conference affiliation linked to academic prestige in Stanford/Iowa study

[Point6]

Somebody cited this on the VA Tech Board. Potential expert witnesses in the antitrust case? We should at least get them on retainer.

https://ed.stanford.edu/news/ncaa-conference-affiliation-linked-academic-prestige-stanfordiowa-study

 

[CL82]

Their conclusion is going to get a real world test at Rutgers. RU is a good school but it is about to get a perception bump in much the same way that 4 star recruit becomes a 5 star after a top school recruits it.

 

[upstater]

This study goes directly against what specialists like Andrew Zimbalist have found in other studies. Zimbalist isn't in an education department (Ed. departments deal exclusively with secondary and primary education). Zimbalist is an economist who has been looking at the sports business.

Here's why I'd trust Zimbalist over these fellows:

Let's say that I totally accept their findings. But if you read this...:

“Football doesn’t corrode a school’s academic reputation. It enhances it. Contrary to what many academic professionals believe, academic and athletic reputations are not antagonistic. They’re complementary.”
In the study (link is external) in the July issue of the journal Sociology of Education, Stevens and two colleagues find that intercollegiate football leagues are composed of schools that tend to be similar in measures of academic reputation. What’s more, over time, scores assessing the academic reputation of schools admitted to any given league come closer and closer to the scores of those already in that league. “This reputation convergence seems to be independent of change in underlying academic quality,” said Stevens.

..the premise is bad. There's a contradiction. If a school's status trends toward the mean in the conference they join, then that must also mean that a school that joins a sucky conference trends downward (so, say Vanderbilt's status will erode over time). Joining the Patriot League may be gret for a school too! Or heck, the Ivy League.

Reputation convergence is great for schools that join the B1G. And that convergence may have a lot more to do with the CIC anyway, and the AAU. But it does not do much for schools that join the SEC. Mizzou and Texas A&M are not going to experience a status bump by joining the ACC. When you join CUSA or AAC, then obviously you hope you're not going to trend toward the mean in these conferences.

Does football enhance reputations? For some schools yes, for some schools no, for others it hurts them (see Rutgers). It's as though these researchers never managed to understand that in football, a team wins the game, and another team loses the game.

 

[Kolumbo]

These studies are irrelevant, in my opinion. There are a fixed and relatively small number of universities affected. A population of what, 60-80? Is Vandy hurt by the SEC? Is Duke hurt by adding Louisville? Will Louisville get a bump by joining the ACC? ND and Stanford will not be affected by any conference moves. In the grand scheme of things, there are far more people who could care less about football than obsess about it, I think.

 

[pj]

There's a contradiction. If a school's status trends toward the mean in the conference they join, then that must also mean that a school that joins a sucky conference trends downward (so, say Vanderbilt's status will erode over time). Joining the Patriot League may be gret for a school too! Or heck, the Ivy League.

What's the contradiction? Is there any doubt that Penn, Cornell, Dartmouth, and Brown improved their academic stature by associating in athletics with Harvard, Yale, Columbia, and Princeton? Isn't it plausible that the academic perception of Rice and Tulane suffered for their being in C-USA, and that Vandy would be more highly regarded if it were in the Ivy League or B1G than the SEC?

 

[Ha Who]

My problem with Zimbalist is his constant sports is not a catalyst. He would have you fund the north end 100%. It's not that he is incorrect. He does not believe in the entertainment value sports bring to a city. I remember going to Whalers games. Bars and restaurants were packed. Are they the greatest jobs? Of course not. I'd rather have Microsoft than the NHL. North end residents would not work at Microsoft anyway. Quality of life is the issue. With the AHL and AAC, Hartford is in trouble.

 

[Kolumbo]

I assume that if and when UCONN gets the AAU invite, the next obstacle thrown its way will be URA membership....Universities Research Association. I saw that SUNYSB was a member and it turns out, so are all the B1G schools.

 

[pj]

I assume that if and when UCONN gets the AAU invite, the next obstacle thrown its way will be URA membership....Universities Research Association. I saw that SUNYSB was a member and it turns out, so are all the B1G schools.

The URA is an association of schools who operate major facilities on behalf of the federal government. I doubt they would have any role in realignment. The federal government isn't funding new facilities so joining the URA is out of the question.

 

[Sea Goat]

What's the contradiction? Is there any doubt that Penn, Cornell, Dartmouth, and Brown improved their academic stature by associating in athletics with Harvard, Yale, Columbia, and Princeton? Isn't it plausible that the academic perception of Rice and Tulane suffered for their being in C-USA, and that Vandy would be more highly regarded if it were in the Ivy League or B1G than the SEC?

