<p>Middlebury ranks the 5th again this year, in a tie with Carleton College...</p>
<p>we are so much better than carleton!</p>
<p>i agree! i expected us to be like the 3rd or 4th, but oh well...</p>
<p>Considering that Middlebury's SAT avg is within three points of Colgate, Hamilton, Colby and 30-50 points below Bowdoin and Wesleyan, I haven't really understood why USNWR ranks it so far in front of all five of these schools in recent years. I guess their acceptance rate is a little lower, although I think that is only 1.5% of the score anyway. Maybe their endowment per student is much higher.</p>
<p>According to the latest common data sets, 72% of Bowdoin students submitted SAT I scores, while 87% of Middlebury students submitted them. That might explain Bowdoin's higher average.</p>
<p>I remember figuring that if Bowdoin included all students in their SAT avg that their 1400 avg would fall to 1370 in comparison to Midd's 1349. I got the impression that Middlebury had only 50-60% of applicants report SAT or otherwise how does its average drop so much from 1430 to 1349 when everyone is included? Still, what other factors cause USNWR to rank Middlebury significantly above schools like Wesleyan, Bowdoin, W&L, Colgate?</p>
<p>SAT scores are a difficult gauge of quality, especially at schools for which they're optional. furthermore, they aren't really the heft of the rankings, since they are a fraction of a fraction of the total score (and a small fraction at that). middlebury's reputation and financial resources rank justify it's position. i think what you're noticing, gellino, is the equitable spread of high quality students among a far deeper group of schools than in previous years. i think this is especially noticeable this year in the rankings and, i bet, will be so much more the case next year. the distinctions between student quality are shrinking (there is less a difference between, say, swarthmore, and the next group of LACs than there used to be), so the schools are essentially ranked by institutional strength (insofar as USNEWS determines it) and reputation. i think that's always been the case, but we were previously able to look to gradations in student quality to feel that the rankings were a pecking order of ability as much as institution. less so now.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Still, what other factors cause USNWR to rank Middlebury significantly above schools like Wesleyan, Bowdoin, W&L, Colgate?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Middlebury is only slightly above Bowdoin - I believe their relative scores are something like 90 and 89 on a 100-point scale. According to last year's USNWR ratings, the factors known as "faculty resources" (a blend of factors such as average class size and how much is spent on faculty) and "financial resources" (how much is spent per student) are the reasons for Middlebury's slight edge over Bowdoin. Like Bowdoin, Wesleyan is hurt primarily by shortcomings in the "faculty resources" and "financial resources" categories.</p>
<p>"middlebury's reputation and financial resources rank justify it's position"</p>
<p>If you were to use academic reputation-i.e. peer assessment –for assessing a college, Smith, Grinnell and Bowdoin rate higher. Pomona, Davidson, Wesleyan and Oberlin are equal to Middlebury. Just a thought. ;)</p>
<p>
[quote]
"middlebury's reputation and financial resources rank justify it's position"</p>
<p>If you were to use academic reputation-i.e. peer assessment for assessing a college, Smith, Grinnell and Bowdoin rate higher. Pomona, Davidson, Wesleyan and Oberlin are equal to Middlebury. Just a thought.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Reputation has little to do with Middlebury's relative position in the USNWR ratings - the "peer assessment" factor is the only factor where reputation comes into play. The other factors are primarily data driven. And the "financial resources" factor is a little bit misleading as it is not based on endowment but rather how much is spent. If endowment were used to measure "financial resources," Bowdoin would be rated ahead of Middlebury as it has a higher per-student endowment.</p>
<p>"Reputation has little to do with Middlebury's relative position in the USNWR ratings"</p>
<p>It was you who said "Middlebury’s <em>reputation</em> and financial resources rank justify its position" Now you're saying reputation has little to do with Middlebury's ranking? The peer assessment is largest percentage (25%) of the ranking. Obviously USNWR believes it’s the most important component. Financial resources is only 10%</p>
<p>
[quote]
It was you who said "Middlebury’s <em>reputation</em> and financial resources rank justify its position" Now you're saying reputation has little to do with Middlebury's ranking?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>It was pb2002 (not torasee) that said that.</p>
