The current "one-size-fits-all" rankings regime creates a winner take all environment where institutions are rewarded for investing in things having little to do with education and brand is what is optimized for, not learning. This arms race occurs at every stratum of higher education, with each institution trying to beat out its nearest peers, not just the upper echelons.
Why your reputation depends on the success of every student.
Why the answer to that question may not be as clear cut as you think.
Why the piece of paper they graduate with better be an offer letter.
Why helping your students choose the right one for them could be the most valuable thing you teach them.
Why the house doesn't win when it's futures that are being gambled with.
Top achievers apply to top schools, right? For students from low-income families, this isn't the case at all. Recent research has shed a lot of light on the factors holding these students back from applying to "dream schools."
How should we measure the success of a state-funded college? Graduating students into jobs? If so, what kind of job would be considered a success, and should these schools focus solely on job-training for those roles? If you can't afford a private college, should you be able to study philosophy, even if statistics show you will face a 13.6% unemployment rate?
Do you still trust our nation’s colleges and universities to prepare you for a future degree? If so, how much money are you willing to place behind that trust?