<p>Take from this what you will.
America's</a> Top Colleges 2011 on Shine</p>
<p>Rofl, UPenn at 52? Cal at 70? Haverford at 7?</p>
<p>almost as surprisingly for the 2011 edition :
CMU at 108
NYU at 173
GWU at 291
JHU at 88
WUStL at 76
UMich AA at 92
Georgetown at 52
Emory at 53
Cal at 65</p>
<p>
Well, not according to the set of criteria that Forbes used to evaluate colleges and universities, anyway. </p>
<p>But, honestly, I think this is a headline without a story for a few reasons.</p>
<ol>
<li><p>I doubt that differences at the top are very significant or meaningful.</p></li>
<li><p>All this analysis on the institutional level may be interesting (or it may not be–I guess that’s a matter of personal preference), but what really matters to students and their families should be what happens on the personal level, for a particular student in an institution.</p></li>
<li><p>I’m not sure Forbes’ criteria are always the criteria by which I would choose to evaluate colleges and universities. I mean, suppose Omaha Magazine decided to rank institutions of higher learning, and gave the greatest weight to “proximity to Omaha.” Would the fact that Omaha Magazine published a list mean that Creighton really was better than Stanford?</p></li>
</ol>
<p>I thought the list was kind of interesting to see, and perhaps even something to consider, but I hardly think it means very much.</p>
<p>^^how much do you think USN&WR lists mean?</p>
<p>Princeton and Harvard do make the top at positions # 2 and #6. </p>
<p>Since the list is based on loan debt and future earning power, it is skewed. Obviously if you want a free education, West Point and the other military academies are the best deals at zero monetary cost. Yet, funny how the majority of Forbes and Wall Street crowd do not pursue that path.</p>
<p>^good point. i wonder where the military academies would fall (and princeton/harvard with their ridiculous financial aid programs) if that factor was eliminated</p>
<p>^I’d be willing to bet P-ton & Harvard would still come up near the top</p>
<p>
For marketing purposes, they mean a great deal because they’re famous. People read them and talk about them, and everyone else who ranks colleges is chasing USNWR. They’re the Coca-Cola of college rankings. The Xerox. The…well, Harvard.</p>
<p>On the other hand, as a tool for picking a college, they still shouldn’t mean much. The first two objections I raised about Forbes, I could raise about USNWR, too: they exaggerate minor differences, and they can’t hope to predict the effect that any particular college will have on and for any particular student. I think that the last time I looked, I (personally, just me, with no pretense of objectivity) felt more in line with the criteria *UNSWR *used to develop its list than I do with Forbes’ criteria, but, honestly, it’s been so long I don’t really remember.</p>
<p>Williams came in at first, which makes sense. They cover 100% of a students demonstrated need. I’m guessing a lot of good schools were moved down due to their expense.</p>
<p>wow. That comes as a bit of a shocker, or maybe even a wake-up call.</p>
<p>UVA and William & Mary are in the 40’s, but USC is at 165, below UCSD, UCI, BU, UF, and JMU? I don’t think so…</p>
<p>Just as everyone will be famous for 15 minutes, every college will get to be ranked in the top ten for at least one poll. If enough silly polls are devised with enough goofy criteria in their methods, every college might even get to be number 1.</p>
<p>Harvard comes at the top of the USN&WP because they have decided that Harvard is the standard by which all other schools are measured. Of course Harvard is #1 compared to Harvard. If teaching excellence were the primary critieria, followed by faculty mentoring and advising, you’d see a different ranking. It’s all a matter of what criteria you pick and how you weight them. That’s why it’s silly to let someone else’s criteria count for more than your own opinion of what matters in education.</p>