Anonymous wrote:Wesleyan seems pretty underrated. I went to Amherst 30+ years ago, and I felt Wesleyan was a near peer. What happened?

Exactly. Like Vassar, it was once a strong institution, among the very best LACs, but has deteriorated due to a lopsided culture that fails to attract a broad base of potential students and drives significant student dissatisfaction. It should probably be ranked even lower than it is. It is not underrated- it has declined.

Anonymous wrote:Reed is the most underrated (and intentionally so).

Sigh....Why is Reed 80,000 a year with no merit aid? Super sad to take it off the list.

Wesleyan seems pretty underrated. I went to Amherst 30+ years ago, and I felt Wesleyan was a near peer. What happened?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Vassar and Smith should be lower. Richmond perhaps as well. CMC is a little too close to the sun

Why? We were very impressed with Vassar.

I’m always surprised Vassar is not more popular. I don’t know what I am missing about it.

Vassar test scores are in line with peers and endowment is comparable but it is culturally and socially defective. Only a certain type of student is drawn to the school, which makes it one of the least intellectually diverse and vibrant colleges in America. As a result of this, Vassar struggles to attract male students esp heterosexual males. The student body lacks geographic diversity for the same reason- heavy tilt towards NY area. If you read through college confidential, there is an extraordinary amount of negativity coming from current and former students, specifically related to the drug culture, weird social scene, etc, while the school’s art programs are overhyped. The imbalanced campus culture has led to a reputational decline from its glory days as a Wellesley peer. Teaching quality is low due to heavy ideological bias. Poughkeepsie is universally regarded as dreadful while accessibility to NYC is overestimated from outside. While its proximity to the tristate area gives it access to high stat students, and the endowment is large enough to sustain good financial aid, it should probably be ranked more in line with Oberlin, which is also kept afloat by a large endowment despite a similarly imbalanced campus culture.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Vassar and Smith should be lower. Richmond perhaps as well. CMC is a little too close to the sun

Why? We were very impressed with Vassar.

I’m always surprised Vassar is not more popular. I don’t know what I am missing about it.

Anonymous wrote:Vassar and Smith should be lower. Richmond perhaps as well. CMC is a little too close to the sun

Why? We were very impressed with Vassar.

Vassar and Smith should be lower. Richmond perhaps as well. CMC is a little too close to the sun

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I love Davidson so I would (biasedly) say it’s ranked too low.

AGREED! Davidson rocks. I'm not an alum nor do I have a student there. But, I do know multiple kids that attend or have attended. Great results and really well-rounded, bright people.

I mean, yes it’s a good school but there aren’t many schools ranked above it that aren’t at least as good or better.

Based on what? there is extraordinarily little probability that you know anything about more than a very small number of those colleges other than vague notions of reputation. Enough with this underrated and overrated nonsense. All rankings of colleges as a whole are complete BS.

I have the same information available to me to allow me to have this opinion than you have to allow you to have another one.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I love Davidson so I would (biasedly) say it’s ranked too low.

AGREED! Davidson rocks. I'm not an alum nor do I have a student there. But, I do know multiple kids that attend or have attended. Great results and really well-rounded, bright people.

I mean, yes it’s a good school but there aren’t many schools ranked above it that aren’t at least as good or better.

Based on what? there is extraordinarily little probability that you know anything about more than a very small number of those colleges other than vague notions of reputation. Enough with this underrated and overrated nonsense. All rankings of colleges as a whole are complete BS.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I love Davidson so I would (biasedly) say it’s ranked too low.

AGREED! Davidson rocks. I'm not an alum nor do I have a student there. But, I do know multiple kids that attend or have attended. Great results and really well-rounded, bright people.

I mean, yes it’s a good school but there aren’t many schools ranked above it that aren’t at least as good or better.

Most of the lists are pretty consistent on the top 20. USNews/Forbes/WSJ. Maybe a few shifting around in the top 20 but that’s just splitting hairs. The top 20 are all great - chose the best fit.

Anonymous wrote:I love Davidson so I would (biasedly) say it’s ranked too low.

AGREED! Davidson rocks. I'm not an alum nor do I have a student there. But, I do know multiple kids that attend or have attended. Great results and really well-rounded, bright people.

I love Davidson so I would (biasedly) say it’s ranked too low.

Reed is the most underrated (and intentionally so).

Which LACs in the latest USNWR rankings are most over ranked and under ranked? (The one that is way too high on the list and the one that is way too low - just in terms of overall academic strength/quality/prestige etc)