Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wesleyan should be in the top 10. It used to be and dropped down a bit when they changed their algorithm and because endowment not as massive as some other schools, but intellectually it's right up there with the the top schools. Just a hair below Amherst, Williams, and Swarthmore, and definitely above Carleton, Vassar, Davidson, Colby, etc.

Oberlin, too, is underrated. Should be in top 25 at least.

Why does it deserve to be ranked higher for poor endowment performance, especially compared to WASP?

I did say it's a hair below WASP. But if ranking is primarily meant to indicate quality of education and student body, Wesleyan delivers on these better than many of the schools it ranks alongside. Not top 5, I concede, but should be top 10. Of course, all of this is subjective, and this is just my opinion (based on firsthand and secondhand experience with quite a few SLACs).

Can you actually back up this statement? What does Wesleyan deliver academically that’s light years ahead of Vassar, W&L, Smith, Barnard, Hamilton, Grinnell, Davidson or Middlebury, which are the schools keeping it from top 10.

In my experience: More intellectually vibrant, creative, and interesting students; more academic freedom and choice, so it's easier to nurture multiple interests; a truer liberal arts education in the classic sense (vs. pre-professional feeling); a better sense of community. (Also, I never said "light years ahead." Just a bit ahead. A little higher. A little better. But they're all good schools.)

How? You aren't giving any actual resources/examples, just saying statements as if they're fact. How is an open curriculum a "truer liberal arts education"

Respectfully, I am not stating anything as fact. I've made it clear in my responses that this is my opinion, based on my experience. The question itself is inherently subjective, so no one can respond to it with anything other than an opinion. I was asked which colleges I thought were underrated, I thought about it for a bit, and I replied. I'm not sure why it's controversial to suggest that Wesleyan is underrated. It's a fabulous school. All the top slac's are, in fact, as I also said. As for "in my experience" - I have fairly deep experience at two different, highly rated private schools, so I'm thinking about which students we have sent where, as well as my friends who have had kids at some of these schools, and what I know of their experiences there. I've also toured most of them in the not-too-distant past. Hence my opinion is based on my experience of these schools, and when asked, I took time to explain why. If you don't like Wesleyan, then fair enough, but why not talk about the schools you do like rather than worry about what I think? Anyway, I stand by what I said: I think Wesleyan is underrated/under-ranked for what it offers relative to other similar schools, but they are all good.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wesleyan should be in the top 10. It used to be and dropped down a bit when they changed their algorithm and because endowment not as massive as some other schools, but intellectually it's right up there with the the top schools. Just a hair below Amherst, Williams, and Swarthmore, and definitely above Carleton, Vassar, Davidson, Colby, etc.

Oberlin, too, is underrated. Should be in top 25 at least.

Why does it deserve to be ranked higher for poor endowment performance, especially compared to WASP?

I did say it's a hair below WASP. But if ranking is primarily meant to indicate quality of education and student body, Wesleyan delivers on these better than many of the schools it ranks alongside. Not top 5, I concede, but should be top 10. Of course, all of this is subjective, and this is just my opinion (based on firsthand and secondhand experience with quite a few SLACs).

Can you actually back up this statement? What does Wesleyan deliver academically that’s light years ahead of Vassar, W&L, Smith, Barnard, Hamilton, Grinnell, Davidson or Middlebury, which are the schools keeping it from top 10.

In my experience: More intellectually vibrant, creative, and interesting students; more academic freedom and choice, so it's easier to nurture multiple interests; a truer liberal arts education in the classic sense (vs. pre-professional feeling); a better sense of community. (Also, I never said "light years ahead." Just a bit ahead. A little higher. A little better. But they're all good schools.)

How? You aren't giving any actual resources/examples, just saying statements as if they're fact. How is an open curriculum a "truer liberal arts education"

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?

Yes. My alma mater. Ranked too low, but Wes students could care less. They lnkw how special it is. That’s what’s great.

This is true of 50 or more LACs. Really it is dumb to rank them at all, and anyone who attended one knows it.

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?

Yes. My alma mater. Ranked too low, but Wes students could care less. They lnkw how special it is. That’s what’s great.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I do think that the focus of popular universities is moving west and south.

Nope. I have two arguments for you: Climate change and Roe v Wade overturned. Why would one want to send DCs to states with hurricanes, fires, rising temps and banned abortions?

Census data and college application increases disagree

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wesleyan should be in the top 10. It used to be and dropped down a bit when they changed their algorithm and because endowment not as massive as some other schools, but intellectually it's right up there with the the top schools. Just a hair below Amherst, Williams, and Swarthmore, and definitely above Carleton, Vassar, Davidson, Colby, etc.

Oberlin, too, is underrated. Should be in top 25 at least.

Why does it deserve to be ranked higher for poor endowment performance, especially compared to WASP?

I did say it's a hair below WASP. But if ranking is primarily meant to indicate quality of education and student body, Wesleyan delivers on these better than many of the schools it ranks alongside. Not top 5, I concede, but should be top 10. Of course, all of this is subjective, and this is just my opinion (based on firsthand and secondhand experience with quite a few SLACs).

Can you actually back up this statement? What does Wesleyan deliver academically that’s light years ahead of Vassar, W&L, Smith, Barnard, Hamilton, Grinnell, Davidson or Middlebury, which are the schools keeping it from top 10.

In my experience: More intellectually vibrant, creative, and interesting students; more academic freedom and choice, so it's easier to nurture multiple interests; a truer liberal arts education in the classic sense (vs. pre-professional feeling); a better sense of community. (Also, I never said "light years ahead." Just a bit ahead. A little higher. A little better. But they're all good schools.)

