OU academics “abysmal” Per Wall Street Journal

[ou48A]

The OU community should use this as motivation to make academic progress



http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...=djemMTIPOFF_t


By KEVIN HELLIKER

Oklahoma has the top-ranked team in college football. But its academic standing is, by some standards, abysmal.

The school can't be found among the nation's top 100 universities in the annual U.S. News & World Report rankings. In the rankings that many academicians take most seriously—federal research expenditures—Oklahoma isn't among the top 150 universities. Nor does it belong to the Association of American Universities, an elite group of 61 research institutions.

So here's a question: when it comes to college football's current conference realignment drama, in which schools like Oklahoma have been exploring their options, how much do academics matter?

On Tuesday, the Pac-12 Conference announced it would remain at 12 members for now. Oklahoma had held informal talks with the conference in recent days about the future. In an interview Wednesday, Pac-12 President Larry Scott wouldn't comment on the conference's assessment of any specific school. But he said that when the conference considers new members "the academic brand is as important as the athletic brand." He said the Pac-12 "prides itself on being best of breed academically as well as athletically."

Oklahoma President David Boren said the university ranks first among U.S. public institutions in the number of national merit scholars, boasts an average freshman ACT score above 26, belongs to the Carnegie Foundation's highest category of research universities and climbed 10 spots in the U.S. News ranking over the past year. "The Pac 12 folks embraced us warmly about academics," he said, adding that both sides decided against a marriage for non-academic reasons.

Television revenue from football games is, by every account, the largest factor driving the recent reshuffling. But in the scramble to create a select number of power conferences, some say academic standing is playing an underappreciated role.

The Pac-10 became the Pac-12 this year thanks to the addition of two schools, Colorado and Utah. As it happens, both rank relatively high in federal research expenditures: Colorado is No. 47, Utah is No. 58. "From the outset of our talks with the Pac 10, it was clear that we wouldn't have been part of the conversation if not for our profile as a research institution—as well as our athletic success," said Chris Hill, Utah's athletic director.

Until this year, every member of the Big Ten belonged to the AAU, the Ivy League of American research universities. Only after accepting an offer to join the Big Ten did its newest member, Nebraska, get booted out of the AAU on grounds that its level of competitive grant-getting no longer reached elite status. Nebraska argued that the AAU unfairly devalued its agricultural research dollars. Not merely an athletic conference, the Big Ten decades ago created a research cooperative linking member libraries, course materials and research missions.

"On our campuses you'll find more Nobel laureates than Heisman Trophy winners," said Barbara McFadden Allen, executive director of the cooperative, called the Committee on Institutional Cooperation. She said academic stature invariably figures into expansion conversations. (The University of Chicago belongs to the CIC but pulled out of the Big Ten in 1946).

While one conference, the SEC, has dominated college football's national championships in recent years, the crown for academic preeminence tends to involve a competition between the Pac 12, Big Ten and ACC. The Big East and Big 12 rank toward the bottom of the list academically. These two conferences are also in the weakest positions overall in terms of recent defections and potential future ones.

The major conference with a relatively low academic ranking that isn't concerned about membership is the SEC, which recently added Texas A&M.

John V. Lombardi, the president of LSU, an SEC member, wrote in an email that he thinks talk about the academic compatibility of schools in realignment is a rationalization. "Once an athletic conference is expanded by the addition of athletically effective institutions with strong television markets, then the members talk about the relative wonderfulness of their members' academic profiles," he wrote.

Officials of the Big Ten and ACC either declined to comment or did not return calls and emails seeking comment.

The ACC, whose members include Duke, Virginia and North Carolina, is one of the top academic conferences. This weekend, it welcomed two new members, Pittsburgh and Syracuse. According to U.S. News, both schools have fairly good reputations. Pitt ranks No. 58 and Syracuse is No. 62.

If academics were paramount, it's fair to assume Texas—No. 45 according to U.S. News—might leave the Big 12, which has limited scholarly distinction. One possible reason it hasn't: political pressure to drag along Texas Tech, an in-state rival that U.S. News ranks No. 160.

