Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

But I don’t have any opinion on the rankings if colleges other than that they are far too complex and subjective to be susceptible to any sort of objective ranking. I’ve supported my opinion. Now tell me how you would evaluate that Davidson is better or worse than Haverford or Vassar or Wesleyan or W&L or Hamilton or Claremont, other than vague notions of “weather” or “because USNWR says so”

Davidson is a nice school but FWIW its average test scores lag all of the above (not a lot but noticeably). Check out the CDS.

This is because of the scores of Division 1 athletes.

Are D1 recruits more or less likely to report scores now?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

But I don’t have any opinion on the rankings if colleges other than that they are far too complex and subjective to be susceptible to any sort of objective ranking. I’ve supported my opinion. Now tell me how you would evaluate that Davidson is better or worse than Haverford or Vassar or Wesleyan or W&L or Hamilton or Claremont, other than vague notions of “weather” or “because USNWR says so”

Davidson is a nice school but FWIW its average test scores lag all of the above (not a lot but noticeably). Check out the CDS.

This is because of the scores of Division 1 athletes.

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Because it's well known to very wealthy people, including internationally. But the intellectual variety, and not the ostentatious trappings of wealth variety, at least for the four years.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

But I don’t have any opinion on the rankings if colleges other than that they are far too complex and subjective to be susceptible to any sort of objective ranking. I’ve supported my opinion. Now tell me how you would evaluate that Davidson is better or worse than Haverford or Vassar or Wesleyan or W&L or Hamilton or Claremont, other than vague notions of “weather” or “because USNWR says so”

Davidson is a nice school but FWIW its average test scores lag all of the above (not a lot but noticeably). Check out the CDS.

Anonymous wrote:

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.

But I don’t have any opinion on the rankings if colleges other than that they are far too complex and subjective to be susceptible to any sort of objective ranking. I’ve supported my opinion. Now tell me how you would evaluate that Davidson is better or worse than Haverford or Vassar or Wesleyan or W&L or Hamilton or Claremont, other than vague notions of “weather” or “because USNWR says so”

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

The kids that I know at Wesleyan seem pretty happy. Smart athletes for the most part. Do people really consider Washington & Lee or Middlebury to be better? That would not have been the case 30 years ago.

I think the vast majority of students today would choose Midd over Wesleyan. W&L is a different animal and in some ways diametrically opposite Wesleyan culturally. 10 pct of W&L also gets a full ride via Johnson Scholar - that is a tough offer to turn down.

If you ranked the top 30/40 schools by standardized test score profile (taking into account SAT, ACT and very importantly percentage of students who submit, because if only 25 percent submit, the average scores are inflated)… you would get a list that is similar to USNWR but with some notable differences too. Frankly I think the list you would get would be a better reflection of academic strength than USNWR.

Anonymous wrote:

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.

The kids that I know at Wesleyan seem pretty happy. Smart athletes for the most part. Do people really consider Washington & Lee or Middlebury to be better? That would not have been the case 30 years ago.

Anonymous wrote:Always funny to see conservatives freak out about Oberlin, Wesleyan, Vassar, and Brown because of reputations forged from the 60s to 80s when the reality is that today they are very middle of the road institutions

Lol. Middle of the road - when students are only allowed a single perspective on all matters.

Vassar geographic concentration really bad. Only draws narrow minded activist type kids from NY, CA, NJ, MA. Those 4 states are 60% of domestic student body.

overrated - Colby and Richmond; to a lesser extent, Bowdoin

underrated - Haverford, Macalester and Wesleyan

Always funny to see conservatives freak out about Oberlin, Wesleyan, Vassar, and Brown because of reputations forged from the 60s to 80s when the reality is that today they are very middle of the road institutions

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Your kid dodged a bullet. Lots of drugs at Reed. Lots of mental health problems, too.

Drugs very prevalent at Vassar and Wesleyan as well

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Because they do what most good SLAC, ivies & other good schools do and funnel money to financial aid. It’s tough for families that don’t qualify for aid but can’t afford the typical tuition for good schools.

As a result the school consists of rich kids and poor kids - so much for diversity

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Your kid dodged a bullet. Lots of drugs at Reed. Lots of mental health problems, too.

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Because they do what most good SLAC, ivies & other good schools do and funnel money to financial aid. It’s tough for families that don’t qualify for aid but can’t afford the typical tuition for good schools.