Anonymous wrote:Overranked: Pomona, Claremont McKenna, Swarthmore, Wesleyan, Smith, Bryn Mawr, Carleton, Bates, Vassar

Underranked: Sewanee, Furman, Trinity (CT), Trinity (TX), Denison, Reed, Rhodes, Wofford

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wesleyan should be in the top 10. It used to be and dropped down a bit when they changed their algorithm and because endowment not as massive as some other schools, but intellectually it's right up there with the the top schools. Just a hair below Amherst, Williams, and Swarthmore, and definitely above Carleton, Vassar, Davidson, Colby, etc.

Oberlin, too, is underrated. Should be in top 25 at least.

Why does it deserve to be ranked higher for poor endowment performance, especially compared to WASP?

I did say it's a hair below WASP. But if ranking is primarily meant to indicate quality of education and student body, Wesleyan delivers on these better than many of the schools it ranks alongside. Not top 5, I concede, but should be top 10. Of course, all of this is subjective, and this is just my opinion (based on firsthand and secondhand experience with quite a few SLACs).

Can you actually back up this statement? What does Wesleyan deliver academically that’s light years ahead of Vassar, W&L, Smith, Barnard, Hamilton, Grinnell, Davidson or Middlebury, which are the schools keeping it from top 10.

In my experience: More intellectually vibrant, creative, and interesting students; more academic freedom and choice, so it's easier to nurture multiple interests; a truer liberal arts education in the classic sense (vs. pre-professional feeling); a better sense of community. (Also, I never said "light years ahead." Just a bit ahead. A little higher. A little better. But they're all good schools.)

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wesleyan should be in the top 10. It used to be and dropped down a bit when they changed their algorithm and because endowment not as massive as some other schools, but intellectually it's right up there with the the top schools. Just a hair below Amherst, Williams, and Swarthmore, and definitely above Carleton, Vassar, Davidson, Colby, etc.

Oberlin, too, is underrated. Should be in top 25 at least.

Why does it deserve to be ranked higher for poor endowment performance, especially compared to WASP?

I did say it's a hair below WASP. But if ranking is primarily meant to indicate quality of education and student body, Wesleyan delivers on these better than many of the schools it ranks alongside. Not top 5, I concede, but should be top 10. Of course, all of this is subjective, and this is just my opinion (based on firsthand and secondhand experience with quite a few SLACs).

Can you actually back up this statement? What does Wesleyan deliver academically that’s light years ahead of Vassar, W&L, Smith, Barnard, Hamilton, Grinnell, Davidson or Middlebury, which are the schools keeping it from top 10.

In my experience: More intellectually vibrant, creative, and interesting students; more academic freedom and choice, so it's easier to nurture multiple interests; a truer liberal arts education in the classic sense (vs. pre-professional feeling); a better sense of community. (Also, I never said "light years ahead." Just a bit ahead. A little higher. A little better. But they're all good schools.)

Anonymous wrote: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:

Anonymous wrote:Wesleyan should be in the top 10. It used to be and dropped down a bit when they changed their algorithm and because endowment not as massive as some other schools, but intellectually it's right up there with the the top schools. Just a hair below Amherst, Williams, and Swarthmore, and definitely above Carleton, Vassar, Davidson, Colby, etc.

Oberlin, too, is underrated. Should be in top 25 at least.

Why does it deserve to be ranked higher for poor endowment performance, especially compared to WASP?

I did say it's a hair below WASP. But if ranking is primarily meant to indicate quality of education and student body, Wesleyan delivers on these better than many of the schools it ranks alongside. Not top 5, I concede, but should be top 10. Of course, all of this is subjective, and this is just my opinion (based on firsthand and secondhand experience with quite a few SLACs).

Can you actually back up this statement? What does Wesleyan deliver academically that’s light years ahead of Vassar, W&L, Smith, Barnard, Hamilton, Grinnell, Davidson or Middlebury, which are the schools keeping it from top 10.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wesleyan should be in the top 10. It used to be and dropped down a bit when they changed their algorithm and because endowment not as massive as some other schools, but intellectually it's right up there with the the top schools. Just a hair below Amherst, Williams, and Swarthmore, and definitely above Carleton, Vassar, Davidson, Colby, etc.

Oberlin, too, is underrated. Should be in top 25 at least.

Why does it deserve to be ranked higher for poor endowment performance, especially compared to WASP?

I did say it's a hair below WASP. But if ranking is primarily meant to indicate quality of education and student body, Wesleyan delivers on these better than many of the schools it ranks alongside. Not top 5, I concede, but should be top 10. Of course, all of this is subjective, and this is just my opinion (based on firsthand and secondhand experience with quite a few SLACs).

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wesleyan should be in the top 10. It used to be and dropped down a bit when they changed their algorithm and because endowment not as massive as some other schools, but intellectually it's right up there with the the top schools. Just a hair below Amherst, Williams, and Swarthmore, and definitely above Carleton, Vassar, Davidson, Colby, etc.

Oberlin, too, is underrated. Should be in top 25 at least.

Why does it deserve to be ranked higher for poor endowment performance, especially compared to WASP?

Anonymous wrote:Wesleyan should be in the top 10. It used to be and dropped down a bit when they changed their algorithm and because endowment not as massive as some other schools, but intellectually it's right up there with the the top schools. Just a hair below Amherst, Williams, and Swarthmore, and definitely above Carleton, Vassar, Davidson, Colby, etc.

Oberlin, too, is underrated. Should be in top 25 at least.