The best way to rank a school president?

Larger training is awash with rankings, proclaiming the perfect universities, faculty dorms and even campus meals. Now a brand new rating goals to measure the effectiveness of faculty presidents.

Launched by the American Enterprise Institute, a conservative assume tank, the rankings rating presidents primarily based on how a lot they supported pupil success, elevated entry and improved affordability. The examine, which used federal knowledge to measure commencement charges, socioeconomic range of the coed physique and tuition prices, ranked 446 faculty presidents who served at about 200 U.S. establishments between 2000 and 2023.

The ranked leaders don’t need to be present presidents and even nonetheless alive; on the high of the record sits the late Gary Thomas, who served as president of the College of Missouri at Rolla from 2001 to 2005. (The Rolla campus is now the Missouri College of Science and Know-how.) On the backside, in spot 446, is Kenneth Starr, the previous unbiased counsel throughout the Clinton administration who went on to guide Baylor College from 2011 to 2016; he died in 2022. And whereas most schools haven’t touted the presidential examine outcomes like they generally do their institutional rankings, some—such because the College of San Diego, the place James T. Harris III was declared the highest sitting president—despatched out press releases celebrating their chief’s efficiency.

Like all rankings within the training sphere, these have generated widespread skepticism, not solely concerning the examine’s methodology but in addition about whether or not faculty presidents can really be ranked on a slim set of metrics.

Rating Presidents

Cody Christensen, the researcher behind the rankings, stated he received the concept within the aftermath of final December’s congressional listening to on campus antisemitism, wherein the presidents of Harvard College, the College of Pennsylvania and the Massachusetts Institute of Know-how waffled on a query about hypothetical requires the genocide of Jewish college students.

Blowback was fierce; the presidents of Penn and Harvard stepped down shortly thereafter.

Christensen, a Ph.D. pupil at Vanderbilt College learning increased training coverage, stated that amid the tumult, “for the primary time, it appeared like the general public and Congress have been within the management and efficiency of what faculty presidents have been really doing.”

The highlight introduced a “pure jumping-off level” for analysis on what makes an efficient faculty president, he stated—a place he thought was sorely underexamined in comparison with different management roles, reminiscent of CEOs.

Christensen, who labored for AEI as a analysis assistant earlier than enrolling in graduate faculty, reached out to the group to contract a one-off examine assessing what he sees as one of many world’s hardest jobs.

“You’re working a company that’s huge, that’s so disconnected, it has so many alternative competing pursuits, and the president of a college arguably has much less management over the course of their establishment than every other chief govt of a company,” Christensen stated. “You’ve totally different deans and totally different provosts. You’ve received totally siloed workplaces for monetary help and admissions. You’ve school that nearly solely do analysis, and also you’re competing for nationwide grants, after which attempting to fundraise to your endowment on high of all of that, whereas additionally being the figurehead, presumably serving to the establishment keep heading in the right direction.”

With that in thoughts, Christensen got down to rank presidents primarily based on “what the establishment itself stated mattered,” in addition to “elements that mattered to college students, households, taxpayers and policymakers.” That led him to deal with pupil success, entry and affordability.

However Christensen acknowledged that the rankings don’t totally seize all the things that establishments worth; he famous that many universities emphasize analysis output, as an illustration, which isn’t a part of the examine. Such knowledge is difficult to acquire and holds much less weight for college kids and households, he stated.

Christensen hopes the rankings present a metric for boards and policymakers to evaluate presidents. Too typically, he stated, their focus is on whether or not an establishment climbed or dropped within the U.S. Information Finest Faculties rankings, moderately than on extra illuminating metrics reminiscent of retention and commencement charges, the range of the coed physique, and tuition costs.

“I perceive that not all or each change is due to the faculty president’s management, however for those who’re slipping on all fronts, I feel it’s definitely worth the dialog to listen to what the president has to say about it, and if they will clarify it or not. I feel that’s useful,” Christensen stated.

Can Presidents Be Ranked?

The faculty presidency has lengthy been a tricky job, however the previous few years have introduced distinctive challenges, together with the COVID-19 pandemic, the looming demographic cliff, widespread campus protests, plummeting mistrust in increased training and rising scrutiny from conservative lawmakers.

The tenure of presidents has additionally declined in recent times, down to five.9 years within the newest American Council on Schooling survey.

Given the ever-evolving slate of challenges presidents face, some specialists imagine they shouldn’t be ranked solely on pupil success, entry and affordability.

Michael Harris, a professor of upper training and chair of the Division of Schooling Coverage and Management at Southern Methodist College, known as the rankings “a gross oversimplification,” arguing that the examine doesn’t issue within the many issues which are outdoors of a president’s management and that the standards are too broad given the precise, particular person challenges every campus faces.

“I feel it’s so contextual. You could know the actual facets of that establishment, but in addition what that establishment wants at the moment,” he stated. “At some phases of their improvement, establishments might have extra capital tasks and capital campaigns and fundraising. At different occasions—take into consideration the present [political] local weather—can they successfully work with the governor and the Legislature?”

Harris additionally argued the character of the presidency is more and more outward-looking, making it troublesome to rank the job primarily based on inside numbers alone.

“A variety of the main focus of the president is externally targeted. It’s authorities relations, fundraising, improvement, making pals—broadly outlined. It’s pushed by what’s taking place outdoors of the establishment. A variety of what the president is doing is broad strategic course,” he stated.

Kevin McClure, a professor of upper training on the College of North Carolina at Wilmington, stated that boards sometimes consider presidents based on particular measures constructed into strategic plans. Funds, enrollment and nationwide rankings efficiency are sometimes essential elements, however the metrics might range an awesome deal relying on the circumstances.

“There may be particular issues a president was employed to do, and people might equally be a part of that analysis. That would embrace issues like, ‘We now have employed somebody who’s a very good fundraiser, and one of many major issues that we’re on the lookout for is somebody who’s going to guide us on this subsequent fundraising marketing campaign,’” McClure stated. “They may have been introduced in as a stabilizer, somebody who got here in after a interval of disaster, or after a no-confidence vote of their predecessor and tried to revive confidence and belief from school or others.”

Limitations of Rankings

Typically school views are included in presidential evaluations. And professors typically have totally different priorities than governing boards, reminiscent of transparency, shared governance, manageable workloads and educational freedom.

McClure believes it may be troublesome to craft an exterior analysis for presidents, given the constraints on obtainable knowledge and its tenuous connection to management and efficiency. He famous that presidents depend on quite a few subordinates to assist perform their job, and that the work of the college is pushed largely by school and employees who work instantly with college students.

“To what extent can we attribute institutional efficiency to 1 particular person?” McClure stated.

Christensen agreed that the rankings are restricted in scope, noting within the examine that “measures used to guage efficiency mirror solely a part of the roles and duties” of a college chief, and that “some circumstances are outdoors the management of faculty presidents.” He additionally identified that public college presidents might have much less management over sure measures than the leaders of personal establishments. Finally, he suggested in opposition to placing an excessive amount of religion in anybody rating.

“I typically am a rankings skeptic. I feel plenty of weight will get placed on rankings,” Christensen stated. “I now discover myself placing out a rating, and I proceed to share plenty of these cautions.”

However he advised the findings of his examine may also help confirm how presidents have moved the needle at their respective establishments—significantly on pupil success, entry and affordability.

“I don’t think about that my faculty president rankings are going to have that a lot affect or gravity to alter institutional behaviors and habits. However I feel it may very well be a wholesome beginning place,” Christensen stated.

(This story has been up to date to incorporate the right identify of the College of San Diego president.)