Clemson’s “Fatal Attraction”
There’s nothing wrong with wanting to be one of America’s “Top 20″ public universities – at least as defined by the editors of one particular magazine, but the all-consuming fixation of Clemson University with the U.S. News & World Report “America’s Best Colleges” rankings has a “Fatal Attraction” feel to it.
Earlier this year, FITS published a series of explosive memos outlining the questionable internal processes that the University was employing in its effort to earn this coveted distinction.
Obtained by exclusively by FITS, these documents demonstrated how school officials methodically broke down the various criteria associated with the U.S. News‘ rankings – and then sought to appropriate funds and set other administrative and academic priorities accordingly.
Now, according to a new report from Inside Higher Ed, one Clemson official has “laid bare in a way that is usually left to the imagination the steps that Clemson has (rather brazenly) taken since 2001 to move from 38th to 22nd in U.S. News’s ranking of public research universities.”
Reporting from some higher ed conference in Atlanta, here is an excerpt from the Inside Higher Ed report:
In reporting institutional financial information to the magazine, (Clemson researcher Catherine Watt) said, Clemson runs “multiple definitions to figure out where we can move things around to make them look best” in the rankings. Academic expenditures are emphasized and administrative overhead minimized wherever possible, within reason, she said. The university has encouraged as many alumni as possible to send in at least $5 to help bring up their giving rate, and hired a firm to find disconnected alumni.
And to actual gasps from some members of the audience, Watt said that Clemson officials, in filling out the reputational survey form for presidents, “rates all programs other than Clemson below average,” to make the university look better. “And I’m confident my president is not the only one who does that,” Watt said.
Are you kidding us? Is this middle school?
Clemson’s obsession has drawn sharp rebukes from its peers, as well as South Carolinians who contend that the school is no longer serving its mission as a land-grant, publicly-funded University.
But that hasn’t stopped Clemson.
According to this report, the University has sought to “manipulate” – its word, not ours – “every possible indicator to the greatest extent possible.”
And what of the students who are being forced out?
“Two or three students here and there, what a difference it can make,” the article quotes the Clemson administrator saying. “It’s manipulation around the edges.”
Indeed … it’s also pathetic.
Clemson receives hundreds of millions of dollars each years from the taxpayers of South Carolina – money it has frankly lost all sense of perspective on (click here and here).
Bottom line? More and more South Carolina parents are having their children rejected, the parents whose kids do get in have to figure out a way to pay the freight. After all, Clemson’s annual in-state tuition has more than doubled – from $5,090 to $10,378 – since President James Barker and “Top 20 Fever” arrived on campus in 2001.
We’re glad that Clemson is – a decade later – closing in on its goal of being ranked in the “Top 20″ according to U.S. News & World Report … we’re just sad the University sold its soul, compromised its integrity and abandoned its mission to the people of South Carolina in doing so.
Comments
By CNSYD on June 3rd, 2009 at 4:07 pm
If only Clemson could be more like USC east.
By sam on June 3rd, 2009 at 5:06 pm
I think this article is way out of line, sounds like someone who had a problem with Clemson in their past. Clemson does not get hundreds of millions of dollars in funding from the stats each year. In fact their funding has been cut from around 200 million down to 79 million a year, which is less than 10 percent of the schools budget. Trying to improve a schools image is a good thing, and by trying to improve areas like lowering class sizes, its not hurting anyone. If South Carolina residents want to complain about paying under 9,000 dollars a year for an education of this level, then they should just go somewhere else. If the state continues to take away money from the school, it should go private and forget about being nice to everyone from the state that has abandoned the university. Of course the other big state school, South Carolina in Columbia is getting more money, despite not having the same level of education as Clemson.
By C-L-E-M-S-O-N on June 3rd, 2009 at 5:27 pm
“There’s always haters when you are on top.”
By elroy jetson on June 3rd, 2009 at 7:52 pm
On top of what?
