BusinessWeek has employed student surveys for its MBA rankings. They have done this for a while. Their other major input is employer ratings (since they are recruiting and hiring from these schools). I doubt that is possible to do any survey without getting some noise and distortion (e.g. MBA students might give high marks because they realize it will impact the perceived value of their degree, not because they really believe it).
@tk21769 I didn’t run all LACs since I was focusing on National Universities. The ones I did look at (Amherst, Williams, Swarthmore, W&L, Midd, Kenyon, etc.) all rated at or near the top compared to national universities. If I have time, I’ll look at a broader set.
I’ve always senses some differences in undergraduate focus between top schools and I thought it was interesting that the Niche results tracked relatively closely to my perception. However, I think you are right that the sample sizes for a number of schools in Niche are too small. Some, like Berkeley, UCLA, etc. do seem to have enough.
The only thing I’ve found valuable at Niche are the blurby polls. And by valuable, I mean often hilarious.
Check out the most popular answer on the question at Trinity College, “What one word or phrase best describes your school:”
Answer is “Cocaine”
https://www.niche.com/colleges/trinity-college/
when business week came out with its rankings, they were actually surprised at the honesty of the students’ responses. That’s the main reason the perceived top schools finished lower, so alumni of these schools started criticizing the current students and told them not to devalue their degree, so then I think you may have seen some students respond well about their schools. Business week rankings are a lot more respected than US News (which isn’t saying much), but it’s good to have BW provide an undergrad and grad ranking not based on test scores, acceptance rate or gpa. Business week said it best - there are two customers of b-schools, the students and the employers, and that’s who they surveyed.
Here is the GPA data from Harvard’s Class of 2015 Student Survey.
According to Harvard grads, grade inflation is not much of a problem, so I guess it must not be…
http://features.thecrimson.com/2015/senior-survey/
Nope, that certainly wouldn’t be a problem. But to someone interpreting the data, certain red flags might arise.
I know you’re joking (or I think you are), but you should still drop a winking or a giggling emoji. haha
For those considering this as a valid variable for judging undergraduate quality, multiple flaws include the self-selection of majors and careers and region of residence and the resulting influence both have on salary level. Not everyone wants the highest-paying jobs or studies subjects that lead to them, and not everyone (or every school) is on the coasts.
Some schools have higher percentages of kids studying high-reward subjects and/or are on the coasts, while schools at a relative disadvantage are those with fewer pre-professional majors and/or schools not situated along the coasts.
…for the umpteenth time. 
I may be saying this for the umpteenth time, those salary rankings are as reliable or unreliable as US News.
I disagree. USNews at least attempts to gather info on factors that directly affect or reflect the quality of undergraduate education. Salaries… don’t.
It can be improved, but USNews’ formula is a lot more comprehensive and valid than looking at salaries that are largely self-selected. If salaries are going to be included, they need to be compared by major and with standard of living taken into account. And even then, stats can’t fully account for human taste/choice. Maybe a better career-related measure would be a career satisfaction survey. Are you happy with your career? (something like that…)