Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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

.

These two rankings, in particular, tend to substantiate each other, in that Middlebury's U.S. News category ranking of #19 roughly doubles to #40 in the WalletHub site, in which colleges and universities are included together.

Where's Williams? Bowdoin?

The site notes that, "Some institutions were excluded from our sample due to data limitations."

Makes no sense why these wouldn't have the info for schools like Williams and Bowdoin. Very suspect.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Since this thread is about Middlebury's ranking, here's a summary of where Midd has ranked in USNews over since inception:

2025: 19
2024: 11
2023: 11
2022: 9
2021: 9
2020: 7
2019: 5
2018: 6
2017: 4
2016: 4
2015: 7
2014: 4
2013: 4
2012: 5
2011: 4
2010: 4
2009: 5
2008: 5
2007: 5
2006: 8
2005: 11
2004: 7
2003: 7
2002: 9
2001: 6
2000: 5
1999: 7
1998: 8
1997: 7
1996: 7
1995: 11
1994: 8
1993: 8
1992: 9
1991: 8
1990: 12
1989: 14
1988: 17
1986: Not ranked
1984: Not ranked

Can you do Bowdoin?

Here's Bowdoin:

2025: 5
2024: 9
2023: 6
2022: 6
2021: 6
2020: 6
2019: 5
2018: 3
2017: 6
2016: 4
2015: 5
2014: 4
2013: 6
2012: 6
2011: 6
2010: 6
2009: 6
2008: 7
2007: 7
2006: 6
2005: 7
2004: 10
2003: 7
2002: 5
2001: 6
2000: 9
1999: 7
1998: 8
1997: 8
1996: 4
1995: 6
1994: 6
1993: 6
1992: 4
1991: 4
1990: 13
1989: 9
1988: 12
1986: 10
1984: Not ranked

Anonymous wrote:Since this thread is about Middlebury's ranking, here's a summary of where Midd has ranked in USNews over since inception:

2025: 19
2024: 11
2023: 11
2022: 9
2021: 9
2020: 7
2019: 5
2018: 6
2017: 4
2016: 4
2015: 7
2014: 4
2013: 4
2012: 5
2011: 4
2010: 4
2009: 5
2008: 5
2007: 5
2006: 8
2005: 11
2004: 7
2003: 7
2002: 9
2001: 6
2000: 5
1999: 7
1998: 8
1997: 7
1996: 7
1995: 11
1994: 8
1993: 8
1992: 9
1991: 8
1990: 12
1989: 14
1988: 17
1986: Not ranked
1984: Not ranked

Midd doesn't have the endowment of some other schools thus doesn't offer the robust FA of a Williams, etc. And this impacts rankings in the latest US News methodology.

For me, a UMC family with an HHI of about 200k but full pay due to parents/in laws inheritance hitting in a short span of time. These are in unprotected accounts (ie our retirement accounts aren't great, but our brokerage accounts have more because we can only shift so much per year).

Long story short, we're full pay but not rich. And there are schools where we tour that feel a little shabby. The presentation leans into it: "we may not have the best food, or the best gym because we prioritize FA .. and half our kids attend for zero dollars". The tour guides say, "Nobody pays for anything! the school has our back!" And for us, looking around the shabby labs, I think ,sure if this was zero dollars, I'd love it. But it's not.

So there are a few places like Midd where I think, well shoot, it's lovely and these kids have parents with connections. And doesn't that matter? My kids have gone to NYC public schools. We live in an apartment building with all kinds of families. I appreciate kids learn a lot from new voices, but .. these voices aren't new to my kids, at all. So why are we the only sucker in the school, in the shabby classrooms, eating crap food, and paying full price.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

remark how?

Along the lines of “oh, you went to Middlebury? That’s a great school” or, “Middlebury? that’s hard to get in to.” Also, for a smaller school, LOTS of Midd grads (and other NE SLAC) grads in New England. My education was good & the name recognition & alumni network has helped. But not sure if more than for other schools. MANY from my class and year above / below have kids going … almost all ED.

Not anymore. It is a relatively easy admit ED these days, as you should well know. Of course all these kids got in ED; everyone does nowadays.

Are you really starting this nonsense first thing in the morning. Middlebury is fortunate that your kid didn't get in.