By CNSYD on June 3rd, 2009 at 8:42 pm
On top of USC east. But I will admit that is not difficult.
By flipnut on June 3rd, 2009 at 8:42 pm
Sounds like Clemson has just learned to play the game and play it well. As for all those in state students who can’t get in, maybe their chances would be better if most SC public schools were not such a joke.
But it sounds like you’d rather see them give up on their goals and start an affirmative action program for in state students who didn’t go to one of the few good high schools in the state.
By Collegiate Living on June 3rd, 2009 at 8:57 pm
As bipartisan, this article seems a bit harsh for Clemson University. I feel like they are extremely one sided and should absolutely accept counter points from editors, students and fans at Clemson…
By The Way It Is on June 3rd, 2009 at 9:56 pm
“On top of what?”
Well in Clempson it usually involves a cow or a sheep.
By Gamecockfan on June 3rd, 2009 at 11:02 pm
My son graduated from USC and my daughter graduated from Clemson. Clemson is definitely the superior school. I love Carolina , but Clemson’s academics are just better than USC’s.
By Cow College Alum 85 on June 3rd, 2009 at 11:53 pm
Lest we forget, Life, Hope and Palmetto Fellows is state money and available only to state institutions. Barker really needs to go before he embarrasses us even more. His goal to create his own legacy has gotten way out of hand. Are there no more Walter Cox’s left for us.
By marvin on June 4th, 2009 at 1:01 am
Okay. Did none of you guys get the point here? The University made up numbers, shut out SC students and probably spent a fortune on some pr consultant just to get a ranking that by all accounts means nothing. Our education system at all levels is a farce, and the kids coming out of it will not be prepared to function, much less succeed. We used to value education for its own sake, and we wanted to our children to actually know how to think and read and write and calculate numbers and approach problems — all the stuff that makes people smarter and happier and more prosperous. The American dream, people. Other countries are moving past us and we are no longer able to compete.
The only point of our entire education system seems to be to keep it running to pay a whole bunch of worthless bureaucrats, lobbyists, lawyers and consultants who can’t do anything else anywhere else except government. What happens when the money runs out and the school has to compete for students based on real academics? Sadly, we’ll probably find out.
By Statesman on June 4th, 2009 at 8:03 am
Can you say #1 Internation Business School in the U.S. for years? Per Business Week “The International Business School at the University of South Carolina is ranked No. 1 in the world.”
Go milk some cows…Taters….
By bluetiger on June 4th, 2009 at 8:25 am
It can only last so long and this has hypocrisy at Clemson has gone on long enough. Committing Institutional homicide any time some voices concern, disagrees with the inner circle or, in any way discloses the foul underbelly of Administrtion misdeeds is beyond bad. Misappropriation of funds to pet projects or hoarding in case they want something special later is bad. Holding money that is appropriated to pay fairly for the performance on the job from the “regular” employees only to “gift” it in large chunks to the “chosen few” is bad. Refusing to answer critics with facts is sneaky bad. Leaving the Offices of the school as open playgrounds for senior employees to harass,proposition and retalliate if refused with no consequences, no protection for those victims is shamefully bad. AND, carrying on this way over the top, out of control campaign for Top 20 notice from a magazine has now reached the level of Nationwide embarassment. Now, having spent $700,000 for defense against one ex-employee – one individual, without any doubt now, has enough evidence of wrong doing to warrant that kind of money to hide it from the public. Now, our Alma Mater’s best defense is trying to hide the BOT and President’s Staff from justice by saying that they are protected and above the law because they are “South Carolina” – sad state, it’s bad enough to have foreigners immune to our laws – now, State Employees are given a free hand to pleasure themselve in any way and be immune to any legal recourse?
And, before the little gang of individuals that are in awe of Barker, tout ranking at any cost and continually and boringly call any one who states facts that show the Administration for what they are a “disgruntled employee” – don’t bother, I’m not one either.
