Margo Gray

News then tallied the votes and published the results, declaring Stanford the best national university and Amherst the best national liberal arts college.

The rankings quickly became a lifeline for the struggling US News and World Report magazine. When schools like Amherst boasted about their top spot, it turned into free advertising for US News. And the editors realized they could attract even more attention by making their methodology seem more sophisticated. They began sending out lengthy questionnaires to colleges

The rankings quickly became a lifeline for the struggling US News and World Report magazine. When schools like Amherst boasted about their top spot, it turned into free advertising for US News. And the editors realized they could attract even more attention by making their methodology seem more sophisticated. They began sending out lengthy questionnaires to colleges

The rankings quickly became a lifeline for the struggling US News and World Report magazine. When schools like Amherst boasted about their top spot, it turned into free advertising for US News. And the editors realized they could attract even more attention by making their methodology seem more sophisticated. They began sending out lengthy questionnaires to colleges

asking for a range of statistics, things like graduation rates and the average SAT scores of enrolled students.

asking for a range of statistics, things like graduation rates and the average SAT scores of enrolled students.

asking for a range of statistics, things like graduation rates and the average SAT scores of enrolled students.

Based on all these different statistics, U.S. News then had to create a formula to measure the quality of an institution.

Based on all these different statistics, U.S. News then had to create a formula to measure the quality of an institution.

Based on all these different statistics, U.S. News then had to create a formula to measure the quality of an institution.

In other words, US News had to decide which factors define the quality of an institution and how much each of those factors should matter. For example, if a school has a top tier engineering department, but a subpar humanities program, or has a massive endowment, but limited campus space, how should all of that be weighed?

In other words, US News had to decide which factors define the quality of an institution and how much each of those factors should matter. For example, if a school has a top tier engineering department, but a subpar humanities program, or has a massive endowment, but limited campus space, how should all of that be weighed?

In other words, US News had to decide which factors define the quality of an institution and how much each of those factors should matter. For example, if a school has a top tier engineering department, but a subpar humanities program, or has a massive endowment, but limited campus space, how should all of that be weighed?

As if assessing the quality of a single institution wasn't challenging enough, U.S. News set out to rank more than 1,400 schools against one another, lining them up on a single scale from best to worst.

As if assessing the quality of a single institution wasn't challenging enough, U.S. News set out to rank more than 1,400 schools against one another, lining them up on a single scale from best to worst.

As if assessing the quality of a single institution wasn't challenging enough, U.S. News set out to rank more than 1,400 schools against one another, lining them up on a single scale from best to worst.

So was US News up to the Herculean task? Well, in 1997, the magazine hired an outside consultancy to review its ranking methodology, and the feedback wasn't exactly glowing. The consultancy concluded, the principal weakness of the current approach is that the weights used to combine the various measures into an overall rating lack any defensible, empirical, or theoretical basis.

So was US News up to the Herculean task? Well, in 1997, the magazine hired an outside consultancy to review its ranking methodology, and the feedback wasn't exactly glowing. The consultancy concluded, the principal weakness of the current approach is that the weights used to combine the various measures into an overall rating lack any defensible, empirical, or theoretical basis.

So was US News up to the Herculean task? Well, in 1997, the magazine hired an outside consultancy to review its ranking methodology, and the feedback wasn't exactly glowing. The consultancy concluded, the principal weakness of the current approach is that the weights used to combine the various measures into an overall rating lack any defensible, empirical, or theoretical basis.

In simpler terms, the magazine's supposedly scientific formula was largely arbitrary. But that didn't stop US News. Instead, that same year, the magazine blasted out its rankings online for the first time.