hawkette

Peer Assessment scoring is by far the most controversial element of the USNWR rankings. I did a quick check of the differences in Overall USNWR rank and PA rank and found there to be some enormous gaps. The full list for national universities is found below.

I have also noted with *** those colleges that were recognized by USNWR as the best for CLASSROOM TEACHING EXCELLENCE. For what a student will actually experience while on a college campus, this is arguably the most important factor as it relates to faculty strength. The great majority of those scoring highly in this area had PA scores that were at a deficit (sometimes a very significant deficit) to their overall USNWR ranks.

Difference Between USNWR Rank and PA Rank , USNWR Rank , PA , PA Rank , School


57 , 124 , 3.3 , 67 , Arizona State
53 , 96 , 3.6 , 43 , U Arizona
45 , 112 , 3.3 , 67 , U Oregon
37 , 118 , 3.1 , 81 , U Buffalo
36 , 75 , 3.7 , 39 , Indiana U
32 , 71 , 3.7 , 39 , U Minnesota
31 , 122 , 3 , 91 , U Kentucky
30 , 64 , 3.8 , 34 , Purdue
29 , 96 , 3.3 , 67 , U Mass
27 , 79 , 3.5 , 52 , U Colorado
27 , 118 , 3 , 91 , Washington State
26 , 85 , 3.4 , 59 , U Kansas
24 , 91 , 3.3 , 67 , U Missouri
23 , 96 , 3.2 , 73 , SUNY-Stony Brook
23 , 124 , 2.9 , 101 , Colorado State
23 , 124 , 2.9 , 101 , Kansas State
22 , 44 , 4.1 , 22 , U Texas
21 , 64 , 3.6 , 43 , U Iowa
21 , 112 , 3 , 91 , Ohio Univ
21 , 112 , 3 , 91 , Florida State
19 , 62 , 3.6 , 43 , Texas A&M
19 , 71 , 3.5 , 52 , Michigan State
18 , 57 , 3.7 , 39 , Ohio State
18 , 91 , 3.2 , 73 , U Nebraska
17 , 108 , 3 , 91 , U Oklahoma
16 , 21 , 4.8 , 5 , UC Berkeley
16 , 38 , 4.1 , 22 , U Wisconsin
15 , 96 , 3.1 , 81 , Auburn
15 , 96 , 3.1 , 81 , U Tennessee
15 , 96 , 3.1 , 81 , UC Riverside
14 , 48 , 3.8 , 34 , Penn State
13 , 25 , 4.5 , 12 , U Michigan
13 , 38 , 4 , 25 , U Illinois
12 , 71 , 3.4 , 59 , Virginia Tech
12 , 85 , 3.2 , 73 , Iowa State
12 , 124 , 2.8 , 112 , U Arkansas
11 , 54 , 3.6 , 43 , U Maryland
11 , 112 , 2.9 , 101 , U South Carolina
11 , 112 , 2.9 , 101 , Loyola U (Chi)
10 , 35 , 4 , 25 , Georgia Tech
10 , 42 , 3.9 , 32 , U Washington
10 , 122 , 2.8 , 112 , Catholic U
9 , 28 , 4.2 , 19 , U North Carolina***
8 , 42 , 3.8 , 34 , UC Davis
7 , 23 , 4.3 , 16 , U Virginia***
7 , 59 , 3.5 , 52 , U Georgia
7 , 108 , 2.9 , 101 , U New Hampshire
7 , 108 , 2.9 , 101 , Drexel
6 , 7 , 4.9 , 1 , MIT
6 , 14 , 4.6 , 8 , Johns Hopkins
6 , 25 , 4.2 , 19 , UCLA
6 , 49 , 3.6 , 43 , U Florida
6 , 79 , 3.2 , 73 , UC Santa Cruz***
6 , 124 , 2.7 , 118 , Michigan Tech
5 , 96 , 3 , 91 , U Vermont
5 , 96 , 3 , 91 , Northeastern
4 , 12 , 4.6 , 8 , Cornell
4 , 38 , 3.8 , 34 , UCSD
4 , 85 , 3.1 , 81 , NC State
3 , 4 , 4.9 , 1 , Stanford***
3 , 22 , 4.2 , 19 , Carnegie Mellon
2 , 27 , 4 , 25 , USC
2 , 75 , 3.2 , 73 , Baylor
1 , 2 , 4.9 , 1 , Harvard***
1 , 9 , 4.6 , 8 , Columbia
1 , 9 , 4.6 , 8 , U Chicago***
1 , 44 , 3.6 , 43 , UC Irvine
0 , 1 , 4.9 , 1 , Princeton***
0 , 14 , 4.4 , 14 , Brown***
0 , 34 , 3.8 , 34 , NYU
0 , 59 , 3.4 , 59 , Rutgers
