<p>The new Forbes rankings are out for 2012. Forbes is unique in that it combines both National universities and national LACS in one ranking. The top 100 schools in the country can be found here: America's</a> Best Colleges List - Forbes</p>
<p>The interesting methodology used for these rankings can be found here: Americas</a> Top Colleges - Michael Noer - Backslash - Forbes</p>
<p>Thoughts?</p>
<p>I like the methodology. However, citing the military academies as no cost is deceiving; you have to be in the military for a number of years after, and for a man out of West Point, it’s quite likely that you could end up in combat. You are getting paid, but it’s not like another job, since you can’t quit, so I would think it should count as some kind of cost for attending.</p>
<p>Something to keep in mind is that the man who put this ranking together–a retired economist from Ohio U named Richard Vedder–would like to see all public higher education ended: no state universities, no state or federal financial aid and no research support. His grand vision is one of private universities for those who can afford them and a combination of for-profit schools (he loves DeVry and U of Phoenix) and in-house training by corporations for everyone else. So, it’s no wonder that he’s come up with a ranking that essentially mocks public higher education.</p>
<p>In essence, Vedder is following the “PETA model” of highlighting some legitimate issues (such as cost, student loan debt etc) as a means of hopefully legitimizing a very radical and extremist agenda that would be soundly rejected by an overwhelming majority of Americans.</p>
<p>State schools appear to be shafted by these rankings. The highest ranked state school in the list (UVA) is ranked #46</p>
<p>The methodology sounds fine at a high-level, but then when you actually look at the details, it becomes suspect. The single largest component - 17.5% for student satisfaction of professors - of the ranking is from RateMyProfessors.com, hardly a scientific measure for instructor quality…The next largest component is 15% from the self-reported website Payscale.com.</p>
<p>Thoughts?
All you need to know is “The rankings are prepared exclusively for Forbes by the Center for College Affordability and Productivity, a Washington, D.C. think tank founded by Ohio University economist Richard Vedder.”</p>
<p>Interesting methodology? </p>
<p>Well, utterly ridiculous can be interesting too! Let’s look at the garbage the “economist” used to define his methodology:</p>
<p>Student Evaluations from RateMyProfessor.com (17.5%)
Predicted vs. Actual Freshman-to-Sophomore Retention Rates(5%)
Listings of Alumni in Who’s Who in America (10%)
Salary of Alumni fromPayscale.com (15%)
Alumni in Forbes/CCAPCorporate Officers List(5%)
Competitive Awards (7.5%)Student Nationally Competitive Awards(7.5%)</p>
<p>This ranking makes the rankings of Princeton Review look legitimate! Forbes should stick to telling us how Lady Gaga jumps to the top of this year’s ranking of the richest and most powerful actors, actresses, athletes, writers and musicians. :)</p>
<p>The things he bases the rankings on sound like they are practical and make sense; how he actually gets the information is painfully flawed.</p>
<p>
Seems like a bad idea. I know for Notre Dame, we have our own website for professor ratings, so there’s next to nothing on RMP. I can only assume that some other schools do the same, as well.</p>
<p>
He does seem to like the military academies, though, and they’re public.</p>
<p>I am in complete agreement with Xiggi. I can’t believe I am typing this…</p>
<p>I didn’t know how much of a joke forbes could be, only had to review their top 100.</p>
<p>What a nutty list! Going down it, there are so many laughable pairings that I can’t even begin to identify them.</p>
<p>It’s interesting, though, that it’s clear that selectivity still has some correlation with rankings even if you use some other metric.</p>
<p>Such crap rankings its ridiculous. “Whos, Who”, I get those mailings and toss them out all the time.</p>
<p>I think everyone should read: [What</a> Will They Learn? - A guide to what college rankings don’t tell you about core curriculum requirements](<a href=“http://whatwilltheylearn.com/]What”>http://whatwilltheylearn.com/)</p>
<p>hilarious rankings</p>
<p>What Will They Learn seems to believe that having a core curriculum is the only thing that measures how good a college is. Brown automatically for its open curriculum, even though most people there still take an approximation of a core. Even Columbia, which has stringent core requirements, only gets a B. I’m not really sure what’s the purpose of this website. If you want to take a math class, even though it’s not on the core, no one’s going to stop you. If your son or daughter doesn’t want to take a math class, then that’s their problem.</p>
<p>
But why is US News better? Because it conforms to your pre-conceived notions of which college is “better,” based largely on (subjective, often regional) prestige?</p>
<p>All college rankings are completely flawed.</p>
<p>
Of course you do. ND does well at #18 (mixed with LACs and Research Universities, no less). </p>
<p>
Sure they are. Simmering down large institutions with all kinds of strengths and weaknesses into a single ordinal number is sure to be a flawed process.</p>
<p>
Which is completely negligible from its US News ranking, so what would my motivation be?</p>
<p>Anyway, I liked the methodology when I read the article about it. Not after I found out where the information is actually coming from. I retracted that statement.</p>
<p>
But damn if it doesn’t make them money.</p>
<p>
Not so! Mine is perfect:
<a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/college-search-selection/978040-ranking-colleges-prestigiosity.html?highlight=prestigiosity[/url]”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/college-search-selection/978040-ranking-colleges-prestigiosity.html?highlight=prestigiosity</a></p>
<p>UCBChemEGrad, it is not impossible for one to find a ranking questionable despite being an alumni of a school that came well on top of the list. </p>
<p>Just as one person with integrity should when USNews will announce their nutty and corrupt peer assessments, their dart-throwing high school counselors’ input, and their most asinine lists of schools dedicated to “teaching.” Fwiw, the people who REALLY fill those surveys probably do know more about Lady Gaga than about the schools they are supposed to rank. :)</p>
<p>
I find it hard to argue with your success.</p>