Forbes 2025 ranking is out

[Anonymous]

Why is Colby so far below its peers nescacs?

[Anonymous]

Is there a reason Forbes always ranks Claremont McKenna ridiculously high every year?

[Anonymous]

Carnegie Mellon is practically a community college according to Forbes.

How utterly stupid.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:"No, Georgetown, Emory, WashU are permanent T25s. Some crazy choices Forbes ranked above them include
CMC
UCSD
Bowdoin
UF
USC"

Partly agree. "Permanent T25s" when slacs are not included. Ucsd & uf totally agree, crazy. Bowdoin, cmc & usc, arguable but not totally crazy.

You are clueless regarding UCSD and UF. USC, as well.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I took a look and really makes zero sense. It is getting to the point where rankings are worthless. I focus on acceptance rate and rate of employment or grad school after. Also rate of graduation in four years. You have to look at metrics important to your family. Pell grants not helpful to us so not something we would focus on or grad research if you are not at a school with grad school also wouldn’t be a fit for us but might be for others.

Seriously? Acceptance rate? That can be so easily manipulated with marketing to unqualified and naive students. (Hello, U Chicago!)

The actual demand in free market is way more real than random magazine. I would add yield rate and student caliber in that mix as acceptance rate alone doesn't show the whole picture.

who gives a shit about selectivity. just go ham on ED and early action. Useless. Student outcomes and debt are better metrics of outcomes which matter

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:UMD 41...$uck it ND (42), UT (46), NYU (49), Wisconsin (50) and BC (59)!

I laughed when I saw these too!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Is there a reason Forbes always ranks Claremont McKenna ridiculously high every year?

I’ve lived in LA. I think the academics are rigorous, and the town in cute, but good luck with getting a job afterwards. Odd.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:UF ahead of Michigan, UNC, and UVA. Go Gators!

Yeah!

Chomp, chomp!

Hilarious. My kids are all off to college and are doing well (so far) so I can laugh at this insanity. You want your kids to go to the best schools with less than 10-15 percent acceptance rates, with name recognition (not necessarily Ivy, esp now!), and good job outcomes in your kids’ chosen fields. Stick to the coasts, with a few exceptions, and avoid anywhere not near a city (and job pipelines).

Oh, and somewhere FUN. Where you don’t have to walk through protests to get to class. University of Chicago and Princeton, we’re all looking at you. There is a reason that smart kids are turning down Cornell for Clemson and the University of Georgia.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is there a reason Forbes always ranks Claremont McKenna ridiculously high every year?

I’ve lived in LA. I think the academics are rigorous, and the town in cute, but good luck with getting a job afterwards. Odd.

CMC grads had the highest average Econ salary post grad of any college in America last year. They get jobs and the K and R of KKR graduated there. It’s the most pre-professional school out there.

[Anonymous]

Pomona ranked far too low-Forbes had them at #1 at one point in 2012 or something. Should be in same echelon as Williams and Amherst and def same level as CMC if not higher. All of the Claremont colleges are amazing and the consortium is really unique and gives them an edge over many NESCAC’s and the Ivys.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I took a look and really makes zero sense. It is getting to the point where rankings are worthless. I focus on acceptance rate and rate of employment or grad school after. Also rate of graduation in four years. You have to look at metrics important to your family. Pell grants not helpful to us so not something we would focus on or grad research if you are not at a school with grad school also wouldn’t be a fit for us but might be for others.

Seriously? Acceptance rate? That can be so easily manipulated with marketing to unqualified and naive students. (Hello, U Chicago!)

The actual demand in free market is way more real than random magazine. I would add yield rate and student caliber in that mix as acceptance rate alone doesn't show the whole picture.

who gives a shit about selectivity. just go ham on ED and early action. Useless. Student outcomes and debt are better metrics of outcomes which matter

Agree outcome is one of the biggest parameter why schools would be in high demand.

When it comes to ranking, demand in the real word is the actual real ranking.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"No, Georgetown, Emory, WashU are permanent T25s. Some crazy choices Forbes ranked above them include
CMC
UCSD
Bowdoin
UF
USC"

Partly agree. "Permanent T25s" when slacs are not included. Ucsd & uf totally agree, crazy. Bowdoin, cmc & usc, arguable but not totally crazy.

You are clueless regarding UCSD and UF. USC, as well.

UCSD is a bunch of UCLA rejects who can’t cope. Perfectly respectable school, but #3 & 2nd tier in their own testblind for entry overrated public school system. No way they should be above Georgetown, Emory & WashU.

UF much better than most would think nowadays. Regionally strong rep & network. Top UF kids are underrated and would be competitive at most any top school. Good # of hardworking bright kids w/hi-stats who just didn’t get into ivies or Duke/Vanderbilt/Emory or decided to stay home due to Bright Futures. But end of day being a public school & having to accept kids from all across the state, hard to put above Georgetown, Emory & WashU.

USC, same tier as Georgetown, Emory & WashU. Hard for older folks who remember the old USC to comprehend.

[Anonymous]

Forbes is a far more respected publication than US news which stopped printing in 2010 due to being bad at reporting / commenting on the news.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"No, Georgetown, Emory, WashU are permanent T25s. Some crazy choices Forbes ranked above them include
CMC
UCSD
Bowdoin
UF
USC"

Partly agree. "Permanent T25s" when slacs are not included. Ucsd & uf totally agree, crazy. Bowdoin, cmc & usc, arguable but not totally crazy.

You are clueless regarding UCSD and UF. USC, as well.

UCSD is a bunch of UCLA rejects who can’t cope. Perfectly respectable school, but #3 & 2nd tier in their own testblind for entry overrated public school system. No way they should be above Georgetown, Emory & WashU.

UF much better than most would think nowadays. Regionally strong rep & network. Top UF kids are underrated and would be competitive at most any top school. Good # of hardworking bright kids w/hi-stats who just didn’t get into ivies or Duke/Vanderbilt/Emory or decided to stay home due to Bright Futures. But end of day being a public school & having to accept kids from all across the state, hard to put above Georgetown, Emory & WashU.

USC, same tier as Georgetown, Emory & WashU. Hard for older folks who remember the old USC to comprehend.

+100

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I took a look and really makes zero sense. It is getting to the point where rankings are worthless. I focus on acceptance rate and rate of employment or grad school after. Also rate of graduation in four years. You have to look at metrics important to your family. Pell grants not helpful to us so not something we would focus on or grad research if you are not at a school with grad school also wouldn’t be a fit for us but might be for others.

Seriously? Acceptance rate? That can be so easily manipulated with marketing to unqualified and naive students. (Hello, U Chicago!)

The actual demand in free market is way more real than random magazine. I would add yield rate and student caliber in that mix as acceptance rate alone doesn't show the whole picture.

who gives a shit about selectivity. just go ham on ED and early action. Useless. Student outcomes and debt are better metrics of outcomes which matter

But it gives insecure, neurotic parents something to obsess over, so there’s that.