Comparative Alumni Research

“Private Colleges can't compete on inputs but we can compete on outputs.”

Kent John Chabotar
President, Guilford College
2009 Summer Seminar

Colleges increasingly compete in a market that does not perceive significant differences between small private liberal arts colleges, professionally-focused universities, and large, mainly public, research universities.

Indeed, the claims of public universities blur distinctions between themselves and smaller, private colleges and universities. It is now common for public flagship universities to promote honors programs, low student-to-faculty ratios, and a strong sense of campus community—even though these opportunities, to the extent they really exist, are limited to a select few.

For example, at least three Big Ten universities proclaim student faculty ratios of 10:1 or better. And while claiming these attributes to compete for better-prepared students, many large, public universities discount the value of attributes such as small classes, suggesting they make little difference in the quality of education.

Absent a clear sense of difference in institutional character or effectiveness, students and parents increasingly opt for subsidized public universities.

Private colleges, though they outnumber public institutions by a wide margin, enroll only about 15 percent of the undergraduate students in four-year institutions, down from nearly 50 percent as the 1960s began.

Perhaps it is not surprising then that U.S. News & World Report and other purportedly objective rating sources have become more influential. Widely disparaged by higher education leaders, these ratings become more influential with each passing year.

Criticized for their emphasis on inputs rather than outcomes and for the heavy weighting of reputation, even the editors decry the “paucity of data on what happens to a college’s graduates after they leave their alma m