The validity of Princeton Review’s college rankings, which featured the university prominently in several categories in its publication released last week, can change from moment to moment – it just depends on which university administrator is talking.
Princeton Review’s 2009 edition of The Best 368 Colleges, which rated the university’s athletic facilities No. 1 in the nation but also gave the school a No. 2 ranking in the “Students Study the Least” category, had administrators contradicting one another when commenting on the rankings’ credibility.
Vice President for Student Affairs Linda Clement refused to distinguish Princeton Review, a test preparation company that compiles rankings based on student surveys from a variety of schools, as a legitimate source. For this year’s rankings, Princeton Review used a combined 120,000 student surveys from 368 schools.
“The reason these rankings are developed is a commercial enterprise,” Clement said. “I think we aren’t very certain about the scientific nature of the surveys. Until you understand the total nature, I might be skeptical about the results.”
In contrast, Senior Associate Athletics Director Kathy Worthington, who was pleased with the athletic facilities honor, as well as the university receiving a No. 2 ranking in the “Students Pack the Stadiums” category, believed the survey results should be taken seriously.
“Princeton Review is a well-respected publication,” Worthington said. “We take great pride that they appreciate what we have to offer.”
In fact, the Athletics Department puts such stock in the Princeton Review rankings that it posted a press release on its website in an effort to attract future students.
“We want our recruits to know how well liked our facilities are by our students,” Worthington said.
But Kate Gannon, an associate director in the office of undergraduate admissions, said students shouldn’t take the Princeton Review rankings too seriously.
“I think prospective students regard the Princeton Review rankings as fun facts or points of interest, but I don’t think they make their final decisions on where to apply or where to attend based on them,” she said.
Clement, who did not mention the university’s placement in any specific ranking, agreed with Gannon, adding that her skepticism stems from her years as an admissions director.
“I was an admissions director here for a long time, and I would always tell people about these rankings, and I didn’t have concrete confidence in them and to not trust rankings – we don’t know the force of the research,” Clement said.
But despite Clement’s warnings, some students were already reading into the rankings this week.
“It sounds like some priorities are a little bit backwards,” said Michael Sweeney, a senior computer science major, upon learning of the university’s equally high marks for sporting event attendance and lack of studying.
Yet Sweeney did not hold the university responsible, saying, “You’ve got to blame the students on that – it’s your decision to study or not.”
Junior theatre major Thony Mena also sensed a set of misguided priorities, except on the part of the university, not the students, in regards to the highly rated athletic facilities.
“The athletic fields are apparent,” Mena said. “God knows how much money they spend on athletics when you’ve got kids without housing.”
But junior criminology and criminal justice major Ian Nabb was able to see the positives from the rankings and said he is proud the university trails only the University of Florida in “Students Pack the Stadiums.” In recent years, both Florida’s football and men’s basketball programs have won national championships.
“Coming second place to [Florida] is not too bad,” Nabb said. “I think it shows a lot of campus involvement and school pride.”
Incoming sophomore transfer students Kristen Harris and Oona Urbanski, both letters and sciences majors, did not expect to be entering a student body rated amongst the least-active studiers in the nation.
“It doesn’t really discourage me, because it’s not going to make me study less,” Harris said. “I’ll just study harder, and that will make us look better.”
But when told the university actually failed to make Princeton Review’s list of top-20 party schools, after receiving such an honor repeatedly in recent years, Urbanski noticed an obvious contradiction – and reflected a different type of student disappointment.
“If we study the least, we better be a good party school,” Urbanski said.
