Kansas Gov. Mark Parkinson has challenged Kansas University officials as well as members of the Kansas Board of Regents to improve the national ranking of the state’s universities.
He notes KU alumni and friends would not be satisfied with the Jayhawk football and men’s basketball teams ranked nationally in the 90s and they certainly shouldn’t be satisfied with the university academically ranked in the 90s. He called on the regents and state legislators to do what is necessary to elevate KU’s national academic ratings.
Currently, the KU football team is ranked in the nation’s top 25. The KU men’s basketball team is likely to be ranked in the top five as the season gets under way in November.
Early in his tenure as KU chancellor, Robert Hemenway said his goal was to have KU ranked in the top 25 of all state-aided schools and then, upon achieving this goal, aim for the top 25 of all U.S. universities.
Unfortunately, KU has fallen in its national academic rankings, into the 40s among state-aided institutions and in the 90s of all universities — public and private.
Of course, some at KU claim rankings really don’t mean that much and there shouldn’t be such a concern where KU stands. Fortunately, most KU faculty, students, alumni, friends AND the governor don’t share this opinion.
Using athletics as a yardstick, what does it take to be recognized as a national leader, not just an also-ran? What are some of the common characteristics of those schools which have nationally ranked football and basketball teams that compete with the athletic powerhouses of the nation?
First of all, they have excellent coaches, who can inspire, coach and recruit superior student athletes.
The coaches and their assistants are tireless recruiters. They keep track of promising young men as early as those in junior high school. They scout the country looking for talent.
The schools have excellent facilities. They must “keep up with the Joneses,” which has created a call to arms among these schools who want to compete for league and national titles.
Obviously, it takes money — a lot of money — to pay for, or at least to create, a winning program.
After a team and its university establish a substantial winning record, it becomes a bit easier to raise the money.
Why shouldn’t the same principle apply to raising academic rankings of a university — KU, for example?
First of all, there must be leadership — individuals who can inspire and have vision.
These senior officials — the chancellor, president and provost — must have the ability to lead, coach and demand high performance. Who are KU’s coaches? They should not tolerate average or mediocre performance. Basketball and football coaches will not win national titles putting up with average performances. They practice day after day to get it right and then work 365 days a year to keep their players in shape.
Has KU had this kind of demanding and inspirational leadership?
What kind of a job has KU done recruiting the best in faculty and students? In recent years, there has been considerable concern among many KU alumni, the parents of superior high school students, who seem to have been neglected by KU recruiters.
How good is KU in recruiting “top” faculty? What priority do KU officials place on recruiting?
Money is a major concern at KU, but if the school is to improve its national rankings, attract superior students and faculty, it needs money, and a lot of it.
Currently, state support for KU, as well as for other regents schools, is not sufficient to bring about positive changes in KU’s national rankings.
But with exciting leadership and visible results, the chances for greater state support are improving.
Unfortunately, KU has not presented a strong story to state legislators and, consequently, the lawmakers have been able to get by without too much public protest in not funding KU and other schools to the level they deserve.
Private fiscal support has been good, but again, without inspirational leadership, vision and excellent communicators, a capital campaign to raise badly needed dollars has had to be postponed.
Just as athletic teams need excellent facilities, so does the university’s academic and research side. How KU measures up in its facilities compared to those Big 12 schools with higher academic rankings is questionable. But, again, it takes money to build quality facilities that help attract superior students and faculty.
• • •
Cheating in athletics is a major concern and certainly can and unfortunately does play a role in the success of some teams. When such instances have been detected, it is important the guilty are punished.
It’s difficult to know to what degree cheating takes place on the academic side of a school such as KU, but when and if it does occur it should be dealt with by strong public action. Plagiarism and other wrongs should not be tolerated, whether among junior faculty or senior officials.
• • •
An interesting “ranking” situation exists in Kansas City with the KU Hospital and KU School of Medicine. KU Hospital currently ranks in the top five nationally of all teaching hospitals while KU medical school is ranked in the 60s. This situation has been noted by several senior state officials with some wondering why there is such a disparity. What role does leadership and vision play in this situation?
KU Hospital leaders clearly have found the right answers while KU Medical School leaders seem to be struggling. Something needs to be done to improve the school’s national ranking.
• • •
New KU Chancellor Bernadette Gray-Little has an opportunity to make a significant difference in the academic accomplishments on Mount Oread. However, she will need the help and support of those genuinely concerned about the excellence of the institution.
