President Barack Obama reformed the college ranking process this month by providing students with a new information database.

The college scorecard system pulls from data records the federal government keeps on over 7,000 institutions, including Syracuse University, to develop customized lists.

The scorecard purposely avoids a numbered ranking system. This enables prospective undergraduate, transfer and graduate students to decide for themselves what makes a “top college.” The resource allows students to go into the enrollment process fully informed with hard statistics, rather than self-reports or historic prestige.

The idea of “college prestige” plays a huge role in college rankings and in the decision process, but prestige isn’t an attribute that can be reliably backed up by data.

America’s top colleges are picked from a small and relatively unchanging pool of “fan-favorites,” most often including Harvard, Yale and Princeton universities in the top spots. These institutions all belong to a larger group of prestigious universities collectively known as the Ivy League.

The Ivy League actually refers to a Northeastern sports conference – not educational excellence – and is more akin to the NCAA Atlantic Coast Conference than an academic hall of fame.

The college scorecard system eliminates misleading information, making it an essential tool in students’ college selections. The president’s scorecard has specifications that allow you to sort schools by the percent of its college graduates who earn more than high school grads, average annual cost, number of students, graduation rate and salary after attending.

Because most students lack the ability to visit all of the schools they are interested in, arbitrary rankings that often include factors like the self-reported “hotness” of its student body end up being used by students instead.

Each institution’s information block shows where the university stands against national averages of these categories. However, the scorecard does lack information about the facilities and equipment available at each college – a critical factor to athletes and scientists.

The president’s plan allows students to decide for themselves what’s important in their college experience with verifiable data to guide them. For example, a school could place first in the nation for the highest annual salary after graduation, but place far lower on the list for its high cost of attendance.

The scorecard states that its “Average Annual Cost” category is compiled from the average net price for federal financial aid recipients, incorporating state and school scholarships into its final price. For 40 million Americans facing a staggering student loan debt of $1.2 trillion, money spent on school and earned after graduation is of extreme importance.

Julian du Buclet, a senior finance and entrepreneurship major, expressed regret that the scorecard wasn’t available as a tool when he was applying to schools.

“If I could do it again, I think I would attend Howard (University) or Morehouse (College) because they offer full rides for [academic excellence], and knowing something like that would have definitely influenced my decision over paying 60K a year here — before tax,” said du Buclet.

The fully customizable scorecard system effectively places college ranking power into the hands of students, revolutionizing the college selection process and reinforcing the fact that the “Top College” isn’t necessarily the best college for every student.

Zhané Souter is a senior broadcast journalism major and forensic science minor. Her column appears weekly. She can be reached at zisouter@syr.edu and followed on Twitter @zhanesouter.

Published on September 23, 2015 at 12:03 am