Except Columbia would give up sports if it could. Seriously, I believe there is a correlation as you suggest. The reverse can work also - you can harm a conference's academic reputation by adding weak academic institutions. The ACC has some fine institutions, but they cheapened their academic reputation by adding Louisville - plain and simple. The B1G added UMD and Rutgers, both substantially better schools than Louisville. Academics still count for something in the B1G. The ACC? Not so much.

 

[Calamitous]

Somebody cited this on the VA Tech Board. Potential expert witnesses in the antitrust case? We should at least get them on retainer.

https://ed.stanford.edu/news/ncaa-conference-affiliation-linked-academic-prestige-stanfordiowa-study

Not sure if it should be "conference affiliation linked to academic prestige." To me, more like "conference affiliation linked to a university's exposure and increased popularity." Not convinced academic prestige increases because of conference affiliation, but maybe money and research becomes better because of your new conference friends. Doesn't necessarily increase your academic rank. In the case of my school, only 2 of our conference mates are SCHEV peer institutes while we have 10 in another P5 conference (the B1G).

 

[pj]

I think it's more the assumption that "birds of a feather flock together" so if you're hanging out with a school in athletics, you're probably similar to them in other respects. It's a generalization of an inference we commonly make about people, to corporate entities. People just assume Brown must be an elite school, since it hangs with Harvard and Yale. After a while, enough elite people have acted on that assumption and gone there to make it one.

 

[Calamitous]

I think it's more the assumption that "birds of a feather flock together" so if you're hanging out with a school in athletics, you're probably similar to them in other respects. It's a generalization of an inference we commonly make about people, to corporate entities. People just assume Brown must be an elite school, since it hangs with Harvard and Yale. After a while, enough elite people have acted on that assumption and gone there to make it one.

Cool... that means UConn is going to be in the B1G.

 

[upstater]

What's the contradiction? Is there any doubt that Penn, Cornell, Dartmouth, and Brown improved their academic stature by associating in athletics with Harvard, Yale, Columbia, and Princeton? Isn't it plausible that the academic perception of Rice and Tulane suffered for their being in C-USA, and that Vandy would be more highly regarded if it were in the Ivy League or B1G than the SEC?

The contradiction is that he said "football enhances..." your reputation. In other words, it's always a positive.

And, really, does the Ivy League have athletic cache? It's all academic cache.

 

[upstater]

My problem with Zimbalist is his constant sports is not a catalyst. He would have you fund the north end 100%. It's not that he is incorrect. He does not believe in the entertainment value sports bring to a city. I remember going to Whalers games. Bars and restaurants were packed. Are they the greatest jobs? Of course not. I'd rather have Microsoft than the NHL. North end residents would not work at Microsoft anyway. Quality of life is the issue. With the AHL and AAC, Hartford is in trouble.

He doesn't say that constantly. He says that in some cases it is positive. His studies show that in the majority of cases it is not.

 

[Kolumbo]

NYU doesn't even field a football team and is a top university. I think sports and academics are unrelated.

 

[Ha Who]

He doesn't say that constantly. He says that in some cases it is positive. His studies show that in the majority of cases it is not.

His problem is he is constantly quoted in local media. While Hartford has a thriving arts community, it is a limited market. Infinity music hall can be a real economic boost. The community does need a supermarket as opposed to the unhealthy bodegos. My piunt is that a thriving non AHL arena which draws 15000 fifty plus nights per year is a boost to a small city like Hartford

 

[upstater]

His problem is he is constantly quoted in local media. While Hartford has a thriving arts community, it is a limited market. Infinity music hall can be a real economic boost. The community does need a supermarket as opposed to the unhealthy bodegos. My piunt is that a thriving non AHL arena which draws 15000 fifty plus nights per year is a boost to a small city like Hartford

When it comes to entertainment and certain revenue producers, it almost doesn't matter. Cities want sports, politicians want casinos, because they like the stealth taxes. You can send a million studies to these guys showing that casinos cause a huge drain but it's not going to matter a whit to politicians who love to spend those stealth taxes.

 

[Ha Who]

When it comes to entertainment and certain revenue producers, it almost doesn't matter. Cities want sports, politicians want casinos, because they like the stealth taxes. You can send a million studies to these guys showing that casinos cause a huge drain but it's not going to matter a whit to politicians who love to spend those stealth taxes.

You nailed that. Poor Springfield. At least it takes a little effort to get to Connecticut casinos. When I see the lines in Hartford for lottery tickets,I get sick. Politicians stealing from the poor

 

[RegisteredUconn]

NYU doesn't even field a football team and is a top university. I think sports and academics are unrelated.