[Just the facts]

OU should immediately decrease enrollment to 6,500 undergrad students. That should get the academics up. I wonder how the top 6,500 at OU compare academic wise to Duke, Harvard, Yale, and Stanford.

Duke: 6,504
Harvard: 6,655
Yale: 6,318
Stanford: 6,878

[Midtowner]

You're wanting OU to become a private university?

[betts]

As an academician myself, I would like to argue that federal research dollars are a ridiculous way to evaluate an institution's academic prowess. First of all, many of the premier researchers do not teach, or teach rarely. Many of them are poor teachers. Much of the research being done today is a waste of dollars. My husband and I read the abstracts of many of the academic research journals we receive with some of the same humor we reserved for the "Weekly World News". "Publish or perish" has led to reinvention of the wheel multiple times over. Yes, there is cutting edge research being done, but there is also a huge amount of dead weight and waste.

I haven't attended enough academic institutions to really judge how one determines quality of education. I'm not sure its possible, honestly. I went to school with Condoleeza Rice and had the same major, had a long-term roommate who was Associate Deputy Attorney General, and see another one of my classmates on occasion on Rachel Madow as an analyst. They went to the University of Denver with me, a school not known for its academic excellence. I went to the University of Michigan and the University of Oklahoma as well. I'm not sure I could tell the difference between them, to be honest with you. I think my son's classes at the Naval Academy were very difficult, but the English papers he wrote were no better than the ones my other son wrote for classes at the University of Oklahoma. I think my son at the University of Oklahoma has a better overall fund of knowledge than the engineer/pilot who went to the Naval Academy.

So, I'm calling BS on that article. Most of us have innate intelligence that gives us a start. That in addition to how hard we work at our education is probably a better long-term predictor of our capabilities than where we got our degree.

[ou48A]

I am told that the writer is a KU graduate.
KU fans have been feeling left out of the conference realignment talks.

[Swake2]

OU should immediately decrease enrollment to 6,500 undergrad students. That should get the academics up. I wonder how the top 6,500 at OU compare academic wise to Duke, Harvard, Yale, and Stanford.

Duke: 6,504
Harvard: 6,655
Yale: 6,318
Stanford: 6,878

They would compare poorly.

[HewenttoJared]

They would compare poorly.

Aye

[ou48A]

We can criticize the article but the bottom line is still the same…. we need to get better.
But we need more donations and better state funding.

Even Traber is rubbing this in our face…

[Just the facts]

They would compare poorly.

How do you know? Have you seen the garbage Harvard and Yale have been producing for the last 20 years? Obama and Bush are their two biggest achievers. Need I say more?

[OKCTalker]

Betts & ou48A are dismissing the article and its findings (Betts: "I'm calling BS on that article" and ou48A: "I am told that the writer is a KU graduate. KU fans have been feeling left out of the conference realignment talks.").

Guys - what reasonable and objective standards would you apply to measure academic standards at the collegiate level? Whatever they are, OU would be OK, but it's far from excellent.

[Swake2]

xx

[Pete]

what reasonable and objective standards would you apply to measure academic standards at the collegiate level? Whatever they are, OU would be OK, but it's far from excellent.

Maybe not excellent but certainly not 'abysmal'.

Lost in the forced rankings are the rating points themselves. Once you get beyond the top 10-20 schools the rating points are really close.

For example, Texas -- which is often held out as an 'excellent' school -- had 63 points versus OU's 47. That's significant but those two schools are much closer than 46 slots (#45 vs. #101) would indicate. At #5, Stanford has 93 points which means Texas is almost twice as far from them in the scoring than from OU.

Also, Missouri loves to hold itself out as some sort of Harvard of the Midwest, yet they have 50 points (#90 in the rankings) versus 47 for OU, Kansas and Nebraska.

[FritterGirl]

That bloviating dimwit on the Sports Animal is hardly one to speak to higher education and quality of academic performance. He can hardly string two rational thoughts together without screaming at someone. Hardly a credible reference.

