<p>How do they determine these things...
Giving abysmal ratings to great schools such as Bowdion, Weslyan, U Rochester, etc....</p>
<p>Surveys...useless</p>
<p>Bowdoin:
Selectivity - 98 on a scale of 99
Campus Life - 96 on a scale of 99
Best campus food - # 1 in the country
School runs like butter - # 2
Dorms like palaces - #17
Very positive student quotes in the "Students Say" section.
What do you find abysmal about their Princeton Review rankings?</p>
<p>Like the old adage for consumers: "caveat emptor", that is, buyer beware. Buyers are liars. They lie about themselves to themselves, to others and miss the point of the application process. It is important to understand who you are, what your requirements are, whether there is a proper fit, and whether the feasability of the school meets your distant goals. Also, does the school fit your personality? Find the school that matches you. </p>
<p>By the way, what of the social development of the person. What if you are dysfunctional socially? What if you whine all the time? The intimate environments of college sometime brings out numerous conflicts within themselves that are often unnoticed.</p>
<p>Best wishes.</p>
<p>last year bowdoin's academic score and admission scores were calculated as 66. this is what the book gives to schools that for whatever reason provide insufficient data or didn't turn their data in on time.</p>
<p>Think of it as probability. If a school shows up in the top 20 party schools most years, there is a pretty fair probability that partying is rampant at that school. The survey is far from scientific, but even a non-scientific sampling can yield likelihoods. I wouldn't pay much attention to absolute rankings (like #1 vs. #10, for instance).</p>
<p>I think the Princeton Review rankings are okay, overall. There are some anomalies, and some issues when the survey info isn't complete, but in some ways it's an interesting perspective on a school versus the single relatively limited ranking from USN&WR. </p>
<p>As pb2002 said, you DO have to be careful with PR when you see a lousy rating that it isn't due to insufficient info...for example, if a school does not provide sufficient admissions selectivity info (yielding a 60* on the PR scale, which basically just means N/A (what they should write, IMO)), the academics ranking will also be bad, because they base the academic rating partially off the admissions selectivity rating. </p>
<p>And, of course, all rankings must be taken with a grain of salt, anyway. PR, for example, makes assumptions about what is a "good" quality and what is "bad". For example, a school that ranks on the "Class Discussions are Rare" list and the "Professors Make Themselves Rare" list is going to take a hit on the academic ranking, because PR generalizes those as negative characteristics. For a student who learns perfectly well in a lecture environment, though, those might not be a big deal. So, as always...don't take opinion as gospel truth.</p>