Skip to main content

Getting on the Front Page: Organizational Reputation, Status Signals, and the Impact of U.S. News and World Report on Student Decisions

Research in Higher Education volume 50, pages 415–436 (2009)Cite this article

Abstract

Recent studies have suggested that a causal link exists between college rankings and subsequent admissions indicators. However, it is unclear how these effects vary across institutional type (i.e., national universities vs. liberal arts colleges) or whether these effects persist when controlling for other factors that affect admissions outcomes. Using admissions data for top-tier institutions from fall 1998 to fall 2005, we found that moving onto the front page of the U.S. News rankings provides a substantial boost in the following year’s admissions indicators for all institutions. In addition, the effect of moving up or down within the top tier has a strong impact on institutions ranked in the top 25, especially among national universities. In contrast, the admissions outcomes of liberal arts colleges—particularly those in the lower half of the top tier—were more strongly influenced by institutional prices.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant access to the full article PDF.

USD 39.95

Price includes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

References

  • Adelman, C. (1999). Answers in the toolbox: Academic intensity, and Bachelor’s degree attainment. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Educational Statistics.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ajzen, I. (1985). From intentions to actions: A theory of planned behavior. In J. Kuhl & J. Beckman (Eds.), Action-control: From cognition to behavior (pp. 11–39). Heidelberg: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Management and Human Decision Processes, 50, 179–211.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Allison, P. (2005). Fixed effects regression methods for longitudinal data using SAS. Cary, NC: SAS Institute Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bastedo, M. N., & Bowman, N. A. (in press). The U.S. News and World Report college rankings: Modeling institutional effects on organizational reputation. American Journal of Education.

  • Bastedo, M. N., & Gumport, P. J. (2003). Access to what? Mission differentiation and academic stratification in U.S. public higher education. Higher Education, 46, 341–359.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bowen, W. G., & Bok, D. (1998). The shape of the river. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brewer, D. J., Gates, S. M., & Goldman, C. A. (2001). In pursuit of prestige: Strategy and competition in U.S. higher education. Somerset, NJ: Transaction Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • College Board. (2002). SAT-ACT score comparisons. Retrieved May 10, 2008, from http://professionals.collegeboard.com/profdownload/act-sat-concordance-tables.pdf.

  • Desjardins, S. L., Ahlburg, D. A., & McCall, B. P. (2006). An integrated model of application, admission, enrollment, and financial aid. Journal of Higher Education, 77, 381–429.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elsbach, K. D., & Kramer, R. M. (1996). Members’ responses to organizational identity threats: Encountering and countering the Business Week rankings. Administrative Science Quarterly, 41, 442–476.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Espeland, W. N., & Sauder, M. (2007). Rankings and reactivity: How public measures recreate social worlds. American Journal of Sociology, 113, 1–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Finder, A. (2007, August 17). College ratings race roars on despite concerns. New York Times. Retrieved October 6, 2008, from http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/17/education/17rankings.html.

  • Frank, R. H., & Cook, P. J. (1996). The winner-take-all society. New York: Penguin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garland, J. (2003). Miami University tuition plan: A solution for higher education funding? Excerpted from the 2003 State of the University Address. Oxford, OH: Miami University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Griffith, A., & Rask, K. (2007). The influence of the U.S. News and World Report collegiate rankings on the matriculation decision of high-ability students: 1995–2004. Economics of Education Review, 26, 244–255.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gumport, P. J., & Bastedo, M. N. (2001). Academic stratification and endemic conflict: Remedial education policy at the City University of New York. Review of Higher Education, 24, 333–349.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Higher Education Research Institute. (2007). College rankings and college choice: How important are college rankings in students’ college choice process? Los Angeles, CA: Author.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hovland, C. I., & Weiss, W. (1951). The influence of source credibility on communication effectiveness. Public Opinion Quarterly, 15, 635–650.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jencks, C., & Phillips, M. (1998). The black-white test score gap. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Karabel, J. (2005). The chosen. New York: Houghton Mifflin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Machung, A. (1998). Playing the rankings game. Change, 30(4), 12–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marklein, M. B. (2007, April 9). Race, wealth affect significance given to college rankings. USA Today. Retrieved October 3, 2007, from http://www.usatoday.com/news/education/2007-04-09-college-rankings_N.htm.

  • Martins, L. L. (2005). A model of the effects of reputational rankings on organizational change. Organization Science, 16, 701–720.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McDonough, P. M., Antonio, A. L., Walpole, M., & Perez, L. X. (1998). College rankings: Democratized college knowledge for whom? Research in Higher Education, 39, 513–537.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meredith, M. (2004). Why do universities compete in the rankings game? An empirical analysis of the effects of the US News and World Report college rankings. Research in Higher Education, 45, 443–461.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meyer, J. W., & Rowan, B. (1977). Institutionalized organizations: Formal structure as myth and ceremony. American Journal of Sociology, 83, 340–363.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miami University. (2008). Miami’s Ohio Scholarship program: Program specifics. Retrieved February 4, 2008, from http://www.miami.muohio.edu/ohioscholarships/specifics.cfm.