[Rover]

If you go to the description of the criteria on the list you can see why OU might be penalized a bit, particularly in the admissions rates (as state school, OU is expected to allow more entrants), faculty pay rates, alumni giving rates, and a number of pretty subjective areas.

http://www.usnews.com/education/best...-2012?PageNr=3

Also not that it calls out OU for not being in top 100, but OU is at 101. LOL.

And, as far as government research spending, much of that is political.

I am not dismissing the idea of evaluating our universities, but I think often times it is subjective and often not based on preparing its students for succeeding in the world.

[Pete]

I want to be clear that I think OU & OSU should be working hard on improving their academics -- there is lots of room for improvement.

But two more things: 1) OU has made enormous strides under Boren -- I won't bother to list the accomplishments but they are staggering and continuous; and 2) OU has lower tuition and state funding than any school ranked in the top 125. If the state of Oklahoma wants better universities it has to fund them and allow the schools to raise fees to at least a respectable and competitive level.

[Pete]

Besides my degree from OU, I have a graduate degree from Pepperdine (#55 on the list) and lots of hours at UCLA (#28).

My experience was that Pepperdine was not a significantly better school than OU. Very different, that's for sure... But I didn't think my education was drastically better and there were plenty of kids there that used their parent's money to gain admission.

However, I saw a pretty huge difference between UCLA and OU, mainly the caliber of the students. UCLA only admits a small fraction of their applicants and tons and tons of great students don't even get in. So, those that are admitted are super motivated in the classroom and you could feel that at every turn. I've sat in on classes at Stanford and I'd say they are up another couple of notches in this regard.


My general point is there is a substantial difference between a mid-tier and top-tier school; I'd say the top 20-30 or so are in a league by themselves. But after that, there is a sharp drop off and ratings are really just splitting hairs between about the next 100 schools or so.

[adaniel]

I don't think anyone would call OU a beacon of academic excellence comparable to the likes of Harvard or even top state schools i.e., Cal, UNC, etc. But "abysmal?"

I really don't get the obsessions over rankings. Several college presidents have gone on the record complaining about them, yet nobody will do anything because no one wants to be the first to jump off the treadmill. There is a stronger correlation between what you major in at college and your success rather than what college you went to. I'm sure there are some petroleum engineers who graduated from OU or OSU who are doing much better than a letters grad from Yale. Of course thats an extreme example, but I promise you the letters grad will still be laughing at the dumb hicks with their worthless degrees in flyover country.

Truthfully I'm impressed that OU does this well considering it has to grovel at the steps of the state capitol every year for every dime. I have personally never seen the universities in other states beg year in and year out for funding like OU and OSU do. I remember in 2005, when this state had a $1 billion surplus. Instead of making some really great investments in education, as Boren and others asked, the geniuses at the capitol frittered it away. Given the state of the national economy, it will be a long time before we ever get another opportunity like that. Sigh.

OU is not perfect but it has the makings and potential to be a great university. We all know the issues and we don't need some snotty New York writer printing dribble to remind us.

Full disclosure: I am a 2009 OU Grad

[bretthexum]

It amazes me that schools like OU who bring in 10's of million dollars from sports have trouble funding their academic programs. Where the hell does all of that money go?

[ou48A]

Betts & ou48A are dismissing the article and its findings (Betts: "I'm calling BS on that article" and ou48A: "I am told that the writer is a KU graduate. KU fans have been feeling left out of the conference realignment talks.").

Guys - what reasonable and objective standards would you apply to measure academic standards at the collegiate level? Whatever they are, OU would be OK, but it's far from excellent.

Let me assure you that dismissing the article and its findings is anything but my intent.If I felt that way I probably would not have posted this. I am very disturbed by this publicity, but let it be the motivation for improvement.


