<p>I would think that Middlebury should be listed for all of 1-7 if Hamilton, Bates, Colby, W&L, Colgate, Bowdoin, Wesleyan are.</p>
<p>Thanks, gellino, my same transcription error that missed one mention of MIT missed Middlebury also. So that line should read </p>
<p>Middlebury College 1) 2) 3) 4) 5) 6) 7) </p>
<p>I was distracted some times while doing my transcription typing. I appreciate the dialog here about possible errors in my reporting from my sources. I'm still thinking about adding one more source, and about the issue of how many source agreements wins a place on my list.</p>
<p>Can't help but be a little disheartened. Our daughter applied to 8 schools and was accepted to 6. Five are on this list except the one she is currently attending: University of Pittsburgh.</p>
<p>Why would you be disheartened? Does it really matter what these books think of the college she picked?</p>
<p>If she's happy there, getting a quality education and preparing herself for life, then she made the right choice.</p>
<p>Regarding source #6 on the OP's list: Am I the only one on CC who gets the point of "Choosing the Right College"? Does the fact that the book claims to value 'freedom of speech" but then cautions against the most liberal Liberal Arts colleges for their "PC" attitudes make it any clearer?
If you want a guide to schools written by and for the most conservative right-wing segment of society then maybe the fact that "Right" is written in red ink will appeal to you (applies to 2006 edition, now hidden for 2008). Not that neo-cons don't need college guidance, too, but don't take much of what they say about left-leaning schools without the proverbial grain of salt. A neighbor and I swapped college books a few years back and it took me about two minutes looking up a couple of schools I had an interest in to stop and say "whoa, where are these dudes coming from?" Then I got it. You should, too. It is not an unbiased reporting. Funny, but not unbiased. Google it and see who reviews it: <a href="http://www.intellectualconservative.com%5B/url%5D">www.intellectualconservative.com</a> and others. Many of the reviewers don't even get the point of the book, as obfuscated as it is in both its title and language. Don't you make the same mistake.</p>
<p>Is it any surprise that in Wm. Bennett's introduction he lists those who've praised the book and it reads like a list of Fox news staffers, or that the book is praised for its attacks on multi-cultural curriculum, co-ed living arrangements, and tolerance of alternative life-styles? Read it if you will, but understand where the heck it's coming from. There's lots more there not to like. I truly believe they only list the less-conservative schools so they can pick them apart based on neo-con logic.</p>
<p>What I have found about all college guidebooks is that they get pushback from readers and include more colleges with each subsequent edition. That is definitely true of the book about "right" colleges, which has an ENORMOUS and very apparent bias toward old-fashioned Roman Catholic colleges. But it also includes MIT and Middlebury (as helpful replies above reminded me) and my very secular alma mater state university, and various other places where liberal students and liberal professors have been found. :) In other words, these days it has had to cave in to acknowledging that part of the market for college guides, even among students predisposed by family preferences to take right-leaning advice, is that group of students who simply want a good college with a national reputation, politics or religion be dashed. </p>
<p>I would, of course, include in my list any nationally known and well researched college guide that has a "liberal" bias. Perhaps I already have. ;) I will add one more guidebook to the mix after tomorrow, when I go to pick up a copy of that guidebook, and I will relax the criteria for inclusion on my consensus list and then post a new thread. </p>
<p>Thanks for all the comments. What else jumps out at you about the sources used here, or the colleges they mention?</p>
<p>I suppose Fiske was used? Why don't you just name the sources?</p>
<p>Yes, Fiske is the former journalist who compiled source number 3, the most current edition of his guidebook series.</p>
<p>"Right" colleges also touted cores and dead white guy canons over "newfangled" stuff like women's studies.</p>
<p>Perhaps I should be ashamed to admit they both schools my kids attend got that endorsement. (IMO only one is more old-fashioned in its pedagogy than the other, but after inadvertently making trouble elsewhere, I'll keep it to myself. Especially because I don't really know which I prefer; see strengths and weaknesses to both.</p>
<p>And I am starting to hear really good things about University of Pittsburgh bluejay. It goes on my list.</p>
<p>I don't believe reference books such as Choosing The Right College could be successful in the marketplace if they chose not to include highly ranked schools in their lists simply because the schools didn't conform to conservative ideals. What I'm concerned about is that the real agenda behind such books is kept hidden and those seeking accurate evaluations of curriculum, professors, and true freedom of speech aren't aware of it. Most now picking up "The Right" colleges aren't even being informed of the bias in even the subtle way it was projected in the previous edition by highlighting "Right" in the title. The fact that schools are included in "The Right" ratings doesn't mean endorsement; it only means they are fodder for the opinions of the authors. If you came from a foreign land and watched only Fox News you might get a rather stilted version of what's really going on in America, America's status elsewhere, and what the truth really is. Cracking open "The Right" colleges on Barnes & Noble's shelves is not such a different experience. I don't deny conservatives their right to an opinion on colleges and raising kids. I just think parents should consider the source and be made aware of the agenda and bias behind it. It's not a political issue, it's an honesty issue.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I suppose Fiske was used? Why don't you just name the sources?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I believe the sources are:</p>
<p>1) The best 361 Colleges by Princeton Review
2) Peterson's Competitive Colleges
3) Fiske's Guide to College
4) The Insider's guide to the College by the Yale Daily News
5) The Unofficial, Unbiased Guide to the 328 Most Interesting College by Kaplan
6) Choosing The Right College
7) Barron's Guide to the Most Competitive Colleges</p>
<p>Tokenadult, please correct me if I am wrong.
