The now AWOL rankings "Top 50 Business Schools for Getting Hired"  showcases the weaknesses and flaws in rankings, real and potential  But first a little background:

Last week CNN Money.com published Fortune magazine’s ranking of the “50 Best Business Schools for Getting Hired.” I chose not to blog it, because I had a lot of other material to write about, and it seemed this ranking wasn't adding a lot of new insight given the WSJ, FT, and Forbes rankings that focus on employment and ROI. But if you want to see the basic list, without the background data, ClearAdmit has the top 20 listed.

Late last night I received an email from Paul Bodine, author, Accepted editor, and fellow blogger, suggesting that I look at his post "Forgetting North Carolina." In a nutshell CNNMoney had published potentially bad data and left out at least two schools, UNC's Kenan-Flagler and Boston University. CNNMoney and Fortune had based their rankings on data provided by Quacquarelli Symonds Ltd .

Well Kenan-Flagler and Kenan-Flagler alumni did not like being omitted. In fact they were outraged. UNC protested to QS and CNNMoney.  QS's response alluded to confusion between UNC and North Carolina State. 

Kenan Flagler alumni posted background on the whole mess revealing that UNC was never contacted about the survey and claiming that the published data contained significant errors, in addition to omitted schools. UNC also protested to Fortune and CNNMoney.  According to a letter from UNC:

"UNC Kenan-Flagler did not appear anywhere on the list. This was clearly a mistake, which was acknowledged by QS on Feb. 22. Click the following link for background about what we uncovered as we researched the error. Other schools, though not omitted from the list, have made similar complaints that the data is inaccurate.

"We requested that CNNMoney.com take down the ranking and make a public correction. We have worked with all three organizations to ensure that there will be no further distribution of the ranking.

"The site was taken down on Feb. 26. On Feb. 27, a correction was posted, and we received assurances from Fortune, CNNMoney.com and QS that they will not distribute the ranking in any form.

"We will be sure that all key constituencies -- including recruiters, alumni, admitted students and applicants -- are informed about the error and how we have addressed it. Career opportunities for UNC MBAs continue to be outstanding and place us among the very best schools in the world."

CNNMoney's correction/apology acknowledges that "flaws in methodology may have resulted in University of North Carolina's Kenan-Flagler Business School and Boston University being omitted from the list."

It's safe to say that this mess is a nightmare for QS, CNNMoney, and Fortune. Providing and publishing rankings so sloppily slapped together is beneath criticism for an industry that even when the data is accurate has more than its share of critics and is deserving of skepticism. The CNNMoney/QS fiasco is about as bad as it gets for rankings.

But how should you use rankings when the data collection is professional and thorough and neither the schools nor the publications manipulate the results? Is it possible for rankings to really rank and measure educational quality? Should you simply choose to apply to the Top Ten? Ranking X - Y?

No.

Applicants are misguided and lazy if they mindlessly attempt to apply large category rankings to themselves as individuals. Individuals have different needs and different values. It is virtually impossible for a published ranking to mirror exactly an individual's needs, goals, and educational values. The rankings, be they for college, medical, law, business, or other graduate programs, simply lack the granularity necessary to provide significant  guidance to individual applicants.

So do they have any value? Why do applicants pay so much attention to them?

Applicants pay too much attention to them. Period. But unlike many of their critics, I do feel they have value:

• When accurate, unlike the removed QS/CNNMoney version, they are sources of information. Sometimes valuable information. Databanks. I use the data, and so should you. If you want to know the average salaries of graduates from particular schools or their average entering test scores, the rankings will have that information compiled in one place. Like a library, they are sources of information. They are not an excuse for decision-making; using them mindlessly could be the equivalent of a lobotomy. And an expensive one at that.
  
• Rankings are surveys and reflect commonly held beliefs about institutions. Reputation and brand can be factors in choosing where to apply and which schools to accept offers from. They should never be the sole reason you apply or accept an offer of admission. After you research a school's strengths and weaknesses, culture, admitted student profiles, and educational and professional opportunities, then you can consider brand.