In fact IMHO the more attention this issue receives the more likely it becomes that the OU community and state of Oklahoma will take measures to boost OU academics.
As much improve as OU as made we still need to make many more improvements. I’m not educated or smart enough to know the all details and the best path for success for OU. But I do have a few ideas that I think would be very beneficial to OU and to our state that I will share at a later date and on a separate post

But please know the writer has been described as a passionate fan of the KU Jayhawks who could perhaps hold a grudge over the many beat downs OU has given his school. This may have created motivation for the tone of his article.

[MikeOKC]

But please know the writer has been described as a passionate fan of the KU Jayhawks who could perhaps hold a grudge over the many beat downs OU has given his school. This may have created motivation for the tone of his article.

I can't imagine that. A WSJ reporter writing a story to "get back" at OU wins over Kansas? If that's even possibly true - then sports truly is the modern day opiate of the masses.

[bluedogok]

It amazes me that schools like OU who bring in 10's of million dollars from sports have trouble funding their academic programs. Where the hell does all of that money go?

OU is one of a handful of schools where some of the money generated from the athletic department goes into a general school fund, I think UT is another one as well but not sure about others.

In terms of state funding and tuition, the universities in Texas many years ago had their state funding reduced but were allowed to raise tuition without approval of the legislature. From what I heard from the recent students that I worked with at the areas schools (UT, A&M, Texas State, UTSA) was that tuition was going up at a very high rate every semester, much more than what my entire tuition and fees were at OU in the early 80's. In fact some of the increases have caused some legislators to start questioning whether they need to regain control over the tuition costs.

...and as some others have stated, most of these lists aren't worth the toilet paper they should have been written on. Any one can manipulate enough data to get the list to read how you want it to.

[MikeOKC]

One sentence I really liked from the WSJ article concerning the Big Ten:

"On our campuses you'll find more Nobel laureates than Heisman Trophy winners," said Barbara McFadden Allen, executive director of the cooperative, called the Committee on Institutional Cooperation. She said academic stature invariably figures into expansion conversations.

America is in dire straits economically and our population, when colleges are discussed, it's usually about sports - football, especially. I've become so soured on the whole idea of the "student athlete." What a joke. At one time, I loved college football. These days, with players who don't even belong in a university and 80% of OU football players are on the campus only with "special admission." Wow. And they represent the University of Oklahoma to millions. That's sad.

By the way - Boise State? ZERO special admissions for athletics. Z-E-R-O. Tells me a lot. GO BRONCOS! (True student athletes - and damned good ones, too.)

[Soonerus]

Typical modern day journalism, weak, reminds of the book, How to Lie with Statistics...

[bluedogok]

By the way - Boise State? ZERO special admissions for athletics. Z-E-R-O. Tells me a lot. GO BRONCOS! (True student athletes - and damned good ones, too.)

Since you're in love with statistics...check out how Boise State's general student population compares with everyone else. Boise was a junior college not that many years ago. Like every school they have some excellent programs and excellent students but one of the main reasons why Boise has never been discussed for one of the major conferences is because of their overall academics, which has traditionally been lower than that of most schools.

It's just like the same crap about "student athlete graduation rates", that is more crap statistics. If someone comes into a program and leaves early for whatever professional league or transfers to another school, it is counted against the school they left. Even if they left in good standing to go to the pros or if they graduate from the school they transferred to it is still a negative against the original school, how is that right? If someone is booted out or quits and is on academic probation or suspension when they leave the program, I could understand that going into the negative ledger, but a student in good standing? That is just ridiculous.

I can definitely tell you things are much harder for athletes academically now than they were when I was in school. At the time you only needed a 17 on the ACT to get into OU or OSU...and yes, many players rarely attended classes back in that era, that happened at many, many schools. The requirements are much higher now for all students and even a "partial qualifier" now would have qualified like any other student 20-30 years ago at most universities.

[Just the facts]

One sentence I really liked from the WSJ article concerning the Big Ten:

[indent]"On our campuses you'll find more Nobel laureates than Heisman Trophy winners," said Barbara McFadden Allen,

Big deal, they have more of 'everything' on campus than Heisman Trophy winners. Plus, a Heisman is harder to get; they only award one per year.