<p>
[quote]
It was you who said "Middleburys <em>reputation</em> and financial resources rank justify its position" Now you're saying reputation has little to do with Middlebury's ranking? The peer assessment is largest percentage (25%) of the ranking. Obviously USNWR believes its the most important component. Financial resources is only 10%
[/quote]
</p>
<p>You have me confused with someone else as I did not say that Middlebury's reputation is what justifies its rank. However, my point remains the same - "reputation" does not set Middlebury apart from either Bowdoin or Wesleyan as both are rated equal to or higher than Middlebury in the "peer assessment" factor, the only factor which reflects reputation. Middlebury scores higher than both Bowdoin and Wesleyan on "faculty resources" and "financial resources," and scores on those factors are what gives Middlebury its tiny edge over Bowdoin and its slightly larger edge over Wesleyan.</p>
<p>"You have me confused with someone else"</p>
<p>I did indeed. My apologies. :)</p>
<p>i meant middlebury's reputation set it apart from colgate and hamilton, which gellino originally proposed. i don't see any point in wondering why middlebury is ranked above bowdoin, since it's by a difference of one point and the schools tend to swap position regularly these days. on some indicators, middlebury is stronger. on others, bowdoin is.</p>
<p>While Middlebury is an amazing LAC, other top ten LACs might also claim they should be ranked higher. Consider Pomona, tied for #7 with Bowdoin:</p>
<p>Endowment Per Student: <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._colleges_and_universities_by_endowment%5B/url%5D">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._colleges_and_universities_by_endowment</a></p>
<h1>2 Pomona - $942,530 (behind Grinnell)</h1>
<h1>13 Middlebury - $295,249</h1>
<p>SAT scores (USNWR): </p>
<h1>2 Pomona - 1370-1520 (behind Harvey Mudd)</h1>
<h1>17 Middlebury - 1270-1480</h1>
<p>Acceptance Rate (USNWR):</p>
<h1>3 Pomona - 18% (behind USMA and USNA)</h1>
<h1>9 Middlebury - 22%</h1>
<p>%Freshman in Top 10% of HS Class (USNWR):</p>
<h1>6 Pomona - 87%</h1>
<h1>10 Middlebury - 82%</h1>
<p>Freshman Retention Rate (USNWR):</p>
<h1>1 Pomona - 99%</h1>
<h1>14 Middlebury - 95%</h1>
<p>Middlebury beats Pomona in Faculty Salaries, even though Pomona's are higher, 127K vs. 122K, because when "adjusted" for the crazy SoCal cost of living, they're ranked lower; and in Alumni Giving Rate, which may be more reflective of a school's fundraising abilities than "alumni satisfaction". Not sure these are good measures of a school's overall strength.</p>
<p>
[quote]
While Middlebury is an amazing LAC, other top ten LACs might also claim they should be ranked higher. Consider Pomona, tied for #7 with Bowdoin:</p>
<p>Endowment Per Student: <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...by_endowmen%5B/url%5D">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...by_endowmen</a> t</p>
<h1>2 Pomona - $942,530 (behind Grinnell)</h1>
<h1>13 Middlebury - $295,249
[/quote]
</h1>
<p>Endowment is not a factor in the USNWR ratings. USNWR looks only at expenditures per student and does not care about the source of the funds for the spending (i.e., it makes no difference to USNWR whether the funds spent by a school come from a hefty endowment or from hefty charges for tuition and other services).</p>
<p>One might argue that Pomona's stats are so remarkable simply because of the school's small size and its location in California. Middlebury has nearly 1,000 more students than Pomona, and competes with other Northeast elites for top students. Pomona has few competitors within 1,500 miles, and draws heavily on students from within California, many of whom (16%) are Asian and carry with them high SAT scores. They also grab top kids from California publics who didn't get into Stanford and want to stay in sprawling California while avoiding the UC system. </p>
<p>Also keep in mind that Middlebury has grown by nearly 500 students since the mid-90s. In fact, it's quite remarkable that a school of Middlebury's size could maintain its position (and indeed leapfrog many competitors) in such a short amount of time considering that level of growth. </p>
<p>Middlebury also maintains a highly competitive DIII sports program (ranking second in the country behind Williams). All NESCAC schools "tip" athletes with lower scores in order to field competitive teams. Pomona has found an interesting way around this--they let Pizer (with whom they share sports teams) tip the athletes so they don't need to lower their academic standards to fill teams. Very clever. </p>
<p>Pomona isn't "better" than Middlebury--it's just better located and better sized to matriculate a class with dizzying statistics.</p>