It's a winner. The Admit Weekend supplement is a must-read for anyone applying to or interested in applying to the University of Chicago's MBA program. You can use the information contained here if you are buckling down to craft a round 3 application, researching schools for 2008, preparing for an interview, or stewing on the waitlist. A few noteworthy articles in the supplement:  

• Lay the Groundwork Now -- A Message from MBA Career Services
  
• Demystifying Financial Aid for International Students
• Why I Chose Chicago GSB
• Get Involved at the GSB

The Daily Pennsylvanian reports that Dr. Andrew Porter, formerly head of Vanderbilt's Learning Sciences Institute, will become Dean of Penn's Graduate School of Education on August 1. He succeeds previous GSE Dean Susan Fuhrman, who announced last May that she will leave Penn and assume the presidency of Columbia University's Teachers College.

Professor Michael Santana of Legal Writing Prep wrote me about a scholarship his organization is offering to incoming law students, and I thought I would pass along the information:

In 2007, Legal Writing Prep (www. legalwritingprep.com) is awarding scholarships worth $250 through its Entering Law Student Scholarship to help first-year law students with their living expenses.

One (1) scholarship will be awarded at random for every fifty (50) eligible applicants, with a minimum of one (1) scholarship and a maximum of twenty (20) scholarships to be awarded, and applicants can register only once for the scholarship.

To be eligible for the Entering Law Student Scholarship, applicants must:

1. Be an entering first-year law student during 2007's fall semester or quarter.

2. Rely on loans to cover at least fifty percent (50%) of the applicant's cost of education during the first-year of law school.

3. Send an email expressing interest in the scholarship to michaelsantana@legalwritingprep.com by 11:59 p.m. PST on August 1, 2007.

4. Respond to a September 10, 2007 email from Legal Writing Prep using their law school email account by 11:59 p.m. PST on September 24, 2007.

Each scholarship recipient will be notified September 25, 2007 by an email message sent to the recipient's law school email account. Once notified, the recipient has until October 15, 2007 to mail a copy of the following two documents to Legal Writing Prep to receive the scholarship.

1. 2007 law school acceptance letter.
2. Law school financial aid award letter.

The USC waitlist chat transcript is now online. I would like to spotlight a couple of brief exchanges in the chat, because for schools that permit contact, these exchanges reveal what you should and should not do if you want to move from the waitlist to the accepted list:

Linda Abraham (Feb 22, 2007 12:01:45 PM)
What should waitlisted applicants do to enhance their chances of acceptance?

KelleeScottUSC (Feb 22, 2007 12:03:09 PM)
At this point, your application is complete, but you can send in supplemental information to enhance. In the past, candidates have sent in an additional letter of recommendation, results of any projects they have been working on, and an additional essay to demonstrate leadership skills. If you are on the cusp of the GMAT 80% range, the lower end, some candidates may choose to re-test in order to improve their score.

Linda Abraham (Feb 22, 2007 12:36:18 PM)
What are some mistakes waitlisted applicants make that hurt their chances of acceptance?

KelleeScottUSC (Feb 22, 2007 12:38:54 PM)
Linda, great question! Waitlisted candidates who come in unannounced and demand an interview show a lack of maturity as an example, However, in general, candidates who do not demonstrate their continued interest in Marshall don't necessarily stay high on the ADCOM radar.

Linda Abraham (Feb 22, 2007 12:39:29 PM)
Would it be fair to say that intelligent, substantive, periodic communication is the way to go?

KelleeScottUSC (Feb 22, 2007 12:40:04 PM)
Linda, I would agree with that enthusiastically.

There is much more to the chat than these exchanges, but they reveal much about what a school that encourages contact wants to see and does not want to see from its waitlisted candidates.  Be mature. Don't drown them in meaningless drivel. But do demonstrate your continued interest while taking advantage of the opportunity to trumpet recent achievements.

This week we have a waitlsit chat with Cornell Johnson on Wednesday February 28 at 12:00 PM PT/1:00 pm ET/8:00 PM GMT. Please feel free to join us if you are on Johnson's waitlist. If you would like waitlist assistance and are on another school's list, please check out:

• Accepted.com's individual waitlist advising.
• The Nine Mistakes You Don't Want to Make on an MBA Waitlist, an ebook.
  
• 2007 Waitlist Chat Transcript.