this is that so few universities have the integrity to opt-out of this nonsense. At least my alma mater (Reed) doen't go along.

PS, my wife is a Doctor and they consider the USN&WR annual hospital rankings to be about as valid as the school rankings, or even worse than the school rankings as they don't even have as many objective criteria to use.

Scientific-looking rankings sell magazines. See the recent Portland Monthly on K-12 schools in Portland, and the one on the "best doctors" in town.

That "best doctors" issue is kind of funny. My father-in-law showed up in that a couple of years ago and he had no idea how. He'd never received a survey, didn't hear anything about it until one of his colleagues showed him the issue.

How many university web sites brag about their rankings? A whole lot of them.

When I arrived at my alma mater, we were ranked fourth in the nation. YAY! Much cheering and whatnot. The next year, we went down to seventh. BOO! Much dark talk about how ratings don't really give you an accurate picture of the school, etc. The next year, up to 3rd. Full press release!

Very interesting; thanks for putting it together. I tend to like self-educated, blue-collar intellectual types myself. Having been stabbed in the back by Ivy Leaguers(who couldn't win on the strength of their arguments) more than once, I am wondering if some people don't use the rank of the institutions with which they are associated as an excuse to abandon critical thinking altogether?

I went to Lewis & Clark because my most treasured college professor had a daughter there and told me I would love it. And he was right, and I could not have made a better choice, certainly by going off of some kind of absurd ranking involving decimal points, of all the ridiculous BS.

Exactly as you point out, Jack, people are passing judgment on professors and schools they know nothing about. There's no such thing as a single meaningful ranking of schools. It depends entirely on what you want.

I, personally, am enormously happy that I went through a school that had a night program, so that I hung out with and took classes with people who had day jobs. But that's partly because with the exception of a year of temping, I was K-through-JD, so who's to say what that's worth to somebody else?

My mother's been writing college recommendations for about 30 years, and she always tells kids that the point is not to pick the best school, but the best school for YOU. It's a huge cliche, but everybody knows it's true, which is why this kind of ranking nonsense strikes me as so absurd.

Justin,
What specifically do you object to in the rankings? Have you looked at their methodology?

I have, and while I don't like the way schools game the system, I don't find the criteria that they use all that unreasonable. Average SAT, four year graduation rate, number of library books, average per student expenditure, faculty recourses, acceptance rates ... which of these SPECIFICALLY do you object to?

Jack points to peer review, but his own example actually shows how the system DOES work well. Assuming Jack is not lying (he implies he would if he misrepresents his own school) and that he does not rank schools he knows nothing about, US News gets 1/8th of the sample from jack. Then we overlap this with hundreds of other peer reviewers nationwide and voila! you have a valid peer review scale.

Look, no one forces parents to rely on US News solely. Parents that do are foolish. But I think US News does perform a valuable service. Of course it's better to visit every school personally or review each school's materials. But with more than 4000 educational institutions in the county, this is very hard to do. US News, Princeton Review, etc. help make the process a lot more comprehensible.

This farce should be the impetus for a national bar exam. The results, sorted by law school and subject, would provide the meaningful objectivity that the US News criteria lack.

Many of the "objective" factors used to determine rank are meaningless. For example, the number of volumes that the library possesses. Three examples to show the invalidity of this measure. First, the University of South Carolina law library is very small, because it is two blocks from the main University's library. Many law related treatises are contained in that library, but are not included in USC Law's book count. Second, Lewis & Clark law has a majority of its books in off-site storage. They are included in the school's bookcount. Many are old editions, outdated volumes, and other useless material. Third, why should a University devote monies to purchasing a variety of journals and reporters when a majority of studies use WestLaw, LexisNexis, LoisLaw, FindLaw, HeinOnline and JSTOR (among others) to access these materials?

Every factor has these problems. Per student expenditures? It's more expensive in New York City, NY, than South Royalton, VT. Time to graduate rates? School with a high number of "traditional" full-time 3 year students will do better than school who focus on "non-traditional" night students. Average LSAT? This only works if law students go to the "best" school they can get into ... not into the school that fits them best (money, location, program, et al).

The numbers are worse than meaningless. They are misleading and deceptive.

Chris:

(By the way, the things I mentioned above relate to Ugrad rankings; I don't know specifically about law school rankings.)

Adjust per student expenditures by cost of living.

LSAT: are you actually arguing that average LSAT is not related to quality of the school? Even accounting for fit, don't you expect a strongly positive correlation between average LSAT and school quality?

Time to graduate. You are right, schools with non traditional students do more poorly. But by most measures of educational assessment, getting students through the program in a reasonable amount of time is a measure of success. A program with a large number of non-traditional students may be successful at what it does, but do you think it deserves some higher ranking as a result?


