In 2025 we have learned to expect the unexpected on a daily basis. Much of that is thanks to the Trump administration, which seems determined to disassemble much of what has made the United States the world’s greatest country, from the economy to moral leadership on the world stage to a system of higher education unmatched around the world. Or choose your own examples.
Not all unexpected news, even all the news out of D.C., comes from the world of politics, of course. Last week we learned that we are about to see the end of Morse Code.
No, not that Morse Code. Cargo ships being attacked by Houthi rebels in the Red Sea and fishing boats stranded in the Gulf of Mexico can still send SOS distress calls by telegraph (if anyone still sends telegrams, that is). What is about to end is Morse Code, the column written by U.S. News and World Report rankings guru Bob Morse. U.S. News announced last week that Morse is retiring after 49 years with the magazine (which is actually no longer a magazine).
Bob Morse has been the “man behind the curtain” throughout most of the 42 years that U.S. News has been in the college rankings business. As such he has been one of the most influential figures in the college admission world throughout most of my career. He has been a controversial figure but also respected and maybe even feared, a posture incongruous with his unassuming personality. On visits to Washington by college presidents, stopping by Bob Morse’s office to bend the knee, kibbitz, and lobby was as important, perhaps more important, than similar time spent with members of congress.
I don’t know Bob Morse, nor could he pick me out of a police lineup. I have been in his office as a member of one of the early iterations of a counselors’ advisory group. My participation was short-lived because I pushed for systemic change in the rankings rather than tweaks to the methodology. On the occasion of his retirement announcement, here are some personal reflections on Bob Morse, his legacy, and college rankings.
First of all, I probably owe Mr. Morse an apology, perhaps even several. I seem to recall a blog post in which I posited Bob Morse as a movie villain, and more recently I listed him and his rankings as finalist candidates for an Admissions Armageddon, the ultimate battle for dominion over the world of college admission. The armageddon metaphor was a reference to author Tom Robbins’ contention in Another Roadside Attraction that the ultimate armageddon for earthly domination would be a contest between gonorrhea and the cockroach. I apologize if any reader falsely jumped to the conclusion that I thought Bob Morse resembled either of those.
At a NACAC conference session a number of years ago, I aroused Bob Morse’s ire when, after he described the U.S News rankings as a “good product,” I asked him if he thought it was good journalism. I continue to believe that’s a valid question. Do college rankings break (report) news or make news? Each fall when I see the perennial newspaper stories announcing that some university rose two places in the rankings, I wonder whether the real news is actual change in the quality of the institution or merely a tweaking of the ranking methodology to justify producing annual rankings.
That leads to a larger question. Do college rankings reflect changes in college admission or contribute to creating those changes? I think it is unfair to blame U.S. News for all the unsavory trends in college admission, but the rankings are also not blameless. The emphasis on selectivity as a measure of quality has led to measures ranging from “recruit-to-reject” to admitting large swaths of students in Early Decision, all in the name of lowering admit rates and raising yield (those are no longer major components of the rankings.) A number of institutional strategic plans and presidential compensation packages are built around the rankings.
The very fact that Morse was at that NACAC session speaks to one of his admirable qualities. He has always been unafraid to face and engage in discussion with his critics. U.S. News has made major changes in its ranking methodology in recent years, adding output metrics and trying to reward institutions that are instruments of social and economic mobility. There is nothing phony about him; he is a true believer in rankings and in data. He deserves a ton of credit for his role in helping develop the Common Data Set.
If one’s strengths can also be weaknesses, he may be too trusting, to the point of naivete. He genuinely believes that metrics like alumni giving actually measure satisfaction with the college experience, and he always seems shocked and disappointed when colleges are shown to have misrepresented their data and attempted to game the rankings.
Former U.S. News editor Brian Kelly wrote an appreciation of Bob Morse on its rankings website, calling him “the godfather of college rankings” and quoting the Washington Post’s description of Morse as “one of the most powerful wonks in the country.” It is a fitting tribute, but there are two statements in it that I can’t agree with.
One is that Kelly credits Morse with “an obsession with ‘getting the numbers right.’” On one level, that may be right that Morse was addicted to data, but on another, U.S. News has never made more than minimal attempts to verify college claims. There are several small regional colleges that have for years reported seven percent admit rates and 100 percent yield, something anyone in the admission world knows is possible only with creative accounting. U.S. News treats the information colleges submit as an honor system, trusting but not verifying.
Kelly also makes the claim that Morse and the rankings are committed to a “best fit” approach to choosing a college. There are two competing worldviews when it comes to college choice, fit and prestige. Fit sees choosing a college as subjective, as intensely personal, tied to the experience one has in college. What is right for me may not be right for you.
The U.S. News rankings pay lip service to fit, especially in the articles published in the annual rankings publication. But everything about the rankings themselves, from the name of the publication, “America’s Best Colleges,” to the false precision (is #7 that much better than #23?) is grounded in a belief that college selection is objective, based on proxies for quality. Many years ago the cover of “America’s Best Colleges” stated, “Let a computer choose the best college for you.” Today that would be “Let AI pick the college for you.” None of those have any resemblance to a commitment to “best fit.”
I started out stating that this would be a personal reflection, and here’s where it gets really personal. Several weeks ago I was part of a discussion about how one knows that they are getting old. Is it related to hitting a certain age milestone? Those of us who once didn’t trust anyone over 30 changed our tune once we turned 30. 50 and 60 seemed old, until they didn’t. Is getting old a function of life circumstances, like when your friends start becoming grandparents, you realize that there are no major league baseball players as old as you, or you have no idea who any of the Grammy nominees are?
For a brief moment last week I had a new, unnerving, definition. In skimming through Kelly’s tribute to Bob Morse, I saw a reference to him being 66 years old. Talk about unexpected news! I long ago came to grips with being older than dirt, but older than Bob Morse? SOS!
In reading the article more carefully, I discovered that the reference to Bob Morse being 66 came from a 2014 article. He is, indeed, older than I am, and I am no longer panicking about my perception of reality.
The philosopher Wlliam James said that each of our lives is a moral experiment in seeking what is true and what is right. I profoundly disagree with Bob Morse about college rankings and his assumptions about them, but I also respect him for living out his beliefs. I hope he will find retirement both relaxing and rejuvenating.