Newsweek once again has compromised both credibility and ethics by releasing its annual high school rankings feature. The “rankings” are based on one single measure – on that is invalid as a gauge of quality; it simply does not measure how “good” a high school is. And the rankings also violate journalistic ethics, as the gauge is one that directly promotes increased profits for an enterprise run by Newsweek’s parent company.
The rankings are based entirely on the single criterion of how many AP (or two other similar) tests are taken by the students in the school. That’s it. How the students perform on the tests is not part of the equation.
Newsweek’s description: “Public schools are ranked according to a ratio devised by [reporter/editor] Jay Mathews: the number of Advanced Placement, Intl. Baccalaureate and/or Cambridge tests taken by all students at a school in 2008 divided by the number of graduating seniors.”
This is so clearly not a valid gauge of a school’s quality that it’s hardly worth wasting words explaining. The criterion is also subject to easy manipulation, needless to say.
Here’s why this feature compromises Newsweek’s ethics. Newsweek’s parent company, the Washington Post, also owns Kaplan, the test prep powerhouse. It’s also hardly necessary to explain that encouraging more students to take AP tests directly correlates with increasing Kaplan’s business.
Standard journalistic ethics call for avoiding the appearance of conflict of interest. The Newsweek high school rankings emblazon the appearance of conflict of interest across the heavens.
An increasing chorus of dissenters complains each year about this feature – including some of the “winners.” In May 2008, the superintendents of 38 high-performing school districts signed a letter to Newsweek protesting the feature and requesting that their districts be excluded (a toothless request, but a meaningful gesture). This year, a top education reporter in Dallas – the location of two of the top-ranked schools – questioned the rankings’ credibility.
It’s not just time-wasting but also harmful to pass authoritative-looking judgments on schools based on invalid criteria. Meanwhile, with the very survival of the news media under threat, journalistic credibility is one asset the media should struggle to keep. Newsweek is making a big mistake in compromising its ethics so shamelessly. The magazine needs to eliminate and renounce this corrupt and damaging feature.
Follow me on Twitter @CarolineSF
Comments
Caroline,
I write about this every year too.
SF International Living Examiner
P.S. My daughter graduated from SOTA in 2003. She went to university in Canada. My son went to Riordan and went to a different university in Canada. If you want some info about going to a foreign university (primarily Canada) for SF kids, let me know.
Patrick
SF International Living Examiner
No one said that this is the best measure. That is only your own implications that it is. And if you imply it, then to you there is some truth to it as well. It's ranking schools on variables, not saying one is better than another. That's your own implication. They have every right to post such things.
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!