Sponsors


As a lawyer/blogger, I get
to be a member of:

In Vino Veritas

If You See Kay, Red 2011
Turnbull, Old Bull Red 2010
Cherry Tart, Cherry Pie Pinot Noir 2012
Trader Joe's Grand Reserve Cabernet, Oakville 2012
Benton Lane, Pinot Gris 2012
Campo Viejo, Rioja, Reserva 2008
Haden Fig, Pinot Noir 2012
Pendulum Red 2011
Vina Real, Plata, Crianza Rioja 2009
Edmunds St. John, Bone/Jolly, Gamay Noir Rose 2013
Bookwalter, Subplot No. 26
Ayna, Tempranillo 2011
Pete's Mountain, Pinot Noir, Haley's Block 2010
Apaltagua, Reserva Camenere 2012
Lugana, San Benedetto 2012
Argyle Brut 2007
Wildewood Pinot Gris 2012
Anciano, Tempranillo Reserva 2007
Santa Rita, Reserva Cabernet 2009
Casone, Toscana 2008
Fonseca Porto, Bin No. 27
Louis Jadot, Pouilly-Fuissé 2011
Trader Joe's, Grower's Reserve Pinot Noir 2012
Zenato, Lugana San Benedetto 2012
Vintjs, Cabernet 2010
14 Hands, Hot to Trot White 2012
Rainstorm, Oregon Pinot Gris 2012
Silver Palm, North Coast Cabernet 2011
Andrew Rich, Gewurtztraminer 2008
Rodney Strong, Charlotte's Home Sauvignon Blanc 2012
Canoe Ridge, Pinot Gris, Expedition 2012
Edmunds St. John, Bone-Jolly Gamay Noir Rose 2012
Dark Horse, Big Red Blend No. 01A
Elk Cove, Pinot Noir Rose 2012
Fletcher, Shiraz 2010
Picollo, Gavi 2011
Domaine Eugene Carrel, Jongieux 2012
Eyrie, Pinot Blanc 2010
Atticus, Pinot Noir 2010
Walter Scott, Pinot Noir, Holstein 2011
Shingleback, Cabernet, Davey Estate 2010
Coppola, Sofia Rose 2012
Joel Gott, 851 Cabernet 2010
Pol Roget Reserve Sparkling Wine
Mount Eden Chardonnay, Santa Cruz Mountains 2009
Rombauer Chardonnay, Napa Valley 2011
Beringer, Chardonnay, Napa Reserve 2011
Kim Crawford, Sauvignon Blanc 2011
Schloss Vollrads, Spaetlese Rheingau 2010
Belle Glos, Pinot Noir, Clark & Telephone 2010
WillaKenzie, Pinot Noir, Estate Cuvee 2010
Blackbird Vineyards, Arise, Red 2010
Chauteau de Beaucastel, Chateauneuf-du-Pape 2005
Northstar, Merlot 2008
Feather, Cabernet 2007
Silver Oak, Cabernet, Alexander Valley 2002
Silver Oak, Cabernet, Napa Valley 2002
Trader Joe's, Chardonnay, Grower's Reserve 2012
Silver Palm, Cabernet, North Coast 2010
Shingleback, Cabernet, Davey Estate 2010
E. Guigal, Cotes du Rhone 2009
Santa Margherita, Pinot Grigio 2011
Alamos, Cabernet 2011
Cousino Macul, Cabernet, Anitguas Reservas 2009
Dreaming Tree Cabernet 2010
1967, Toscana 2009
Charamba, Douro 2008
Horse Heaven Hills, Cabernet 2010
Lorelle, Horse Heaven Hills Pinot Grigio 2011
Avignonesi, Montepulciano 2004
Lorelle, Willamette Valley Pinot Noir 2011
Villa Antinori, Toscana 2007
Mercedes Eguren, Cabernet Sauvignon 2009
Lorelle, Columbia Valley Cabernet 2011
Purple Moon, Merlot 2011
Purple Moon, Chardonnnay 2011
Horse Heaven Hills, Cabernet 2010
Lorelle, Horse Heaven Hills Pinot Grigio 2011
Avignonesi, Montepulciano 2004
Lorelle, Willamette Valley Pinot Noir 2011
Villa Antinori, Toscana 2007
Mercedes Eguren, Cabernet Sauvignon 2009
Lorelle, Columbia Valley Cabernet 2011
Purple Moon, Merlot 2011
Purple Moon, Chardonnnay 2011
Abacela, Vintner's Blend No. 12
Opula Red Blend 2010
Liberte, Pinot Noir 2010
Chateau Ste. Michelle, Indian Wells Red Blend 2010
Woodbridge, Chardonnay 2011
King Estate, Pinot Noir 2011
Famille Perrin, Cotes du Rhone Villages 2010
Columbia Crest, Les Chevaux Red 2010
14 Hands, Hot to Trot White Blend
Familia Bianchi, Malbec 2009
Terrapin Cellars, Pinot Gris 2011
Columbia Crest, Walter Clore Private Reserve 2009
Campo Viejo, Rioja, Termpranillo 2010
Ravenswood, Cabernet Sauvignon 2009
Quinta das Amoras, Vinho Tinto 2010
Waterbrook, Reserve Merlot 2009
Lorelle, Horse Heaven Hills, Pinot Grigio 2011
Tarantas, Rose
Chateau Lajarre, Bordeaux 2009
La Vielle Ferme, Rose 2011
Benvolio, Pinot Grigio 2011
Nobilo Icon, Pinot Noir 2009

