Interest in holding higher education institutions accountable for results has increased steadily over the last decade. In 2000, the National Center for Public Policy and Higher Education released Measuring Up, the first of what would become biennial grades of each state’s performance in education. In 2006, the Spelling Commission on the Future of Higher Education urged the federal government to get seriously involved in higher education accountability for the first time. And, throughout the decade, higher education rankings grew in number and influence, particularly those of U.S. News & World Report.
In response to all these factors, and out of a (justifiable) fear of a No Child Left Behind-like federal accountability system, higher education leaders launched their own, optional systems. Institutions could decide individually whether it was worth joining the efforts, designed to provide new, comparable information to prospective students and their families.
Calling itself a, “new and distinctive resource for exploring and comparing private colleges and universities,” the University and College Accountability Network (U-CAN) was launched in September 2007. Just a couple months later, another new Web site, this one only for public institutions of higher education, was announced. Called the Voluntary System of Accountability (VSA), it marketed itself as, “a program to provide greater accountability by public institutions through accessible, transparent, and comparable information…” These initiatives and their sponsors should be applauded for their efforts, but is U-CAN really “new and distinctive,” and is the VSA truly “transparent” and “comparable?”
Both Web sites offer much to the public. They are both free, colorful, attractive, and