Dwincho, hope this will help. :)</p>
<p>Hi, t1388, you nailed it, other than that number 5 is the current (2008) newstand edition of the Newsweek-Kaplan guide rather than the book edition. Oh, and I grabbed the PR best 366 list off the Web for my first source, to learn how to manipulate text files with my new text editor program and to spare myself some typing mistakes. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Maybe I hang with a different crowd, but I can't imagine anyone not noticing the huge selection bias in that book. But Middlebury, MIT, and alma mater all made it into the book despite that bias, which to me is strongly suggestive that their reputations are so strong that the guidebook editors had more to lose by not listing them than the colleges have to lose by being listed in that guidebook. That's a sign that those colleges have strong national reputations, irrespective of one's ideological axe-grinding, and was the point of my compilation. </p>
<p>I will add one more source today (which I trust t1388 will be able to identify :) ) and I will recompile my revised list with a different cut-off rule and post it in a new thread.</p>
<p>
Many call Fox News news, too. Including my college-educated mother! The neighbors who swapped "The Right" book with me are both college-educated, and one's an MD. They have a kid at a highly-ranked (liberal) LAC. They didn't have a clue about the "conservative" bias until I pointed it out. It all depends on which school's review you read. I took one look at Sarah Lawrence in the 2006 edition and another at WUSTL and started flipping through the credits and praise for the book to see who's idea it was to initiate the subterfuge. Why else would they have been so coy about it, unless the point was to hide it? And even more so in the current edition. I think you have far too much faith in the ability of the average parent to discern the bias. Now if they share that bias, I can't do a thing for them and the book will offer consensual validation. If not and they fall into the trap, I believe at least CC should be able to point out such a bias in the interest of fairness. How often have I heard CC contributors attempt to discredit Lloyd Thacker and others behind the dump-ratings groundswell for their philosophical bias? Fair is fair here.</p>
<p>Oh, I decry Lloyd Thacker too ;) , but his problem is more along the lines of not being sure where he stands. As xiggi is fond of pointing out, the only thing that Thacker seems to be definite about is not wanting parents to know that some colleges have much better reputations than others. I'm afraid the water is already over the dam on that issue.</p>
<p>Its an incomplete list. Many many schools that should be on the list are not on it. I am always suspicious of the agenda and methodology of subjectively compounded lists like this. Its a nice "college try" but woefully incomplete.</p>
<p>Its just another attempt at "ranking" and creating yet another elitist list.</p>
<p>There are SEVERAL colleges that belong on a long list of "outstanding colleges in the United States" whether its a list of 100, 150, 200 or more. That is a fool's errand if you ask me.</p>
<p>But for what its worth, and because my D goes there and was either admitted or qualified to be admitted to SEVERAL already on your list but chose instead to attend here, let me personally add FORDHAM UNIVERSITY to that list. You also dont list St. Louis University. Both of whom are HIGHLY respected Jesuit Schools and who BOTH made the top 5 list of schools with the greatest increase in applications since 2001. Last year Fordham had 22,500 applications for 1,700 available freshman seats. Is that selective enough for you? Ask ANYONE in New York City and the tri-state region what are the most respected colleges "in the region" and Fordham is most certainly on that list. One of my D's professors is also tenured at Vassar and teaches part time at Fordham. Fordham's faculty has about 70% with Ivy League pedigree. I dont think Ivy League PhD's would be teaching at Fordham if it wasnt considered a worthy and prestigious school.</p>
<p>Perhaps it was an oversight on your part.</p>
<p>And Fordham got excellent remarks and scores in Petersen's, Fiske, Barron's, Choosing the Right College, Princeton Review 361 Best Colleges, and Kaplan and Kaplan gave them VERY high scores this year and called them one of the "hottest" schools in the United States.</p>
<p>Have a nice day.</p>
<p>Proud Dad: I agree with you. Maybe the wording of my post implied the opposite. I meant to support the position you put forth.</p>
<p>Mythmom: Not at all! I got your sarcasm. (As the father of three girls, I've been struck by gender bias in HS and understand the reason for gender studies in college.)</p>
<p>Why isnt northeastern on there? Its such a great place! Same w/ RPI!!!!! </p>
<p>I guess though some places you missed dont make the list bad, so nice list</p>
<p>I don't think that George Mason University really belongs on that list. Not a bad school, just not one of the top.</p>