I'm not a fan of one-size-fits-all rankings, but those who are can note:
Quote:
An even more extreme example is that of Reed College. Among academics Reed is known as a very strong college and one of the greatest producers of future PhD students in the country. When the US News ranking first came out in 1983, Reed was among the top 10 liberal arts colleges in the country. In 1995 Reed decided that it would no longer provide information to US News for the ranking issue. The result was that Reed was dropped in the rankings down to the 4th tier of colleges, the lowest tier published.
College Admissions Counseling|Resources|College Rankings |
Reed looks more attractive when its objective statistics are considered, as before 1995 with USNWR. Reed also looks better when a particular outcome is considered; Reed has been third or fourth (depending on years measured) in overall future PhD production percentage (behind CalTech, Mudd and sometimes Swarthmore), and the professors are thus teaching to a corresponding level. Many future-PhD students self-select to such schools, so there's a self-fulfilling prophecy effect, and thus a reputation for it. Schools like this are attractive to students with such interests, and so Reed attracts students with academic and research interests, and perhaps not so many with other interests.