Home > Uncategorized > What Many College Rankings Don’t Tell You

Comments 0 Comments
Advertiser Disclosure


Fifteen years ago, our oldest child was preparing to head off to college in a distant state. My wife and I had so many thoughts running through our minds at the time that we thought our heads would explode: Will he be OK on his own? Will the curriculum be challenging enough? Will he figure out what he wants to do? Will he make friends? Is this the right place for him?

College-shopping resources were more limited then. I remember our son clicking through a CD-ROM that gave him (and us) a sense of a school’s selection criteria, academic curriculum, campus life and student-body characteristics, among other things. Still, there was little in the way of the kinds of analytics that are available to applicants and their families these days.

The risk of data overload, however, is high. Many students and their families struggle to know how to translate the hodgepodge of higher education-related statistics into a decision that’s academically, economically and socially right for them.

So it was with keen interest that I read about Money magazine’s ambitious new take on an old process: college-rankings.

The magazine’s editorial team partnered with industry experts and consulting firms to develop a methodology that weighs three categories equally: quality of education, affordability and outcomes. The process takes into effect such things as completion rates, instructional efficacy and appeal, average cost (net of financial aid and other considerations), average debt levels, and projected earnings both upon graduation and 10 to 15 years later.

Other metrics, including entrance-exam scores and certain household demographics (including economic stature) are also taken into account to help predict graduation rates and future earnings.

Although I can’t help but wonder whether the preceding doesn’t skew the rankings in favor of schools that cater to students from economically secure households, I’m more interested in the way affordability is assessed, particularly in light of the impact that higher education costs are having on this generation’s longer-term financial health and well-being.

The magazine’s model calculates that by blending together five variables: net price of the degree, average student borrowing, average parent borrowing, estimated student loan default risk plus a “value added” modifier, which factors in the aforementioned socioeconomics. Pricing is institution-specific and all the other data is drawn from reports that are generated by the U.S. Department of Education. Net prices and total family borrowing (student and parents) constitute 80% of the overall score. The remaining 20% is ascribed to default risk, half of which is influenced by the modifier.

Affordability is relative, though: It’s a function of a variety of factors including some the editorial team rightly assigned to this category, and others that weren’t. Furthermore, in this context, shouldn’t affordability represent that which engenders economic independence—in other words, so that our kids don’t have to move back home after they graduate?

I would want to examine the relationship between net price, average debt-load and average first-year income. Projections of mid-career compensation are irrelevant when student loans continue to be structured with 10-year payback schedules.

I would also scrutinize the relationship between debt and income. Specifically, average student-loan payments shouldn’t total more than 15% of entry-level compensation. Otherwise, it’ll be hard for the grads to afford the preeminent symbols of economic independence—houses and cars—later on.

The final piece of my affordability puzzle is the three-year cohort default rate. The CDR is a relatively new metric that has the potential to prove-out the other calculations, that is, if the government were to shorten the default threshold and include the chronically troubled debts that are being managed from missed payment to missed payment. Even so, it’s better than nothing.

College rankings are a serious business, given the dollars at stake for consumers, and Money’s methodology is an intriguing addition to this body of knowledge. But let’s not lose sight of the proper role these indices play. At best, they’re tools that higher-education shoppers can use to help focus an initial search or to validate a selection they’re inclined to make.

There are no rankings, however, for what is arguably the most important element of the decision process: the right fit.

This story is an Op/Ed contribution to Credit.com and does not necessarily represent the views of the company or its affiliates.

More on Student Loans:

Image: DragonImages

Comments on articles and responses to those comments are not provided or commissioned by a bank advertiser. Responses have not been reviewed, approved or otherwise endorsed by a bank advertiser. It is not a bank advertiser's responsibility to ensure all posts and/or questions are answered.

Please note that our comments are moderated, so it may take a little time before you see them on the page. Thanks for your patience.

Credit.com receives compensation for the financial products and services advertised on this site if our users apply for and sign up for any of them.

Hello, Reader!

Thanks for checking out Credit.com. We hope you find the site and the journalism we produce useful. We wanted to take some time to tell you a bit about ourselves.

Our People

The Credit.com editorial team is staffed by a team of editors and reporters, each with many years of financial reporting experience. We’ve worked for places like the New York Times, American Banker, Frontline, TheStreet.com, Business Insider, ABC News, NBC News, CNBC and many others. We also employ a few freelancers and more than 50 contributors (these are typically subject matter experts from the worlds of finance, academia, politics, business and elsewhere).

Our Reporting

We take great pains to ensure that the articles, video and graphics you see on Credit.com are thoroughly reported and fact-checked. Each story is read by two separate editors, and we adhere to the highest editorial standards. We’re not perfect, however, and if you see something that you think is wrong, please email us at editorial team [at] credit [dot] com,

The Credit.com editorial team is committed to providing our readers and viewers with sound, well-reported and understandable information designed to inform and empower. We won’t tell you what to do. We will, however, do our best to explain the consequences of various actions, thereby arming you with the information you need to make decisions that are in your best interests. We also write about things relating to money and finance we think are interesting and want to share.

In addition to appearing on Credit.com, our articles are syndicated to dozens of other news sites. We have more than 100 partners, including MSN, ABC News, CBS News, Yahoo, Marketwatch, Scripps, Money Magazine and many others. This network operates similarly to the Associated Press or Reuters, except we focus almost exclusively on issues relating to personal finance. These are not advertorial or paid placements, rather we provide these articles to our partners in most cases for free. These relationships create more awareness of Credit.com in general and they result in more traffic to us as well.

Our Business Model

Credit.com’s journalism is largely supported by an e-commerce business model. Rather than rely on revenue from display ad impressions, Credit.com maintains a financial marketplace separate from its editorial pages. When someone navigates to those pages, and applies for a credit card, for example, Credit.com will get paid what is essentially a finder’s fee if that person ends up getting the card. That doesn’t mean, however, that our editorial decisions are informed by the products available in our marketplace. The editorial team chooses what to write about and how to write about it independently of the decisions and priorities of the business side of the company. In fact, we maintain a strict and important firewall between the editorial and business departments. Our mission as journalists is to serve the reader, not the advertiser. In that sense, we are no different from any other news organization that is supported by ad revenue.

Visitors to Credit.com are also able to register for a free Credit.com account, which gives them access to a tool called The Credit Report Card. This tool provides users with two free credit scores and a breakdown of the information in their Experian credit report, updated twice monthly. Again, this tool is entirely free, and we mention that frequently in our articles, because we think that it’s a good thing for users to have access to data like this. Separate from its educational value, there is also a business angle to the Credit Report Card. Registered users can be matched with products and services for which they are most likely to qualify. In other words, if you register and you find that your credit is less than stellar, Credit.com won’t recommend a high-end platinum credit card that requires an excellent credit score You’d likely get rejected, and that’s no good for you or Credit.com. You’d be no closer to getting a product you need, there’d be a wasted inquiry on your credit report, and Credit.com wouldn’t get paid. These are essentially what are commonly referred to as "targeted ads" in the world of the Internet. Despite all of this, however, even if you never apply for any product, the Credit Report Card will remain free, and none of this will impact how the editorial team reports on credit and credit scores.

Your Stories

Lastly, much of what we do is informed by our own experiences as well as the experiences of our readers. We want to tell your stories if you’re interested in sharing them. Please email us at story ideas [at] credit [dot] com with ideas or visit us on Facebook or Twitter.

Thanks for stopping by.

- The Credit.com Editorial Team