Do the NYU teams still sport the nickname the Violets? No wonder they don't sponsor football. How's their pillow fighting squad doing?

 

[Calamitous]

The contradiction is that he said "football enhances..." your reputation. In other words, it's always a positive.

And, really, does the Ivy League have athletic cache? It's all academic cache.

I will agree that successful revenue sports, whether it be football or basketball, enhance the popularity of the school. But I'm not sold that conference affiliation enhances a school's academics in any immediate measure (it takes quite some time). Successful revenue sports or even conference affiliation can increase a school's reputation and draw more students for admissions, but that doesn't mean academics improve... at least not anytime soon. But I see the point that academics can improve over time as the result of the popularity of a university, which may translate to growth and money flowing into a university over time.

But as to conference affiliation helping make a school stronger academically... I'm not sure this argument can be made. I think it's more about the success of an individual program that increases a university's popularity. And once popular, it will take much more time to increase the academic ranking. A 3% increase in academic rank per year only works if your university is initially ranked low. Once you're ranked in the top 100, it's hard to move up... unless the school works the numbers.

One last thought. The popularity of a university comes from out-of-state recognition IMO. If you live in the state, you already know about the school. Joining or being a part of a particular conference may not be helpful. A lot of people assume Iowa State and Iowa are the same, yet they are in different conferences. A lot of kids may not know the difference outside of the state of Iowa. But if one of those schools start dominating in football for a sustained period, that school will become more popular.

 

[upstater]

I will agree that successful revenue sports, whether it be football or basketball, enhance the popularity of the school. But I'm not sold that conference affiliation enhances a school's academics in any immediate measure (it takes quite some time). Successful revenue sports or even conference affiliation can increase a school's reputation and draw more students for admissions, but that doesn't mean academics improve... at least not anytime soon. But I see the point that academics can improve over time as the result of the popularity of a university, which may translate to growth and money flowing into a university over time.

But, you emphasize "success" in your post. And that makes sense. However, 50% of college teams lose more games or tie than they win.

So, a losing school, like, say Rutgers, develops a sheen of being inept (this is something that Zimbalist studied) despite having pretty good academics. Rutgers in fact has dropped about 20-25 spots in USNWR over the last 10-15 years.

 

[Calamitous]

But, you emphasize "success" in your post. And that makes sense. However, 50% of college teams lose more games or tie than they win.

So, a losing school, like, say Rutgers, develops a sheen of being inept (this is something that Zimbalist studied) despite having pretty good academics. Rutgers in fact has dropped about 20-25 spots in USNWR over the last 10-15 years.

There are 40 non-P5 universities ranked ahead of Rutgers in the USNWR. Of the 30 P5 schools ranked ahead of Rutgers, only a handful have really moved up in rankings over the past 15 years. If it's true that Rutgers has dropped 20 to 25 spots, they are an anomaly because none of the other old Big East schools dropped like that.

 

[upstater]

There are 40 non-P5 universities ranked ahead of Rutgers in the USNWR. Of the 30 P5 schools ranked ahead of Rutgers, only a handful have really moved up in rankings over the past 15 years. If it's true that Rutgers has dropped 20 to 25 spots, they are an anomaly because none of the other old Big East schools dropped like that.

Not many schools have dropped like that at all. But many have dropped 10+. Like Syracuse too.

 

[Calamitous]

Not many schools have dropped like that at all. But many have dropped 10+. Like Syracuse too.

True. But it also depends on what publication you're referencing. For example, Virginia Tech (sorry I keep using VT but its all I really know ) is ranked higher in many publications than Clemson and Syracuse, which includes Forbes top 650, Forbes 25 Public, Money Magazines top 665, Times Higher World Universities, Academic Rankings World top 500 and the QS top 750 World. Yet, both Clemson and Syracuse are ranked 9 spots higher than Tech in the USNWR. Tech is also ranked higher than Pitt and Miami in many of these publications as well. Most people look at the USNWR as gospel, but we may find out that Rutgers is doing better than we thought in other publications.

 

[NickyNewark]

True. But it also depends on what publication you're referencing. For example, Virginia Tech (sorry I keep using VT but its all I really know ) is ranked higher in many publications than Clemson and Syracuse, which includes Forbes top 650, Forbes 25 Public, Money Magazines top 665, Times Higher World Universities, Academic Rankings World top 500 and the QS top 750 World. Yet, both Clemson and Syracuse are ranked 9 spots higher than Tech in the USNWR. Tech is also ranked higher than Pitt and Miami in many of these publications as well. Most people look at the USNWR as gospel, but we may find out that Rutgers is doing better than we thought in other publications.

RU will rise higher soon with the reaquisition of the Med and Dentistr school and B1G afiliation IMO.