  • Monks, J., & Ehrenberg, R. G. (1999). The impact of U.S. News & World Report college rankings on admissions outcomes and pricing policies at selective private institutions (Working Paper #7227). Washington, DC: National Bureau of Economic Research.

  • Nettles, M. T., & Perna, L. W. (1997). The African American education data book: Volume III: The transition from school to college school to work. Washington, DC: Frederick D. Patterson Research Institute of the College Fund/UNCF.

    Google Scholar 

  • Olson, J. C. (1977). Price as an information cue: Effects on product evaluations. In A. G. Woodside, J. N. Sneth, & P. D. Bennett (Eds.), Consumer and industrial buying behavior (pp. 267–286). New York: North Holland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pike, G. R. (2004). Measuring quality: A comparison of US News Rankings and NSSE benchmarks. Research in Higher Education, 45, 193–208.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Podolny, J. M. (1993). A status-based model of market competition. American Journal of Sociology, 98, 829–872.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Podolny, J. M. (2005). Status signals: A sociological study of market competition. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rao, H., Monin, P., & Durand, R. (2003). Institutional change in Toque Ville: Nouvelle cuisine as an identity movement in French gastronomy. American Journal of Sociology, 108, 795–843.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rindova, V. P., Williamson, I. O., Petkova, A. P., & Sever, J. M. (2005). Being good or being known: An empirical examination of the dimensions, antecedents, and consequences of organizational reputation. Academy of Management Journal, 48, 1033–1049.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Riper, T. V. (2007, January 19). America’s most expensive colleges. Forbes. Retrieved December 10, 2007, from http://www.forbes.com/2007/01/19/most-expensive-colleges-biz-cx_tvr_0119college.html.

  • Rossi, L. (2007, January 23). Grinnell stuns students with unusual tuition jump. Des Moines Register. Retrieved December 13, 2007, from http://www.topcolleges.com/news32.html.

  • Sauder, M. (2006). Third parties and status position: How the characteristics of status systems matter. Theory and Society, 35, 299–321.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sauder, M., & Lancaster, R. (2006). Do rankings matter? The effects of U.S. News & World Report rankings on the admissions process of law schools. Law and Society Review, 40, 105–134.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sauer, S. J., Thomas-Hunt, M. C., & Morris, P. A. (2008). Too good to be true? The unintended signaling effects of educational prestige on external expectations of team performance. Unpublished paper, Cornell University.

  • Spence, A. M. (1974). Market signaling. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Steinberg, J. (2002). The gatekeepers: Inside the admissions process of a premier college. New York: Viking.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stevens, M. L. (2007). Choosing a class: College admissions and the education of elites. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thacker, L. (2005). College unranked: Ending the college admissions frenzy. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • University of Richmond. (2005). University of Richmond strategic plan: A five-year status report. 2000–2005. Richmond, VA: Author.

    Google Scholar 

  • Volkwein, J. F., & Sweitzer, K. V. (2006). Institutional prestige and reputation among research universities and liberal arts colleges. Research in Higher Education, 47, 129–148.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Washington, M., & Zajac, E. J. (2005). Status evolution and competition: Theory and evidence. Academy of Management Journal, 48, 282–296.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zuckerman, E. W. (1999). The categorical imperative: Securities analysts and the illegitimacy discount. American Journal of Sociology, 104, 1398–1438.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Sincere thanks to Jeremy Reisman, Ben Shipper, and Ruth Kallio for research assistance.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Center for Social Concerns, University of Notre Dame, P.O. Box 766, Notre Dame, IN, 46556-0766, USA

    Nicholas A. Bowman

  2. Center for the Study of Higher and Postsecondary Education, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, USA

    Michael N. Bastedo

Authors
  1. Nicholas A. Bowman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Michael N. Bastedo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Nicholas A. Bowman or Michael N. Bastedo.

Appendices

Appendix A

See Table 6.

Table 6 Descriptions and codings for variables in fixed effects regression analyses
Full size table

Appendix B

See Table 7.

Table 7 Descriptive statistics for variables (excluding year and institutional dummy variables)
Full size table

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Bowman, N.A., Bastedo, M.N. Getting on the Front Page: Organizational Reputation, Status Signals, and the Impact of U.S. News and World Report on Student Decisions. Res High Educ 50, 415–436 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-009-9129-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-009-9129-8

Keywords

  • Rankings
  • Reputation
  • Status
  • Signaling
  • Organization theory
  • College admissions