Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Most go ed1 where yield is 100%

Students ED1 to a school because it is their number one choice. If anything, the more students ED, the more it shows how desirable a college is.

Tulane?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why is Middlebury's ranking so low? I would've thought it would be t10.

With or without the military academies, which have no place on a SLAC list (and they are also larger than SLACs)?
Anyhow, big drop off after WASP and Bowdoin.
After that drop off, Middlebury is in the next tier of 10 schools, which I really would not distinguish from each other, prestige-wise: Carleton, Wellesley, Wesleyan, Barnard, Davidson, W&L, Vassar, Harvey Mudd, and Claremont McKenna.

I would probably include these in the next tier: Smith, Hamilton, Haverford, Colgate, Colby, Bates etc.

Big drop off? Middlebury is better than Swarthmore and Pomona for finance outcomes, and Harvey Mudd is the best undergrad STEM school in the country. Claremont has some of the best all around outcomes, even better than WASP, and is ranked higher on the Forbes outcomes than all except Williams.

Just because you or someone you knew couldn’t get into these schools does not mean you should massively underrate them. Have a good day.

Even students at Claremont acknowledge Pomona’s superiority. You are also arguing that there is no WASP.



Good luck with all that!

A handful of Claremont students having some opinion on Pomona proves nothing. There are even more students who consistently complain at Pomona’s government, economics, literature, history, and international relations departments, as these departments wane in comparison to CMC. And unlike you, the rankings actually support my argument.

In reality, both CMC and Pomona, and for the STEM crowd, Harvey Mudd, are seen as the top dogs of the Claremonts. Any difference between them is negligible.

As for WASP, well that’s just an arbitrary acronym.

SWAMP, anyone? M for McKenna or Middlebury, whichever you prefer.

It is actually MAPS, there is no W. M is for Middlebury

What a BS. Why so much boost for Middlebury? Its at 19th sharing the rank with others. Here its at 40:

https://wallethub.com/edu/e/college-rankings/40750

All T25 LACs are good & elite, why unnecessary boost and parental ego trip. Your kid not even be bothered about the crapshit that you parents are writing here, rather they feel ashamed.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Absolutely one of the top 10.

Schools like Carleton Harvey Mudd are largely irrelevant but ranked higher.

+1. I live in NYC and work on Wall Street. I have had multiple colleagues / managers from Middlebury but only hear about the colleges you mentioned on this thread.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why is Middlebury's ranking so low? I would've thought it would be t10.

With or without the military academies, which have no place on a SLAC list (and they are also larger than SLACs)?
Anyhow, big drop off after WASP and Bowdoin.
After that drop off, Middlebury is in the next tier of 10 schools, which I really would not distinguish from each other, prestige-wise: Carleton, Wellesley, Wesleyan, Barnard, Davidson, W&L, Vassar, Harvey Mudd, and Claremont McKenna.

I would probably include these in the next tier: Smith, Hamilton, Haverford, Colgate, Colby, Bates etc.

Big drop off? Middlebury is better than Swarthmore and Pomona for finance outcomes, and Harvey Mudd is the best undergrad STEM school in the country. Claremont has some of the best all around outcomes, even better than WASP, and is ranked higher on the Forbes outcomes than all except Williams.

Just because you or someone you knew couldn’t get into these schools does not mean you should massively underrate them. Have a good day.

Even students at Claremont acknowledge Pomona’s superiority. You are also arguing that there is no WASP.



Good luck with all that!

A handful of Claremont students having some opinion on Pomona proves nothing. There are even more students who consistently complain at Pomona’s government, economics, literature, history, and international relations departments, as these departments wane in comparison to CMC. And unlike you, the rankings actually support my argument.

In reality, both CMC and Pomona, and for the STEM crowd, Harvey Mudd, are seen as the top dogs of the Claremonts. Any difference between them is negligible.

As for WASP, well that’s just an arbitrary acronym.

SWAMP, anyone? M for McKenna or Middlebury, whichever you prefer.

It is actually MAPS, there is no W. M is for Middlebury

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why is Middlebury's ranking so low? I would've thought it would be t10.

With or without the military academies, which have no place on a SLAC list (and they are also larger than SLACs)?
Anyhow, big drop off after WASP and Bowdoin.
After that drop off, Middlebury is in the next tier of 10 schools, which I really would not distinguish from each other, prestige-wise: Carleton, Wellesley, Wesleyan, Barnard, Davidson, W&L, Vassar, Harvey Mudd, and Claremont McKenna.

