David Brewster
Good article on the tradeoffs universities make when they aspire to become “prestige” institutions. The formula, at Clemson at least: shrink enrollment by being more selective, raise class sizes, raise tuition, game the US News rankings, tell adjuncts to get PhDs.
This article originally appeared in Inside Higher Ed. My current sort-of employer, the College of Charleston, has stated its top institutional goal is …
SLATE.COM
Ed Lazowska: There are some counter-examples. USC became a far better undergraduate institution by chasing rankings. There was a positive feedback cycle in which better students stimulated greater attention to teaching which attracted even better students which attracted even better and more attentive faculty, and pretty soon the “University of Spoiled Children” became a place that a top student or top faculty member might actually consider joining. (This is not to say that USC is exemplary in every respect – only that the pursuit of rankings, at the hands of Steve Sample, a really visionary president, improved the place.)