By Pat Hendrix on June 4th, 2009 at 8:34 am
Good for Clemson. Too bad the dumbasses at USC can’t figure out how to play the game.
By Look at Motivations on June 4th, 2009 at 8:36 am
I would encourage everyone to take a moment and notice the “backtracking” in Dr. Watt’s account over the past 24 hours…she now claims that no “formal” interview took place, and her comments were taken out of context and embellished. However, the consistency in the reports from the Chronicle and Inside Higher Ed, along with the genuine shock experienced by her session participants, indicate otherwise. Too late for CYA and, unfortunately, the harm she has wrought will be felt by many.
I have seen the PowerPoint presentation she used in her mistitled session on “Strategic Planning: Project Management & Lessons in Moving Up in US News Ranks.” I am quite familiar with this (yes, flawed) rankings process, and it is abundantly clear to me that Dr. Watt “strategically planned” where the shock-and-awe comments and factoids would be placed. Anyone familiar with Dr. Watt’s tenure at Clemson is also aware of her motivations for casting a disparaging light on Clemson.
In a nutshell–nasty, vidictive, and unsubstantiated.
By utah on June 4th, 2009 at 10:02 am
attention clemson sympathizers: this isn’t about a comparison between your school and the Flagship University of the state. It’s a matter of clemson taking actions that in no way improve the education of its students, which should be the primary goal of any higher education institution. Instead they are misleading the public, and manipulating the rankings, in an effort to stroke the administration’s collective ego.
By CNSYD on June 4th, 2009 at 11:43 am
I assume the attributes for being the “Flagship” would be the actions of individuals like Pam Parsons and Jim Holderman.
By Clemson: #1 Happiest Students in the nation on June 4th, 2009 at 6:39 pm
Clemson’s response to some of the ridiculous statements in the media:
http://www.poynter.org/column.asp?id=45&aid=164666
By Jeff on June 6th, 2009 at 12:13 pm
What a fraud the school is. Those in real academia have know it for years, now the world is seeing it too.
By ClawofJustice on June 6th, 2009 at 4:25 pm
Hey Sam, and hey Clemson: #1 Happiest Students in the Nation: I know who you are. It’s obvious. But you’re dealing with forces you don’t understand here, chiefly that you don’t control what the media says outside of Greenville and Pickens County. Now that the NYT, the WSJ, the Globe, et al have picked up this story, your usual tactics (spuriously discrediting your opponent, lying, etc.) aren’t going to work as well because you’re now dealing with people who actually know how to use the internet.
You deserve it because you’re a nasty bitch. I’m going to enjoy watching you and your cohorts keep trying to lie your way out of this, and digging yourselves in even deeper in the process.
By Since when is quality a bad thing? on June 9th, 2009 at 1:57 pm
“Clemson’s obsession has drawn sharp rebukes from its peers, as well as South Carolinians who contend that the school is no longer serving its mission as a land-grant, publicly-funded University.”
I’m not sure how Clemson is no longer serving its mission to educate SC residents when 70% (it has always been around this number) of the students are from South Carolina. The smarter kids in our state are now coming to Clemson opposed to out-of-state colleges and universities because of the quality education. With the recent “#1 Happiest Students” accolades, Clemson is pretty hard to pass up.
Just because your kids are not getting into Clemson doesn’t mean the university is not fulfilling its mission of educating SC residents.
By Tony Gentile on July 25th, 2009 at 1:25 pm
My son, who is a R.A. at Clemson,says freshman enrollment is way up this year and the overflow housing is exploding. They’re practically putting freshman in closets. In the past maybe the number of in-state students have been that 70% number however, the class of 2009 freshman is only 40% in-state and yes 60% out-of-state . If you ask me the statement “Clemson’s obsession has drawn sharp rebukes from its peers, as well as South Carolinians who contend that the school is no longer serving its mission as a land-grant, publicly-funded University.”is right on!