Since 2005, Claremont McKenna, ranked number nine on U.S. News \& World Report's best liberal arts colleges in the country, has been lopping on a few points here and there to its entering students' average SAT score before reporting those numbers to U.S. News of World report and rating organizations such as the Princeton Review. For example, in 2010, its combined median score was reported as 1,410, rather than its actual 1,400. And its 75th percentile was reported at 1,510 , when it was, in reality, 1,480 . Claremont McKenna's vice president and dean of admissions has been removed from the college website. President Pamela B. Gann explained the problem and concluded, "As an institution of higher education with a deep and consistent commitment to the integrity of our academic activities, and particularly, our reporting of institutional data, we take this situation very seriously."."144 The rankings and ratings organizations did not reflect as much outrage. Robert Franek of the Princeton Review noted, "That is a pretty mild difference in a point score. That said, 10 points, 20 points to a student that isn't getting that score on the SAT could be an important distinction," and "I feel like so many schools have a very clear obligation to college-bound students to report this information honestly." 45 Although the points added seemed immaterial, the manipulations veiled the reality that the critical reading scores for the 2011 class were the lowest since 2007, and the mean math score had been boosted by 28 points.

Discussion Questions 1. What is troubling about Mr. Franek's reflections on adding points to test scores?
2. Why do you think the dean of admissions added on the points?
3. Explain how the role of rankings would influence behaviors among employees at colleges and universities.