Questions and answers

Canadian universities withdraw from Maclean's survey

Dal News Staff - August 14, 2006

See also: Text of the letter to Maclean's

Q: Why are universities taking this action?

A:

  • As research universities, we take the proper use of data very seriously. WeÕre all teaching institutions, so itÕs important to us that students make decisions on their future based on good information.
  • The problem with the MacleanÕs ranking is it lumps every facet of a university into a single number. At best, that single number is useless; at its worst, itÕs misleading.
  • Consider what happens if students in English rank a university #1 out of 10, but students in Engineering rank it #10 out of 10? The place gets a combined ranking of 5.
    • ThatÕs misleading to the student looking for the best English program.
    • ItÕs misleading to the student looking to avoid the worst Engineering program.
    • Finally, itÕs meaningless for the student who is interested in Nursing.

Q: Does this decision to withdraw have anything to do with the universities' rankings?

A:

  • No, this has has nothing to do with any individual university's prospects in the rankings Ñ the co-signatories represent a breadth of rankings and prospects, and a wide range of strengths and weaknesses.
  • Dalhousie has long held that the system used by MacleanÕs does not accurately reflect the various strengths of different universities. We have been Òranked” with some of the countryÕs largest postsecondary institutions and are pleased to be in that company. We share concerns about the credibility of the survey with many of these institutions. 
  • Like other universities across the country, we object to a misuse of data Ð especially when this ranking is presented as a tool to help students make decisions about their future.
  • In fact, the ranking does the opposite: it obscures the choices students have to make by reducing a whole university to a single arbitrary measure. 

Q: How are students supposed to get information about universities now? DonÕt universities have an obligation to be transparent about their strengths and their weaknesses?

A:

  • Absolutely. Universities have a duty to be transparent, for three reasons:
    • As public institutions, we have that obligation to the taxpayers in our provinces.
    • As educational institutions, we have an ethical duty to be open to students and their families who are trying to make the right personal decisions about their future.
    • As research institutions, we have an ethical duty to make our research transparent, so it can be shared by colleagues around the world.
  • Transparency goes to the very heart of what a university does.
  • In fact, thatÕs exactly why we object to the MacleanÕs ranking exercise. CanadaÕs major universities have hundreds of programs. The magazine reduces them to one number, one that obscures reality.
  • For our part, we at Dalhousie try to provide prospective students with the right kind of data to allow for a more thorough decision. That data, accessible on our website, includes:
    • Satisfaction levels for Dalhousie students compared with those at other universities
    • Student evaluation of the quality of teaching
    • Percentage of students who graduate
    • Percentage of students who are satisfied with university services
    • Investment in facilities renewal
  • In our own research, we have found that the MacleanÕs survey results are not among the top five influencers for prospective Dalhousie students. Our web site, viewbook, brochures, email contact and campus tours all have greater impact. Prospective students use a number of information-gathering techniques in order to make their decisions about university.
  • That said, we have often expressed our interest in working with MacleanÕs to develop a better survey approach that uses data responsibly.

Q: What might a collaboration with MacleanÕs actually look like?

A:

  • Every research university has a range of experts in statistics and performance management Ð itÕs what our scientists and social scientists do for a living. We also have a wealth of data to share.
  • The key to a meaningful survey, as in any area of applied statistics, is to create apples-to-apples comparisons that have validity and more specific details.
  • WeÕre very happy to sit down with MacleanÕs at any time to discuss how the annual survey can best be used to assist students to compare institutions in a way that helps them make good decisions about their future.

Readers Say

Magazines are printed to sell, their main interest being the bottom line. Universities are to educate future citizens who will be responsible for running the financial, industrial, military and social agencies, etc, that keep our country functioning well. Don't mix magazine sales with education.
I think it would be beneficial for the universities to suggest and implement a new way of ranking with macleans instead of just pulling out. Unforunately a lot of prospective students read macleans and make decisions based on the university's ranking. It looks unbelievably bad when a university flat our refuses to participate in such a well known ranking system.
Kudos! That survey has always been pretty hokey, and it's about time universities decided to opt out of it.
1st, as a research university, shouldn't you support multiple sources of information for the sake of objectivity even if the opposing side of an arguement has flaws?
2nd, wouldn't this be more credible if it weren't coming from a university that has scored terrribly on the MacLean's survey.
Magazines are meant to make money but so do universities. Dalhousie states that students shouldn't read possibly misleading 3rd party sources but should rely more on their flashy brochures.
In response to Logan's comment about Dalhousie scoring poorly, it is not the only school bowing out of the rankings. The University of Calgary is following suit.
Good for Dal! I'm glad we've chosen to opt out of this averaging of a diverse university. It isn't a fair system, and I don't think any university can be compared to another using an overall ranking. The only way that someone can or rather, should, decide honestly on where they want to go, is to check it out for themselves~
MacLeans' articles are really terrible judges of universities. Giving an average of a school that is so huge just doesn't make sense.
the Statistical Progress Report (June 2006) may has four weaknesses: 1)it does not include University of Toronto, Waterloo, and McGill for comparison. 2)it does not give any reason for choosing those comparative universities it mentions. 3)it does not reflect the level of tuition increasing which is also an important fact for a prospective student to make a decision. 4)it actually uses lots of data from the Maclean’s ranking from which Dal actually withdraws.
Hell CBU has been getting killed for years over the Maclean' s ranking but you don't hear them complaining or whinning. Quit your belly aching and suck it up. Find your positives and sell them.
Good move, I'd say. My high school graduation year, I bought the Maclean's survey magazine, and not only do I agree that ranking system was quite arbitrary, I also couldn't make much sense out of it. Should these rankings be done in the future, perhaps a program by program comparison with clearly stated criteria might be a better choice.
It is about time that we did something about MacLean's. I have
worked all over the world and Dalhousie has a tremendous
reputation no matter where I go. Yet we are stuck in the middle
of some silly scale put together by some journalists. Things
have improved alot since I graduated in '96, yet we rank lower?

Lastly, the fact that these small undergrad schools are ranked so
high (i.e. STFX) people around Nova Scotia think that means they
are the best it kills me.
The letter is excellent and as a professional surveyor, it's gratifying to see the universities finally opt out of this flawed and irrelevant exercise. Logan (above) however, I'm dismayed that you have such poor critical thinking skills. Your arguments are just silly. First, the point is that the flaws are SO egregious that the data produced is deeply misleading and inaccurate. Second, if you had grasped that point, you'd not have suggested that Dal is complaining because they're low in rank on what many major universities consider to be a meaningless survey! You might also read the letter from U of T which explains in some detail the Maclean's survey flaws and the university's collective withdrawal. Your comments reflect a rather myopic view and poor understanding of the issue. Perhaps you should take pains to be better informed before offering such opinions in the future.

Join the conversation, but keep it clean, stay on the topic and be brief. Read comments policy.

Characters remaining: 2000

(optional)