The Obama administration has set itself an ambitious goal: A new college rating system by this spring, to be implemented in 2015 and later to be linked to federal student aid funding, according to U.S. Education Secretary Arne Duncan. With this move, federal policymakers have joined their state counterparts in pushing performance-based funding for higher education. But many higher education advocates oppose linking the ratings to federal aid and fear it could backfire.
What the system will look like
The new rating system will use the following factors in rating determinations:
- Affordability
- Student completion rates
- Graduate earnings
- Rates of students continuing for higher degrees.
The institutions will be rated within their individual education segments—for example, community colleges won’t be measured against Ivy League institutions.
“These ratings will compare colleges with similar missions,” according to a fact sheet the administration released in August, and “identify colleges that do the most to help students from disadvantaged backgrounds as well as colleges that are improving their performance.”
By 2018, the Administration hopes, students who attend highly ranked institutions could be reaping bigger Pell Grants and better-affordable student loans.
Mixed reaction
Some higher education proponents say tying federal aid to school performance scores is problematic. For example, what will happen to students who attend local community colleges whose ratings may not be high? Many also question the availability and quality of available data.
“I am all for performance-based funding, but we have to be careful of what performance we are funding,” says Robert Wilkinson, Associate Vice Chancellor for Institutional Research and Planning, Indiana University-Purdue University Fort Wayne, and AACRAO member. “In my opinion, within the framework provided, first we need to have a discussion of what constitutes student success (the IPEDS 4-year graduation rate does not define student success). Once defined, how is this reflected in institutional missions? Are we going to rank an urban masters granting institution with a high first-generation student body on the same criteria as a more traditional masters-granting institution with a high number of endowed scholarships? Now imagine, this is just the beginning of a more detailed conversation regarding institutional rankings.”
Secretary Duncan acknowledges that the data is imperfect—but says the ratings will use the best available data and change as better data emerges.
Public hearings underway
The Administration held the first of four planned hearings at college campuses on November 6, in Los Angeles at California State University’s Dominguez Hills campus. At that meeting, speakers brought up issues such as the decline in state funding for public education; students’ struggles with large amounts of loan debt; and faculty members’ concern that a ratings system would not take into account the full value of a college education. Experts anticipate additional issues to emerge, including the ban on a federal database to track student outcomes; the problems with federal graduation rates—which include only first-time, full-time students; and deciding what data to use to track graduates’ earnings.
Other hearings will be held through November at George Mason University, in Fairfax, Va.; the University of Northern Iowa, in Cedar Falls; and Louisiana State University at Baton Rouge.
A “technical symposium” is planned for early next year to discuss the ratings methodology. The Administration then plans to release a version of the ratings system for public comment in the spring. Education Department officials and the White House also plan to bring together innovators and app designers to look at ways to package and provide access to existing federal data, including IPEDS (the Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System), on colleges and students.
Likely to play a large role in the effort is Theodore Mitchell, who is set to be nominated as the successor to Martha Kanter, who resigned as Education Department undersecretary in August. Mitchell is former president of the California State Board of Education and of Occidental College in Los Angeles. He is president and CEO of NewVentures Fund, which supports individuals and institutions making education reforms, emphasizing low-income communities.