Anonymous wrote:Since this thread is about Middlebury's ranking, here's a summary of where Midd has ranked in USNews over since inception:

2025: 19
2024: 11
2023: 11
2022: 9
2021: 9
2020: 7
2019: 5
2018: 6
2017: 4
2016: 4
2015: 7
2014: 4
2013: 4
2012: 5
2011: 4
2010: 4
2009: 5
2008: 5
2007: 5
2006: 8
2005: 11
2004: 7
2003: 7
2002: 9
2001: 6
2000: 5
1999: 7
1998: 8
1997: 7
1996: 7
1995: 11
1994: 8
1993: 8
1992: 9
1991: 8
1990: 12
1989: 14
1988: 17
1986: Not ranked
1984: Not ranked

Can you do Bowdoin?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

remark how?

Along the lines of “oh, you went to Middlebury? That’s a great school” or, “Middlebury? that’s hard to get in to.” Also, for a smaller school, LOTS of Midd grads (and other NE SLAC) grads in New England. My education was good & the name recognition & alumni network has helped. But not sure if more than for other schools. MANY from my class and year above / below have kids going … almost all ED.

Not anymore. It is a relatively easy admit ED these days, as you should well know. Of course all these kids got in ED; everyone does nowadays.

ridiculous.

Since this thread is about Middlebury's ranking, here's a summary of where Midd has ranked in USNews over since inception:

2025: 19
2024: 11
2023: 11
2022: 9
2021: 9
2020: 7
2019: 5
2018: 6
2017: 4
2016: 4
2015: 7
2014: 4
2013: 4
2012: 5
2011: 4
2010: 4
2009: 5
2008: 5
2007: 5
2006: 8
2005: 11
2004: 7
2003: 7
2002: 9
2001: 6
2000: 5
1999: 7
1998: 8
1997: 7
1996: 7
1995: 11
1994: 8
1993: 8
1992: 9
1991: 8
1990: 12
1989: 14
1988: 17
1986: Not ranked
1984: Not ranked

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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

.

These two rankings, in particular, tend to substantiate each other, in that Middlebury's U.S. News category ranking of #19 roughly doubles to #40 in the WalletHub site, in which colleges and universities are included together.

Where's Williams? Bowdoin?

The site notes that, "Some institutions were excluded from our sample due to data limitations."

Anonymous wrote:

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

.

These two rankings, in particular, tend to substantiate each other, in that Middlebury's U.S. News category ranking of #19 roughly doubles to #40 in the WalletHub site, in which colleges and universities are included together.

Where's Williams? Bowdoin?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

remark how?

Along the lines of “oh, you went to Middlebury? That’s a great school” or, “Middlebury? that’s hard to get in to.” Also, for a smaller school, LOTS of Midd grads (and other NE SLAC) grads in New England. My education was good & the name recognition & alumni network has helped. But not sure if more than for other schools. MANY from my class and year above / below have kids going … almost all ED.

Not anymore. It is a relatively easy admit ED these days, as you should well know. Of course all these kids got in ED; everyone does nowadays.

I think all the Midd boosters on this thread are ridiculous, but your statement is also ridiculous. Middlebury is indeed a hard admit, perhaps less so if you're an athlete going ED1. I'm looking at Naviance for DS's NYC area private, and very few get in ED (most with 1500+ SATs, a few athletes with 1400s). In RD, only 5 out of 45 have been accepted in the last five years, all with very high GPAs.

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

.

These two rankings, in particular, tend to substantiate each other, in that Middlebury's U.S. News category ranking of #19 roughly doubles to #40 in the WalletHub site, in which colleges and universities are included together.

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. My kids was recruited by CMS and turned them down. As part of the process they were asked which school they preferred; Mudd didn't make the list even though the kid was offered by MIT as well. Kids go where they feel fit and your nonsensical ramblings aren't going to change anything.

You are responding to a poster putting both Harvey Mudd and Claremont McKenna in the second tier of 10 liberal arts schools, following the significant drop off from the top 5 (WASP+Bowdoin). Learn how to read.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

remark how?

Along the lines of “oh, you went to Middlebury? That’s a great school” or, “Middlebury? that’s hard to get in to.” Also, for a smaller school, LOTS of Midd grads (and other NE SLAC) grads in New England. My education was good & the name recognition & alumni network has helped. But not sure if more than for other schools. MANY from my class and year above / below have kids going … almost all ED.

Not anymore. It is a relatively easy admit ED these days, as you should well know. Of course all these kids got in ED; everyone does nowadays.

Wallet hub and niche are both poor lists.

Not sure any list is good.

Maybe number of applications?

Anonymous wrote:

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.

remark how?

Along the lines of “oh, you went to Middlebury? That’s a great school” or, “Middlebury? that’s hard to get in to.” Also, for a smaller school, LOTS of Midd grads (and other NE SLAC) grads in New England. My education was good & the name recognition & alumni network has helped. But not sure if more than for other schools. MANY from my class and year above / below have kids going … almost all ED.