Tue 31 Jul 2007
Williams will not join the U.S. News revolt (at least not yet), but it will stop promoting its ranking in admissions materials and news releases.
I don’t think that slight policy change will have any effect whatsoever on Williams’ public perception. Anyone savvy enough about colleges to know about and care about the U.S. News liberal arts rankings wouldn’t rely on Williams itself to promote its perennial high ranking. And I think there are far more effective marketing tools that Williams does, and should continue, to utilize in any event. For instance, the current edition of the prospectus and the current admissions page are oustanding and provide information far more interesting than U.S. News rankings.
July 31st, 2007 at 12:24 pm
To the sophisticated, Williams’ presentation of itself will be more seemly as a result of this change. Now Williams needs to reduce the bombast about the Directors Cup - which reduction ought to have a similar effect.
July 31st, 2007 at 1:32 pm
Honestly, the only way I heard about Williams was through the US News Rankings. When I was looking for colleges, I had absolutely no idea where to start, so I ended up researching the top 10 liberal arts colleges along with a bunch of others (my total was in the 30s, I think).
July 31st, 2007 at 2:34 pm
Could be better, could be worse. A step in the right direction for Williams.
August 1st, 2007 at 12:07 am
I too, going to high school 10,000 miles way from New England, would never have heard of Williams if it weren’t for US News.
August 1st, 2007 at 2:20 am
I agree with Ronit and [space] — in Iowa, where I went to high school, no one knows about Williams. If you boycott the US News rankings, you can feel morally superior but you’re effectively saying, ‘We just want students from the northeast elite who already know about us.’
August 1st, 2007 at 2:38 am
Look at this way guys, if the girl of your dreams did not advertise, you wouldn’t be with her. It’s not just the scent that got you there. It’s cause she’s number one!
August 1st, 2007 at 9:06 am
It’s not necessarily that Williams is number 1 that is important or useful, it’s that it is towards the top of the rankings. While the differences (that determine the rankings) between #1 and #3 are negligible, I would argue there are noticeable differences between #2 and #18.
The rankings are good at providing a general guide. Even in Pittsburgh I had never heard of Williams, Amherst, or almost any other NESCAC school. The rankings and some of the underlying statistics inform an intelligent student (one that may have only been looking at the Ivies or other big name schools) that the school is worth her time to explore more.
A student should not just apply to Williams because it is #1. But if a student notices Williams and Amherst because they are at the top, and she then explores them more and finds out they are a good fit, I see nothing wrong with that. A student with top grades and SAT’s might very well be wasting their time looking at school #45, because it might not be academically challenging for her.
What would be a problem, IMO, is if a student chose Williams over Amherst because it is #1 and Amherst is currently #2. However, as a guide to point to schools worth exploring and finding out more about, I think that the rankings can be a useful guide.
August 1st, 2007 at 10:02 am
Isn’t the issue heightened by Williams’ recent proclamation not whether the rankings are good or bad but whether Williams itself should constantly and immodestly hawk its high ranking?
August 1st, 2007 at 3:50 pm
Rankings work great in hierarchically acceptable social groupings. We live in an age where egalitarianism has overwhelmed our sense of inequality. As we strive to denounce rank, we lower our standards inching towards the indistinguishable. What is wrong with ego? This defines western man. You want to do away with which pew you are going to kneel in? Well now, you can sit with the women.
There are several ranking organizations and numerous media channels that allow prospective applicants the opportunity to examine institutions from a number of perspectives. The challenging part is understanding who you are, and having a sound appreciation and assessment of what your needs are, in relation to your objectives and respective institutions.
Whereas some applicants have not had a sound self-examination much less an equitable evaluation of their prospective choices, the school admissions process attempts to preempt this by attempting to pre-select interesting applicants that will address their institutional needs and hopefully meet their criteria for success.
We need measure to understand and differentiate environments that will allow applicants the finest soil to plant their feet in.
August 2nd, 2007 at 12:57 am
Another explanation is that the Williams administrators realize that Williams will not be #1 forever, and indeed will likely drop from the top spot within the next few years - thus, there is nothing to lose.
August 2nd, 2007 at 2:55 am
“I would argue there are noticeable differences between #2 and #18″
Yeah. Mostly per student endowment.
August 6th, 2007 at 6:48 pm
hwc, I don’t really see your point, if you were intending to make one.