<p>The Most Competitive Colleges<br>
Amherst College
Barnard College
Boston College<br>
Bowdoin College
Brandeis University
Brown University<br>
California Institute of Techonology
Carleton College<br>
Carnegie Mellon University<br>
Case Western Reserve University
Claremont McKenna College<br>
Colby College<br>
Colgate University<br>
College of New Jersey, The<br>
College of the Holy Cross<br>
College of William and Mary
Columbia University/
Columbia College<br>
Columbia University/FU Foundation
School of Engineering and Applied
Science<br>
Connecticut College
Cooper Union for the Advancement of Science and Art
Cornell University<br>
Dartmouth College<br>
Davidson College<br>
Duke University
Emory University<br>
George Washington University, The<br>
Georgetown University<br>
Hamilton College<br>
Harvard College
Harvey Mudd Coolege
Haverford College<br>
Johns Hopkins University, The<br>
Kenyon College<br>
Lafayette College<br>
Macalaster College<br>
Massachusetts Institute
of Technology<br>
Middlebury College<br>
New York University
Northwestern University
Oberlin College
Occidental College<br>
Pomona College<br>
Princeton University<br>
Reed College<br>
Rice University
Scripps College
Smith College<br>
Stanford University
Swarthmore College<br>
Tufts University<br>
United States Military Academy at West Point<br>
United States Naval Academy
University of California
at Los Angeles (UCLA)
University of Chicago<br>
University of Miami
University of North Carolina at Chapel
Hill, The<br>
University of Notre Dame<br>
University of Pennsylvania<br>
University of Richmond<br>
University of Rochester
University of Southern California<br>
University of Virginia<br>
Vanderbilt University<br>
Vassar College<br>
Wake forest University<br>
Washington and Lee University<br>
Washington University in St. Louis<br>
Webb Institute<br>
Wellesely College<br>
Wesleyan University
Williams College<br>
Yale University</p>
<p>what do they base this off of? I must say, I'm surprised that some schools aren't on there and others are like Connecticut College.</p>
<p>UCLA is on this list and Berkeley isn't?</p>
<p>U. Miami is not very competitive IMO.</p>
<p>competitive to get into? or competitive once you are there....like the students are very competitive with each other??</p>
<p>This list is so broad as to be meaningless.</p>
<p>We are first, again, by virtue of alphabetical ranking. I cannot complain. =)</p>
<p>People often ask about UCLA being on this list </p>
<p>and Berkeley not being on it. The explanation, based on the Barron's methodology, is that Berkeley's holistic review has let in more lower-ranking students into the bottom of its class than UCLA has. UCLA is now trying to change its admission policy, and may end up with results like Berkeley's. A similar outcome of the Barron's methodology ranks the various national service academies (Army, Navy, Air Force) in different selectivity categories.</p>
<p>Who'd a thunk Miami and Lafayette were better colleges than Berkeley? Wow.</p>
<p>This list is generally the top schools with a few inconsistencies. Lafayette, but not Bucknell and Lehigh? Colby, but not Bates?</p>
<p>I think Bucknell fit the criteria, but declined to be profiled in the specialized volume on those competitive colleges.</p>
<p>^That seems implausible to me as the reason. Why would they do that?</p>
<p>I would not take the list too seriously.</p>
<p>haha- the University of Florida and U-Miami are almost identical in admissions standards-why the gator snub?</p>
<p>
[quote]
and Berkeley not being on it. The explanation, based on the Barron's methodology, is that Berkeley's holistic review has let in more lower-ranking students into the bottom of its class than UCLA has. UCLA is now trying to change its admission policy, and may end up with results like Berkeley's. A similar outcome of the Barron's methodology ranks the various national service academies (Army, Navy, Air Force) in different selectivity categories.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>It's not as if Berkeley's SAT range has gone down since beginning holistic review, which is what most privates do also. Berkeley's SAT range is higher and acceptance rate is lower than UCLA's and many other colleges on this list. SAT range has increased since holistic review was implemented. This year it was 1300-1500. This list really doesn't make sense. I guess University of Miami is just more competitive than Berkeley.</p>
<p>tokenadult -- you explanation seems to describe a category called: what are the stats of the least impressive student admitted? I assume this could be determined by looking at the lowest stat student admitted -- 400/400/400 SAT + 2.2 gpa Football player? It is a common complaint of UCLA football fans that students deemed academically unqualified for UCLA are granted admission to Berkeley.</p>
<p>
[quote]
tokenadult -- you[r] explanation seems to describe a category called: what are the stats of the least impressive student admitted?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Peace to all of you who are doubting the list. I'm not defending the list here--I didn't compile it--but I'm explaining what the list purports to do. The list indeed does consider how likely it is for a general applicant to get into the BOTTOM of a college's admitted class--that, after all, is "competitiveness" from the point of view of an applicant--and while there may be some debate around the margins, and there is definitely no magical cut-off line between being just on the list and just off the list, the list says what it says, and may help applicants assess their chances of getting into different colleges. The list doesn't purport to be a list by college quality (although smart students on campus does tend to help the quality of a college's overall experience). </p>
<p>I cited the focused book in which the exact list from the opening post appears, and also cited a newer publication from Barron's, in which the list has been updated (and expanded, now including more colleges). Barron's does NOT "show the work" of exactly how it weights its calculations, but it does describe its methodology in a paragraph you can find in those books that shows what factors are considered. And, yes, the only reason Bucknell wasn't included in the specialized volume is that its administration declined to have it included in that volume. (Barron's doesn't name which college declined, but by looking at the earlier edition of its comprehensive guidebook it's possible to see which college was left out.) </p>
<p>LOOK IT UP yourself to see what Barron's says about the Barron's methodology. Write to the Barron's editors if you disagree with them. I don't publish the books, so writing to me won't change the lists a whit.</p>
<p>Bates was on there on previous publications, so were Michigan and Berkeley. I think they have to put in some new schools from time to time to spark interests in the book and rotate around and sell more books.</p>
<p>Barron's initial publication (back in the 1980-1992 timeframe) was called "America's Best Colleges". It listed the top 50 Liberal Arts Colleges and Universities in the nation. That book was actually very good...as good as Fiske, possibly even better. They later ceased publishing that book and started publishing America's Most Selective (or most competitive) schools, which, as most of us can agree, is quite laughable.</p>
<p>It's not typical for barrons to come up with a list and leave out U Wisconsin-Madison...:D</p>