The Occasional Book

Norman Mailer - The Naked and the Dead
Maria Dermoȗt - The Ten Thousand Things
William Faulkner - As I Lay Dying
Markus Zusak - The Book Thief
Christopher Buckley - Thank You for Smoking
William Shakespeare - Othello
Joseph Conrad - Heart of Darkness
Bill Bryson - A Short History of Nearly Everything
Cheryl Strayed - Tiny Beautiful Things
Sara Varon - Bake Sale
Stephen King - 11/22/63
Paul Goldstein - Errors and Omissions
Mark Twain - A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's Court
Steve Martin - Born Standing Up: A Comic's Life
Beverly Cleary - A Girl from Yamhill, a Memoir
Kent Haruf - Plainsong
Hope Larson - A Wrinkle in Time, the Graphic Novel
Rudyard Kipling - Kim
Peter Ames Carlin - Bruce
Fran Cannon Slayton - When the Whistle Blows
Neil Young - Waging Heavy Peace
Mark Bego - Aretha Franklin, the Queen of Soul (2012 ed.)
Jenny Lawson - Let's Pretend This Never Happened
J.D. Salinger - Franny and Zooey
Charles Dickens - A Christmas Carol
Timothy Egan - The Big Burn
Deborah Eisenberg - Transactions in a Foreign Currency
Kurt Vonnegut Jr. - Slaughterhouse Five
Kathryn Lance - Pandora's Genes
Cheryl Strayed - Wild
Fyodor Dostoyevsky - The Brothers Karamazov
Jack London - The House of Pride, and Other Tales of Hawaii
Jack Walker - The Extraordinary Rendition of Vincent Dellamaria
Colum McCann - Let the Great World Spin
Niccolò Machiavelli - The Prince
Harper Lee - To Kill a Mockingbird
Emma McLaughlin & Nicola Kraus - The Nanny Diaries
Brian Selznick - The Invention of Hugo Cabret
Sharon Creech - Walk Two Moons
Keith Richards - Life
F. Sionil Jose - Dusk
Natalie Babbitt - Tuck Everlasting
Justin Halpern - S#*t My Dad Says
Mark Herrmann - The Curmudgeon's Guide to Practicing Law
Barry Glassner - The Gospel of Food
Phil Stanford - The Peyton-Allan Files
Jesse Katz - The Opposite Field
Evelyn Waugh - Brideshead Revisited
J.K. Rowling - Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone
David Sedaris - Holidays on Ice
Donald Miller - A Million Miles in a Thousand Years
Mitch Albom - Have a Little Faith
C.S. Lewis - The Magician's Nephew
F. Scott Fitzgerald - The Great Gatsby
William Shakespeare - A Midsummer Night's Dream
Ivan Doig - Bucking the Sun
Penda Diakité - I Lost My Tooth in Africa
Grace Lin - The Year of the Rat
Oscar Hijuelos - Mr. Ives' Christmas
Madeline L'Engle - A Wrinkle in Time
Steven Hart - The Last Three Miles
David Sedaris - Me Talk Pretty One Day
Karen Armstrong - The Spiral Staircase
Charles Larson - The Portland Murders
Adrian Wojnarowski - The Miracle of St. Anthony
William H. Colby - Long Goodbye
Steven D. Stark - Meet the Beatles
Phil Stanford - Portland Confidential
Rick Moody - Garden State
Jonathan Schwartz - All in Good Time
David Sedaris - Dress Your Family in Corduroy and Denim
Anthony Holden - Big Deal
Robert J. Spitzer - The Spirit of Leadership
James McManus - Positively Fifth Street
Jeff Noon - Vurt

Road Work

Miles run year to date: 225
At this date last year: 71
Total run in 2013: 257
In 2012: 129
In 2011: 113
In 2010: 125
In 2009: 67
In 2008: 28
In 2007: 113
In 2006: 100
In 2005: 149
In 2004: 204
In 2003: 269


Clicky Web Analytics