<p>There is not a single ratings system that is perfect (or anywhere near it!) and there never will be. People need to stop worrying so much about ranking and spend time doing research into things that really matter about colleges.</p>
<p>It’s like comparing grapes and apples</p>
<p>And a school with fifteen thousdand and two</p>
<p>Absurd list</p>
<p>I don’t think it’s like comparing grapes to apples. The comparisons are for the quality of an undergraduate education, not the social life on campus. Most well known research universities get their reputation based on graduate school output. I do think it’s fair to compare the undergraduate educations that the different type of colleges and universities offer and I welcome the attempt. It’s just hard to come up with criteria that makes a fair comparison.</p>
<p>Don’t you have to pay a fee to be in “Who’s Who?” Who pays money for something like this?</p>
<p>Also, I would think some more alternative schools, and arts-focused schools, might lose out on a ranking based on the factors listed for making this list. </p>
<p>When I looked at the rankings, I would say that conventional, high prestige schools still do well, but smaller artsy or more experimental schools don’t. Think about the student population at some of the latter schools, and whether their priorities would include lots of money and a blurb in Who’s Who.</p>
<p>"
Go Whitman and Sewanee! Of course, I could probably devise ranking systems to move them higher. Heavily weight obscurity and geographical remoteness along with academics and outcomes and they would be top ten!"</p>
<p>Why --does obscurity impact quality of education? If I were to rate fine watches, brands that are “obscure” to the average person would rise to the top.</p>
<p>Geographical remoteness is in the eye of the beholder, too. Small colleges in nowheresville, New England are remote, but somehow their remoteness is different.</p>
<p>The rankings lost credibility when I found a couple schools listed in the wrong states :D. If they can’t look up the address on the school website, how carefully did they REALLY look at these schools :p.</p>
<p>
I thnk that was the point of Bogney’s post. It was supposed to be sarcastic. That’s how I read it.</p>
<p>I am glad to see more rankings, so long as they tell us their methodology. Eventually, we’ll see it’s ridiculous to differentiate college rank #x and college rank #x+1.</p>
<p>When there are enough data this ranking may be more interesting because of its methodology: </p>
<p>[Parchment</a> College Rankings 2012 | Parchment - College admissions predictions.](<a href=“http://www.parchment.com/c/college/college-rankings.php]Parchment”>http://www.parchment.com/c/college/college-rankings.php)</p>
<p>What do you mean, “eventually”? It’s always been ridiculous to distinguish between college ranking x and x+1. Whoever does that, anyway, other than blithering idiots who are the antithesis of elite?</p>
<p>By the way, if any of you are interested the Forbes site has a long, nerdy defense of the methodology, especially the use of ratemyprofessor. (And ratemyprofessor data was massaged considerably to adjust for some of its known potential biases.)</p>
<p>My post re remoteness and obscurity was intended to be humorous. Those concepts apply differently to New England and pretty much anywhere else in the country. With a student at Whitman and one going to Sewanee, it seems harder to pick a pair of more remote, obscure, but still very good colleges. My kids were apparently as interested in challenging logistics as as challenging classes! </p>
<p>I like the list only because it rates colleges I like relatively highly. Otherwise, it is as absurd as any other list - though the criteria sound better until you consider the data closely.</p>
<p>
Not sure if it’s one that you found already, but the listing for **St. John’s University<a href=“#151”>/b</a> has it located in Collegeville, NY instead of Collegeville, MN, and lists the student population for St. John’s University in Queens.</p>
<p>ETA: Well, to be fair, St John’s University in Queens (#529) is listed as being in Queens, MN and has the population for St John’s University in Minnesota :)</p>
<p>@LoremIpsum “My son passed up #2 and #13 for #19 and doesn’t regret it a bit; for him #19 is a perfect fit.”</p>
<p>This made me laugh, so thank you for that :)</p>
<p>You made passing up Williams and Amherst for Brown sound like he bought a televison at Target after not pulling the trigger on the same set at Best buy or Walmart. Same price, same set, different seller . . .</p>
<p>What I’m trying to say is that at that level of quality, all three of those institutions are a win. What’s to “regret?”</p>
<p>I do agree all the lists are flawed but they have some value to me. For privates (and my D wanted small school so that’s what shakes out), it is useful to know which schools “rate” where because others in the world do pay attention (employers and grad schools) - don’t you think? They likely aren’t investigating the methods used and just “go with it”.</p>
<p>For me, sadly, I am full-pay and am glad my D chose one that seems to consistently rank at least in the top 20 on all these dubious lists. I feel a little better shelling out these hefty tuition sums feeling like they may have a better chance of “paying off” in the future. OBVIOUSLY, presuming she would perform the same way no matter where she chose.</p>
<p>Am I nuts in thinking this way?</p>
<p>Exactly, Downeaster Dad. There is no meaningful difference between 2, 13 and 19. LoremIpsumkid didn’t “go lower on the food chain.”</p>
<p>Sure, the lists have value - if you squint at them. They give you general indications of bands of quality. No argument there. It’s the hair-splitting between similar ranks that is tedious and unproductive and stupid.</p>
<p>The list can hardly be taken seriously when it seems to think you can only receive a quality education at a liberal arts college. This list is completely worthless to anyone considering a STEM major.</p>
<p>They have bigger issues than putting the wrong states in - they totally screwed up Haverford’s rankings:</p>
<p>[Forbes:</a> Bad data hurt Haverford in college rankings - Philly.com](<a href=“Inquirer.com: Philadelphia local news, sports, jobs, cars, homes”>Inquirer.com: Philadelphia local news, sports, jobs, cars, homes)</p>
<p>TS1125 - there are many non LACs on the list. I don’t know other LACs super well, but Williams is arguably one of the best places to study Math. They are great in Physics and DD is getting a great education as a Biology major. Swarthmore has a great engineering program and a well regarded Science curriculum. My brother has a PHD from U of Chicago after his undergraduate work at Colgate. I’m not sure what a STEM major is lacking at a top 10 LAC besides engineering at some of them?</p>
<p>Using Who’s Who and Rate My Professor? Really? Laughable.</p>