Kansas regents are asking for additional funding for the schools under their jurisdiction. It will be interesting to witness the effectiveness of Chancellor Gray-Little in how she presents the school’s needs to state legislators.
Comments
LJWorld.com doesn’t necessarily condone the comments here, nor does it review every post. Read our full policy. Also, read about banned accounts and harassing comments.
LogicMan (anonymous) says…
"He called on the regents and state legislators to do what is necessary to elevate KU’s national academic ratings."
What are the comparison factors and their relative weights for these rankings? Then what can be done to improve each, especially those that won't cost much? Could make for an interesting series of articles.
LJD230 (anonymous) says…
If I remember correctly three of the most senior academic officers left KU in the recent past to lead Iowa University, the University of Oregon and to fill a very senior position at Ohio State.
KU was NOT without good leadership. KU is without adequate state funding to become a great university and too few out of state kids to provide the diversity, intellectual spark and tuition money necessary to propel KU into the forefront of national universities.
It is unreasonable to expect KU to receive adequate money from the state when it must compete with other state funded schools. How many four year schools can the state reasonably support and expect KU, K State and Wichita to improve national ranking. That is a serious question and needs to be addressed. It will not happen at the whim of the Governor.
The US News rankings of hospitals does NOT, repeat NOT, acknowledge KU Hospital as one of the five top teaching hospitals. And the medical school is ranked poorly by USNWR for the very same reasons as is the Lawrence campus. It would be helpful if the writer of this editorial would acknowledge his sources of information relating to the rankings of the Kansas City campus.
It is all about the money folks!!!
nobody1793 (anonymous) says…
To improve KU, you must also improve the Kansas K-12 system which feeds into it. Admitting students that can't pass math 101 is not the way to compete with MIT or Northwestern.
Phillbert (anonymous) says…
Parkinson: "Here are the criteria that U.S. News utilizes: Peer Assessment is 25 percent; Graduation and Retention Rate is 20 percent; Faculty Resources is 20 percent; Student Selectivity is 15 percent; Financial Resources is 10 percent; Alumni Giving is 5 percent; and Graduation Rate Performance is 5 percent."
What's wrong with that picture? For starters, only about a quarter of the ranking is determined by things that directly benefit students, like graduation rate. The rest is either subjective ("Peer assessment" - i.e. "What KSU and other competitors think of KU"), determined by the state ("Financial Resources") or not beneficial to students ("Student Selectivity").
Rather than being obsessed with rankings, maybe we should be obsessed with factors that actually help students and the state - like making sure more students graduate and that we're actually meeting businesses' workforce needs.
Of course, rankings are easier for "this writer" to rail about in editorials, but given what LJD230 pointed out, Dolph can't even get that right.
dudedog12 (anonymous) says…
If they would funnell the money spent on the new memorial stadium addition, the ranking may be different.
Kawatchi (anonymous) says…
Was this written in crayon?
OldEnuf2BYurDad (anonymous) says…
"He notes KU alumni and friends would not be satisfied with the Jayhawk football and men’s basketball teams ranked nationally in the 90s and they certainly shouldn’t be satisfied with the university academically ranked in the 90s."
Apples and oranges, and Dolph of all people KNOWS that. KU Athletics Corp. doesn't have its hands tied by the state/regents. This entire editorial is crap. KU's sports teams have had success because athletics can self-determine success; academics can not. The only way to place emphasis on recruiting is to pay competitive salaries. But when a KU employee goes 10 years even though they've exceeded expectations, how is THAT an enticing place to work?
I wish my wife drove a BMW instead of a Cavalier, but she doesn't because that requires more many than we have. KU needs to come up with some money if they want to compete. It's no more complicated than that.
LiberalDude (anonymous) says…
Maybe if Dolph and his newspaper would call KU (The University of Kansas) by its correct name KU would improve in the rankings...
LloydDobbler (anonymous) says…
It's not entirely about money. It's about focus. Too many of KU's Deans are trying to do too many things. If they focused on teaching the basic courses and making existing programs top notch rather than worrying about producing new programs, marketing, constructing buildings, etc., the academics would be fine. Some graduate programs charge $582 per credit hour including special "fees." So they should be able to function effectively in teaching basic courses...they just need to focus and not get bogged down in politics and kingdom building.
Made_in_China (Paul R. Getto) says…
Money talks and BS walks, Dolph. If you are serious, whack the legislature about the head and shoulders and demand a tax increase or a repeal of some tax exemptions. KU and the other Regents schools have done pretty well on a stavation diet lasting many years. You want excellence? Pay for it.