<p>U.S. News and World Report issued their 2009 rankings of colleges and universities. As always, Carleton placed among the very top liberal arts colleges. The numerical rankings vary from year to year, and this year we're assigned to 8th, which is still within "Tier 1" and also "Most Selective". Way to go, Carleton! (Although it seems like this isn't really news anymore.) You can see details at Liberal</a> Arts Rankings - Best Colleges - Education - US News and World Report</p>
<p>I've always found it a remarkable affirmation of Carleton's academic quality that the school has maintained its US News rankings "against the odds" (an average #6 LAC position over the last decade by my calculations). Minnesota can't come close to matching the applicant numbers you'll find in the Northeast. Add to that the inclusion in the US News formula of financial resources. Though reasonably strong, our endowment will never match the deeper pockets of the likes of Amherst, Williams or Pomona. One can only hope for lots and lots of Matrix and Lord of the Rings residuals for years to come (Barrie Osborne, Class of '66).</p>
<p>Carleton is aggressively seeking to increase its endowment. In a little over a year, the college has already raised $208 million of its $300 million capital campaign. Although Carleton may never reach Williams numbers, it just might...</p>
<p>So could it be implied from your comment that Carleton's ranking may climb up in the next few years to come? How did Bowdoin and Pomona get ahead of carleton...</p>
<p>US News rankings (for what they're worth) are generally pretty static year to year. Unless their evaluation formula changes, I wouldn't expect any earthshattering changes.</p>
<p>In the last decade the average rankings have shaken out:</p>
<ol>
<li>Amherst</li>
<li>Williams</li>
<li>Swarthmore</li>
<li>Wellesley</li>
<li>Pomona</li>
<li>Carleton</li>
<li>Middlebury</li>
<li>Haverford</li>
<li>Bowdoin</li>
</ol>
<p>Amherst-Williams-Swarthmore have been jumping back and forth between #1-3 LAC positions for years.</p>
<p>The #5-9 positions alternate between Pomona-Carleton-Middlebury-Haverford-Bowdoin. </p>
<p>Bowdoin and Middlebury are SAT optional schools so their median reported scores don't represent the entire class (one would presume unsubmitted scores are lower). Middlebury also admits some freshman mid-year that are not included in US News data (again, these stats tend to be lower than fall admits). These factors probably have a minor inflationary impact on rankings. </p>
<p>But I would emphasize - as I have many times - one would be hard pressed to argue ANY measurable difference in overall academic quality between all these schools. This is certainly not to say they are clones - social life, setting, etc. can be remarkably different one to the next. Use rankings like US News as a guide, then move on to more important considerations.</p>
<p>alexkaye, my comment about Williams was directed toward endowment, not ratings. I agree with 1190 that it would be difficult to find an overall difference in quality among any of these schools. I also agree with 1190's point that money generally helps increase one's standing in these "ratings." Geography also affects ratings, which is why Carleton and Grinnell will always be a bit behind the eight-ball, regardless of endowment. Again, they are all GREAT schools.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Bowdoin and Middlebury are SAT optional schools so their median reported scores don't represent the entire class (one would presume unsubmitted scores are lower).
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Jeez. What part of "Middlebury reports SAT I scores for all applicants, regardless of whether they were used in admissions" don't you understand? If someone sends an SAT I score or 3 SAT II scores to Midd, the SAT Is are reported in their numbers. For the most recent CDS, Middlebury reported the SAT I scores of 88% of matriculants, and the ACT scores of 24% (some people send SAT I and ACT scores, in which case both were reported). Compare that to Amherst, where for the class of 2011, the college reported scores for only 76% of matricuants! </p>
<p>If you look at Carleton's CDS, you'll see that the college is reporting SAT I scores for only 78% of matriculants. So Middlebury's published SAT I scores (88% of class) are far more representative of the student body than Carleton's (78% of class).</p>
<p>^^don't more students who apply to carleton take the ACTs?
