Boeing is stepping into an area dominated by U.S. News and World Reports: College rankings. But the aircraft manufacturer is hoping that its efforts, which will focus exclusively on engineering programs (and not, like U.S. News's, on a college's overall offerings) will have a rigor and credibility that the fading newsmagazine's are perceived to lack. (Not that anyone has come up with anything better; and some of the complaints from colleges amount to whining: Many college officials simply don't want to be judged by any standard.)
The rankings idea, reports the Chronicle of Higher Education, came from Boeing VP Richard D. Stephens, who oversees human resources and administration for the company and has served on the U.S. Department of Education's Commission on the Future of Higher Education. Stephens decided that with 35,000 engineers on its payroll, and terabytes of data on their on-the-job performance over the years, Boeing didn't have to wait for the government to figure out how to evaluate higher-education "outcomes."
Within the next few weeks, the Chronicle says, Stephens will send letters to 150 deans of engineering schools laying out how their alumni have done at Boeing, both in absolute terms and relative to the alumni of other programs. The letters will offer suggestions for improvement whenever graduates of the schools consistently lack certain skills or traits.
The rankings are theoretically for private consumption only, but Stephens said he fully expects leaks, and bragging. Some schools with small names, he hints, do disproportionately well at the company and will certainly want to trumpet that fact.
Some observers worry that the Boeing rankings will push engineering schools to be even more beholden to industry than they already are. And beholden to a certain kind of industry, which values a certain subset of engineers.
Because Boeing's chief goal is that its planes stay in the air (and let me say that I, for one, endorse this goal), its evaluation system tends to value solid, by-the-books types, some engineers told the Chronicle. "The extreme employees, either plus or minus, struggled with this," said Paul Illian, a researcher at Seattle University who left Boeing in 2001 after 22 years, "whereas the 'Billy Joe Bob' engineer in the middle flourished under it." Where do M.I.T. grads fall on that spectrum?
The author is solely responsible for the content.
Leon Neyfakh is the staff writer for Ideas. Amanda Katz is the deputy Ideas editor. Stephen Heuser is the Ideas editor.
Guest blogger Simon Waxman is Managing Editor of Boston Review and has written for WBUR, Alternet, McSweeney's, Jacobin, and others.
Guest blogger Elizabeth Manus is a writer living in New York City. She has been a book review editor at the Boston Phoenix, and a columnist for The New York Observer and Metro.
Guest blogger Sarah Laskow is a freelance writer and editor in New York City. She edits Smithsonian's SmartNews blog and has contributed to Salon, Good, The American Prospect, Bloomberg News, and other publications.
Guest blogger Joshua Glenn is a Boston-based writer, publisher, and freelance semiotician. He was the original Brainiac blogger, and is currently editor of the blog HiLobrow, publisher of a series of Radium Age science fiction novels, and co-author/co-editor of several books, including the story collection "Significant Objects" and the kids' field guide to life "Unbored."
Guest blogger Ruth Graham is a freelance journalist in New Hampshire, and a frequent Ideas contributor. She is a former features editor for the New York Sun, and has written for publications including Slate and the Wall Street Journal.
Joshua Rothman is a graduate student and Teaching Fellow in the Harvard English department, and an Instructor in Public Policy at the Harvard Kennedy School of Government. He teaches novels and political writing.