<p>Some might be surprised to find their beloved top 20 college on US News ranked far lower here. The methodology does seem a bit shaky with the use of Who's Who, payscale, and ratemyprofessors (although one could make the argument that all schools are equally advantaged/disadvantaged by the use of such sites, so the imbalances even themselves out in the end). Complete methodology is explained here: Methodology</a> - Forbes.com</p>
<ol>
<li>Williams College</li>
<li>Princeton University</li>
<li>Amherst College</li>
<li>United States Military Academy</li>
<li>Massachusetts Institute of Technology</li>
<li>Stanford University</li>
<li>Swarthmore College</li>
<li>Harvard University</li>
<li>Claremont McKenna College</li>
<li>Yale University</li>
<li>United States Air Force Academy</li>
<li>Wellesley College</li>
<li>Columbia University</li>
<li>Haverford College</li>
<li>Wesleyan University</li>
<li>Whitman College</li>
<li>Pomona College</li>
<li>Northwestern University</li>
<li>California Institute of Technology</li>
<li>University of Chicago</li>
</ol>
<p>Dartmouth @ 30, Penn at 36, Duke at 41, Vanderbilt at 43, University of Virginia at 44, Brown at 45, Georgetown at 52, Emory at 53, Cornell at 70, WashU at 76, Johns Hopkins (misspelled with the s after John omitted!) at 88, UMichigan-Ann Arbor at 92, USC at 112…like WHOA.</p>
<p>The list doesn’t match up to people’s “expectations” of a “correct” ranking. But it is nice that Williams is getting the respect it deserves. So even if the ranking is “incorrect” as perceived by CC, they at least got #1 right.</p>
<p>While all college rankings are silly, and these are sillier than some, it is hardly the stupidest / craziest ranking out there. I think if they added in caliber of students enrolled, which is obviously crucial, it would correct many of the most egregious aspects of this list, such as Dartmouth’s ridiculous ranking. At the same time, it’s nice to see the top liberal arts colleges at or near the top of this list. There is no doubt that, for many students, Williams, Amherst, Swarthmore, Pomona (also ranked too low here), provide the best undergrad education in the country, and often don’t receive the credit / recognition they deserve. </p>
<p>Johnwesley, while that percentage sounds huge, the reason is not that Williams has especially large participation in team sports. Williams has enormous no-cut rosters in men’s and women’s cross country, track and field, swimming and diving, and crew, the vast majority of which (in some cases all) receive virtually no admissions concessions and in many cases are true walk-ons. For example, there are ONE HUNDRED people on the men’s and women’s cross country roster for this fall. In my view, the implications for campus culture are far different for say, recruited football players than for having a 50 man men’s cross country roster. Just want to provide some context to the 40 percent figure, which indicates, rightfully, that Williams is a sporty / outdoorsy place, but not full of the traditional “jocks” somebody might think based on that number alone.</p>
<ol>
<li>Williams College <–</li>
<li>Princeton University <–</li>
<li>Amherst College <–</li>
<li>United States Military Academy</li>
<li>Massachusetts Institute of Technology</li>
<li>Stanford University</li>
<li>Swarthmore College <–</li>
<li>Harvard University</li>
<li>Claremont McKenna College <–</li>
<li>Yale University <–*</li>
</ol>
<p>Its kind of strange to see 5-6 LAC colleges in the top 10, but have Dartmouth in the late 20s. Not so much that LACs don’t belong in the top 10, but rather if they do, what sets Dartmouth apart from them in such a bad way?</p>
<p>“I think if they added in caliber of students enrolled, which is obviously crucial”</p>
<p>I know that is part of traditional rankings, but why is that stat crucial to quality and affordable education? I know it helps to learn from your peers, but isn’t it the charge of a college to educate students no matter what their entry level of the student is? </p>
<p>“Williams is a sporty / outdoorsy place, but not full of the traditional “jocks” somebody might think based on that number alone.”</p>
<p>Yep, they and some other LACs such as Haverford seem to have a tradition of the “scholar/athlete”</p>
<p>Yay Carleton! While I agree that the rankings are a bit, um, odd in their methodology (I don’t think ratemyprofessors or Who’s Who is a very good way of judging undergrad teaching ability), I’m glad to see LAC’s getting the respect that they deserve. Good for Williams, Amherst, Swarthmore, POmona, Haverford, Claremont McKenna, etc.</p>
<p>Here’s the entire top 50 list, for those who are curious:
<p>You know why Forbes has 0 credibility? It kicked Centre and Whitman college out of the top 20 in just one year because people were criticizing their ranks last year.</p>
<p>Well, that’s a good point. The volatility from one year to the next does seem extreme. If ratemyprofessor is anything like those Princeton Review surveys, student participation can jump all over the place.</p>
<p>If I recall correctly, this list was heavily criticized last year because Princeton was ranked #1 and guess where Forbes CEO Steve Forbes went to college? :)</p>
<p>While ranking Princeton #1 alone is not necessarily suspect, it is interesting to note that Princeton’s traditional ranking rivals are way down at #8 for Harvard, #10 for Yale, #6 for Stanford, and the clincher is Princeton’s Ivy-League athletic rival Penn is all the way down at #36! I smell a rat. :)</p>
<p>Garbage. I tolerate the USNews and Washington Monthly rankings because the former does a reasonable job of measuring prestige and the latter does a reasonable job of measuring the good done for society. I don’t think this does a reasonable job of measuring much of anything.</p>