An official at Clemson University created a firestorm earlier this summer when, speaking candidly at an academic conference in Atlanta, she said nearly all policies at her institution were driven by how they would help the South Carolina school move up in the annual U.S. News & World Report rankings of Americaâ??s best colleges.
Education reporters who were at the June conference of the Association for Institutional Research reported that Clemson faculty member Catherine Watt said her university had doubled its tuition this decade to be able to significantly increase faculty salaries, manipulated class sizes and even attempted to downgrade the academic reputations of other institutions when answering peer assessment surveys — all in an attempt to propel the university onto the list of the top 20 public research institutions.
Though Clemson administrators denied Wattâ??s claims and said the accusations were “outrageous” examples of “urban legends,” Inside Higher Ed — an online higher education news source — decided to try to “gauge the extent to which Clemson was an anomaly or an example” when it came to giving low scores to rival universities on U.S. Newsâ?? “reputation” survey in an attempt to make its own institution look better.
This is where Aaron Brower, UW-Madisonâ??s vice provost for teaching and learning, got dragged into the debate.