Ranking decline from 2024 to 2025

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:When people look at rankings, do they look to see if the criteria are things that are important to them? Or, do they just care that the schools are perceived as prestigious and that’s all that matters?

This part.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:By DEI some posters apparently mean USNWR adding 5% more weight to Pell grant recipient grad rates. About 1/3 of all students receive Pell grants. They’re a formal of financial aid based on income, not race. It’s misleading to refer to it as “DEI.” It would be like referring to colleges giving financial aid based on income as DEI.

The bigger change was probably that the financial resources calculation switched to only looking at academic spending. Their financial resources tank subsequently went from 4th to 45th.

Their student to faculty ratio also went up, which also hurt their overall score.

Middlebury has a lot to offer but it’s disinformation from boosters that the drop was due to DEI.

The problem is that the new rankings ding private universities that give exceptionally good financial aid. All US News cares about is federal Pell grants, a measurement specifically used to boost public schools that don’t give great need based aid. If private school A gives great aid then the student doesn’t need a Pell grant. But school A then gets punished for it.

Then add the factors that US News took out of its algorithm - class size, years to graduate, alumni donations - and its clear that the rankings are no longer particularly insightful when it comes to measuring “best colleges.”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:By DEI some posters apparently mean USNWR adding 5% more weight to Pell grant recipient grad rates. About 1/3 of all students receive Pell grants. They’re a formal of financial aid based on income, not race. It’s misleading to refer to it as “DEI.” It would be like referring to colleges giving financial aid based on income as DEI.

The bigger change was probably that the financial resources calculation switched to only looking at academic spending. Their financial resources tank subsequently went from 4th to 45th.

Their student to faculty ratio also went up, which also hurt their overall score.

Middlebury has a lot to offer but it’s disinformation from boosters that the drop was due to DEI.

The problem is that the new rankings ding private universities that give exceptionally good financial aid. All US News cares about is federal Pell grants, a measurement specifically used to boost public schools that don’t give great need based aid. If private school A gives great aid then the student doesn’t need a Pell grant. But school A then gets punished for it.

Then add the factors that US News took out of its algorithm - class size, years to graduate, alumni donations - and its clear that the rankings are no longer particularly insightful when it comes to measuring “best colleges.”

The private would include the Pell Grant, and then give grant aid for whatever the Pell doesn't cover.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:By DEI some posters apparently mean USNWR adding 5% more weight to Pell grant recipient grad rates. About 1/3 of all students receive Pell grants. They’re a formal of financial aid based on income, not race. It’s misleading to refer to it as “DEI.” It would be like referring to colleges giving financial aid based on income as DEI.

The bigger change was probably that the financial resources calculation switched to only looking at academic spending. Their financial resources tank subsequently went from 4th to 45th.

Their student to faculty ratio also went up, which also hurt their overall score.

Middlebury has a lot to offer but it’s disinformation from boosters that the drop was due to DEI.

The problem is that the new rankings ding private universities that give exceptionally good financial aid. All US News cares about is federal Pell grants, a measurement specifically used to boost public schools that don’t give great need based aid. If private school A gives great aid then the student doesn’t need a Pell grant. But school A then gets punished for it.

Then add the factors that US News took out of its algorithm - class size, years to graduate, alumni donations - and its clear that the rankings are no longer particularly insightful when it comes to measuring “best colleges.”

Note only three LACs ranked above Middlebury are public. If the service academies are removed, Middlebury would be 16th.

There is no DEI measure used by US News if the common interpretation of racial equity is used. There is however a "Social Mobility" metric that pertains to graduation rates/performance for students from low income families.

The first year where US News computed a Social Mobility rank was 2020. That year Middlebury had an overall rank of 7th, a Social Mobility Rank of 185th weighted at 5%, a Financial Resources rank of 4th weighted at 8%, and a student/faculty ratio of 8/1 weighted at 8%.

In 2025, Middlebury ranked 19th overall with a Social Mobility rank of 120th weighted at 11%, a Financial Resources rank of 45th weighted at 8%, and a student/faculty ratio of 9/1 weighted at 8%.

Yes, alumni giving rate was weighted at 5% in 2020 and is not used in 2025. However, in 2020 there were 15 LACs with higher giving rates, so dropping that measure likely benefitted Middlebury.

Why did Middlebury's Financial Resources rank drop so much, and when did that happen? In 2024, a year where it was in a five way tie for 11th overall, its Financial Resources was ranked 5th, so it dropped 40 spots in one year. Here's the US News explanation for how that metric was calculated differently for 2025: "In previous editions, U.S. News compared expenditures to fall enrollment. A full academic year was used starting with this edition because expenditures reflect a full year; therefore the full-time and part-time enrollment should also reflect a full year." In other words, the denominator (number of students) was off in previous years; it was not that what counted towards the numerator (academic spending) that changed. While many schools saw changes in their Financial Resources rank, Middlebury was the only school in the 2024 top 15 overall whose Financial Resources rank dropped by more than 8 spots.

It appears the first year Social Mobility was bumped from 5% to 11% was 2024; again, Middlebury ranked 11th that year.

Schools that have great aid are not punished when their students receive Pell grants. Federal aid can be combined with the college's own. If anything, it helps students at schools with good financial aid graduate with less federal debt, which is weighted at 5%.

Middlebury is a great school and all rankings are inherently flawed. But it is misleading to say its drop is due to DEI. Some of its drop is due to Social Mobility, which isn't synonymous with DEI, being weighted more (11%). But it appears more of its drop (16% of total weight) was due to how enrollment was measured, affecting both academic spending per student and faculty per student. Perhaps other schools will see similar adjustments to their enrollment calculations in the future.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:By DEI some posters apparently mean USNWR adding 5% more weight to Pell grant recipient grad rates. About 1/3 of all students receive Pell grants. They’re a formal of financial aid based on income, not race. It’s misleading to refer to it as “DEI.” It would be like referring to colleges giving financial aid based on income as DEI.

The bigger change was probably that the financial resources calculation switched to only looking at academic spending. Their financial resources tank subsequently went from 4th to 45th.

Their student to faculty ratio also went up, which also hurt their overall score.

Middlebury has a lot to offer but it’s disinformation from boosters that the drop was due to DEI.

The problem is that the new rankings ding private universities that give exceptionally good financial aid. All US News cares about is federal Pell grants, a measurement specifically used to boost public schools that don’t give great need based aid. If private school A gives great aid then the student doesn’t need a Pell grant. But school A then gets punished for it.

Then add the factors that US News took out of its algorithm - class size, years to graduate, alumni donations - and its clear that the rankings are no longer particularly insightful when it comes to measuring “best colleges.”

Yes, alumni giving rate was weighted at 5% in 2020 and is not used in 2025. However, in 2020 there were 15 LACs with higher giving rates, so dropping that measure likely benefitted Middlebury.

"Benefitted" relative to their 2020 rank, that is. Relative to the current rank it's probably a wash, at least as far as the private LACs are concerned.

[jsteele]

https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/1263465.page