it said that 78% reported SATs, and 56% reported ACTs.</p>
<p>I'd imagine at middlebury fewer accepted students take the ACTs.</p>
<p>Middlebury reports 24% submitted ACT scores.</p>
<p>That doesn't change the fact that Carleton's reported SAT I scores account for only 78% of entering students. I only bring this up in response to post 5.</p>
<p>Arcadia - it is very possible that 22% of the entering students did NOT take the SAT, but submitted the ACT instead. Since entrance exams are not optional at Carleton, the students have to submit one or the other (or both).</p>
<p>Entrance exams aren't optional at Middlebury either.</p>
<p>This was in Wikipedia's citation on Middlebury.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Middlebury is part of the SAT optional movement for undergraduate admission.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>So this is incorrect?</p>
<p>You can submit 3 SAT IIs in place of the SAT I (or the ACT), but even if you do, Middlebury will see and report your SAT I scores (which are included in all SAT II reports to colleges).</p>
<p>That's one way to get your name in all the test-optional articles without really being so. I guess Midd is "SAT-optional," although that's hardly a notable position.</p>
<p>Wow, didn't expect to create this much of a row over "These factors probably have a minor inflationary impact on rankings" in referring to Bowdoin and Midd's standardized testing policies. I thought I would be saved by "probably" and "minor." Bon chance.</p>
<p>Arcadia, there is no reason to be defensive. I did not suggest (and don't believe) that either school's reporting practices are in any way dishonest or designed to manipulate numbers. I agree with you that US News, not these colleges, have dictated the rules of reporting. Nonetheless, Bowdoin, on its own website, states that around 20% of the incoming class typically does not present standardized test scores. The number of students at Midd not included in the US News data is probably similar, but for somewhat different reasons as you know well (around 14% of Midd's class is accepted as "February admits" and those numbers are not included per US News protocol in calculations. At least a few percent of the fall admits never present ACT or SAT I scores on top of this.) These students, in general, understandably represent a weaker applicant pool at least with regard to standardized test scores. They are invisible to US News.</p>
<p>Hoping to head off further hijacking of this thread (hope against hope?) and in the name of "full disclosure," below is the link to Arcadia's comments yesterday explaining much of this in more detail.
<a href="http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/college-search-selection/553348-usnwr-best-colleges-2009-a-27.html#post1060902239%5B/url%5D">http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/college-search-selection/553348-usnwr-best-colleges-2009-a-27.html#post1060902239</a></p>
<p>And Limner, I fully agree with you that the Midd policy is "SAT-optional lite" but actually agree with it. I'm no fan of standardized testing but understand the need of admissions offices to try to validate the credentials of students applying, in particular, from small or heavily grade inflated high schools ("where everyone is above average," to paraphrase our Prarie Home neighbor, Garrison Keilor). I believe Midd even used to allow AP scores to mix and match with SAT 2's in place of the SAT 1 or ACT. Sounds like bedlum, but maybe a fairer system for students with different aptitudes. Wouldn't hold my breath that these options catch on any time soon so long as US News continues to hold colleges hostage.</p>
<p>The fact that you can submit 3 SAT IIs in lieu of the SAT I is the unique policy. If you submit the 3 SAT IIs, Middlebury will not take your SAT I score into consideration when making an admissions decision, but they will report it in their CDS.</p>
<p>USNWR= epic fail!!!1</p>
<p>Pssh. "The US News list is capitalizing on your and your parents' own fears and insecurities by systematizing a sometimes scary and frustrating process, providing you with a false sense of objectivity while undermining and questioning your own feelings. In the process, you can end up questioning yourself too much, wondering why you like School X more than School Y even though School Y might have a better rank." UChicago Admissions Blogger.</p>
<p>I couldn't find any other way to say it.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Carleton is aggressively seeking to increase its endowment. In a little over a year, the college has already raised $208 million of its $300 million capital campaign. Although Carleton may never reach Williams numbers, it just might...
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Wow, $208 million in about a year? Wasn't the endowment around $600 million when they started? </p>
<p>
[quote]
So could it be implied from your comment that Carleton's ranking may climb up in the next few years to come? How did Bowdoin and Pomona get ahead of carleton...
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I'm not sure how much they could climb. They were already fourth at some point in the last few years, and there's not really a chance they (or any other non-AWS LAC) will break into the top three anytime soon.</p>
<p>I'll find out more about the current Carleton endowment level when I attend a reception hosted by President Oden in a couple of weeks. I'll get back to all y'all.</p>