Maclean’s magazine’s annual university rankings are not as crucial as they are made out to be.
These rankings are huge selling points for universities trying to recruit perspective students and their parents, and give universities public bragging rights. Every year, the magazine ranks universities based on several different criteria. Although the rankings include different factors such as, they may not give a true reading of a quality of a university. For example, rankings based on research capacity may not be important to a first-year student in history.
These criteria also do not necessarily reflect the quality of particular programs. Many universities with lower rankings have some of the best specialized programs. For example, although Carleton only ranks sixth place in its category, it has many well-known programs like journalism and public affairs that are not offered at higher-ranking schools. Although the magazine does touch on certain programs and their quality, they are not included in the rankings nor are there rankings that look at specific programs.
The rankings, like other university rankings, also perpetuate the idea that the higher the ranking, the better quality of education and better experience a student will have. This is not necessarily true. Instead of focusing on really improving itself as an institution, universities may be more focused on scoring well under certain specific criteria.
Maclean’s needs to provide a more comprehensive rating system that gives students a more in-depth picture of the universities and programs they are considering. Students do not necessarily use these rankings when deciding on which university to attend, and they shouldn’t.