I would probably include these in the next tier: Smith, Hamilton, Haverford, Colgate, Colby, Bates etc.

Big drop off? Middlebury is better than Swarthmore and Pomona for finance outcomes, and Harvey Mudd is the best undergrad STEM school in the country. Claremont has some of the best all around outcomes, even better than WASP, and is ranked higher on the Forbes outcomes than all except Williams.

Just because you or someone you knew couldn’t get into these schools does not mean you should massively underrate them. Have a good day.

Even students at Claremont acknowledge Pomona’s superiority. You are also arguing that there is no WASP.



Good luck with all that!

A handful of Claremont students having some opinion on Pomona proves nothing. There are even more students who consistently complain at Pomona’s government, economics, literature, history, and international relations departments, as these departments wane in comparison to CMC. And unlike you, the rankings actually support my argument.

In reality, both CMC and Pomona, and for the STEM crowd, Harvey Mudd, are seen as the top dogs of the Claremonts. Any difference between them is negligible.

As for WASP, well that’s just an arbitrary acronym.

SWAMP, anyone? M for McKenna or Middlebury, whichever you prefer.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Most go ed1 where yield is 100%

Students ED1 to a school because it is their number one choice. If anything, the more students ED, the more it shows how desirable a college is.

Anonymous wrote:Most go ed1 where yield is 100%

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Middlebury name recognition in the NYC and Boston area is ridiculous, super strong alumni network. “Middlebury Mafia” on Wall Street.

This. I’m a 50-something Midd grad with a masters and can’t tell you how many people in New England still remark on my having gone to Midd.

Anonymous wrote:Middlebury name recognition in the NYC and Boston area is ridiculous, super strong alumni network. “Middlebury Mafia” on Wall Street.

Anonymous wrote:Absolutely one of the top 10.

Schools like Carleton Harvey Mudd are largely irrelevant but ranked higher.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Top tier: SWAP+Bowdoin + Wellesley

Next tier includes Middlebury, Varsar, Hamilton, Carleton, CMC

So wrong. Claremont McKenna is first tier, and significantly better than Swarthmore and Bowdoin in outcomes, and Middlebury is not far behind either.

Vassar is around third tier.

Rankings aren't just about finance career outcomes; it’s overall excellence, which is something CMC struggles with.

Nonsense, CMC is an outstanding school. This type of crap is just annoying.

Middlebury parent.

If you really want to get down into the details of the “next 10 tier,” after the top 5 of WASP and Bowdoin, there is no question that Harvey Mudd and CMC — and several other schools— are ahead of Middlebury.

As a parent, you should be more concerned about Middlebury staying in that “next 10” than proclaiming about CMC’s status there, which — unlike Midd — is very secure. With Middlebury’s perpetual “over enrollment,” the permanent decline in study abroad, and Midd’s now taking 70% of its class ED, it is quickly headed in the direction of Bates and Colby. Not good.

The HMC troll once again proves themselves to be a clueless idiot. Your incessant shilling for HMC and denigrating CMC is tiring. I'm not worried about Midds position in the rankings. Nor am I impressed by HMC.

Anonymous wrote:

Claremont is as excellent as they come, and its higher yield rate than Williams, Amherst, Swarthmore, and Bowdoin show that. In SAT scores, graduation rates, salaries, grad school rates, retention rates, Claremont excels and probably does better than your school.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why is Middlebury's ranking so low? I would've thought it would be t10.

With or without the military academies, which have no place on a SLAC list (and they are also larger than SLACs)?
Anyhow, big drop off after WASP and Bowdoin.
After that drop off, Middlebury is in the next tier of 10 schools, which I really would not distinguish from each other, prestige-wise: Carleton, Wellesley, Wesleyan, Barnard, Davidson, W&L, Vassar, Harvey Mudd, and Claremont McKenna.

I would probably include these in the next tier: Smith, Hamilton, Haverford, Colgate, Colby, Bates etc.

Big drop off? Middlebury is better than Swarthmore and Pomona for finance outcomes, and Harvey Mudd is the best undergrad STEM school in the country. Claremont has some of the best all around outcomes, even better than WASP, and is ranked higher on the Forbes outcomes than all except Williams.

Just because you or someone you knew couldn’t get into these schools does not mean you should massively underrate them. Have a good day.

Even students at Claremont acknowledge Pomona’s superiority. You are also arguing that there is no WASP.

Good luck with all that!