<p>Oh heck, why recite facts? You know all you personally need to know about it: It's not Swarthmore.</p>
<p>LOL</p>
<p>"Why would an adjustment be necessary when Oberlin and St. Olaf's are already among the very top math PhD producers per graduate in the United States?"</p>
<p>Because in reality there are about 100 colleges competing with each other for the top students (who can pay).</p>
<p>I guess I really needed to tell you that because like you really didn't know.</p>
<p>Glad I could help you with that tough question.</p>
<p>To get back to the original question. You might look over the math offerings at Harvey Mudd. They are about as extensive as you will find anywhere outside of a major research university. Then use that as the standard against which to compare the other LAC's. ID's list is particularly helpful here, since it tells you that any of the colleges on the list provide a background in math strong enough to give a very high proportion of undergrads the preparation they need to complete their doctorates.</p>
<p>As far as I know, Rugg does not publish methodology, so the list is essentially a meaningless "one guy's opinion" exercise. If you complain about USNews, then exponential these complaints to the google for Ruggs or Gourman.</p>
<p>Adjusting the list for admission SAT's, or family income, etc probably is not relevant to the original question. It might address an interesting sociological issue however. For a given kid, the question is whether the math offererings are good for an individual, not whether they are relatively good, given the admissions profile.</p>
<p>Ironically, I believe the studies of grade prediction do not support the notion that high math SAT's are required for success in technical fields. In fact, the verbal predicts college gpa slightly better than the math, even for math and science majors, but neither does all that well. In another study of how likely people were to end up in science and technical fields, broadly defined, the investigators found that math performance abouve the 78 percentile was helpful, and that beyond that it did not matter.</p>
<p>Many academic mathematicians would object to classifying their area as a "technical" field. Pure math is quite theoretical and does not require technical resources. That is why some LAC's can do very well for their students. All they really need are enough professors with expertise across the subject matter, and interest in teaching.</p>