0 , 59 , 3.4 , 59 , U Pittsburgh
0 , 67 , 3.3 , 67 , Miami U (OH)***
0 , 91 , 3 , 91 , U Alabama
0 , 118 , 2.7 , 118 , U Missouri (Rolla)
-1 , 124 , 2.6 , 125 , NJ Tech
-1 , 124 , 2.6 , 125 , Clarkson
-2 , 3 , 4.8 , 5 , Yale***
-2 , 5 , 4.7 , 7 , Caltech***
-2 , 14 , 4.3 , 16 , Northwestern***
-2 , 23 , 4 , 25 , Georgetown***
-2 , 57 , 3.4 , 59 , Boston University
-5 , 11 , 4.3 , 16 , Dartmouth***
-5 , 54 , 3.4 , 59 , George Washington
-5 , 96 , 2.9 , 101 , Howard
-6 , 8 , 4.4 , 14 , Duke***
-6 , 19 , 4 , 25 , Vanderbilt***
-6 , 33 , 3.7 , 39 , W&M***
-6 , 75 , 3.1 , 81 , Colorado Sch of Mines
-7 , 5 , 4.5 , 12 , U Penn
-8 , 17 , 4 , 25 , Rice***
-8 , 17 , 4 , 25 , Emory***
-8 , 35 , 3.6 , 43 , Boston Coll***
-8 , 44 , 3.5 , 52 , Rensselaer
-8 , 44 , 3.5 , 52 , UC Santa Barbara
-9 , 50 , 3.4 , 59 , Syracuse
-9 , 64 , 3.2 , 73 , U Connecticut
-9 , 82 , 3 , 91 , SUNY-Bing
-10 , 12 , 4.1 , 22 , Wash U***
-10 , 71 , 3.1 , 81 , U Delaware
-10 , 108 , 2.7 , 118 , Texas Christian
-11 , 41 , 3.5 , 52 , Case Western
-11 , 107 , 2.7 , 118 , U San Diego
-11 , 118 , 2.5 , 129 , Samford
-12 , 31 , 3.6 , 43 , Brandeis
-13 , 19 , 3.9 , 32 , Notre Dame***
-14 , 67 , 3.1 , 81 , Clemson
-14 , 67 , 3.1 , 81 , SMU
-15 , 28 , 3.6 , 43 , Tufts***
-16 , 85 , 2.9 , 101 , American U
-16 , 96 , 2.8 , 112 , Illinois Tech
-17 , 50 , 3.3 , 67 , Tulane
-17 , 112 , 2.5 , 129 , U Dayton
-19 , 82 , 2.9 , 101 , St. Louis Univ
-19 , 82 , 2.9 , 101 , Marquette
-21 , 52 , 3.2 , 73 , U Miami
-21 , 91 , 2.8 , 112 , Clark U
-22 , 30 , 3.5 , 52 , Wake Forest***
-22 , 79 , 2.9 , 101 , BYU***
-24 , 35 , 3.4 , 59 , U Rochester
-24 , 67 , 3 , 91 , Fordham
-27 , 54 , 3.1 , 81 , Pepperdine
-29 , 96 , 2.6 , 125 , U of the Pacific
-33 , 85 , 2.7 , 118 , SUNY-Envi Sci/For
-33 , 85 , 2.7 , 118 , U Denver
-34 , 91 , 2.6 , 125 , U Tulsa
-42 , 31 , 3.2 , 73 , Lehigh
-43 , 75 , 2.7 , 118 , Stevens Institute
-50 , 62 , 2.8 , 112 , Worcester
-60 , 52 , 2.8 , 112 , Yeshiva

xiggi

Is there a reason to believe that the "USNWR scores/rank for best for CLASSROOM TEACHING EXCELLENCE" are any more credible than their Peer Assessment?

Did they line up more dart throwers for that one or did they remove their blindfold?

Do the responders even know WHAT they are supposed to measure? Or is it like the PA where it could be about anything as the definition used by USNews is hardly consistent from one year to an another?

Erin's Dad

Just out of interest, do you have the comparison for LACs Hawkette?

noobcake

What surprise, mostly "underrated" private schools and "overrated" (mostly) expensive non top tier private schools.

hawkette

xiggi,
I'm with you on the uselessness/futility of both the PA scoring and the Classroom Teaching scoring. Darts might very well be an improvement.

But I did find it interesting to see how many of the colleges that were perceived as good places for teaching were frequently underachievers on PA scoring relative to their overall USNWR rank.

hawkette

erin's dad,
I just did the comparison on the LACs and the differences with the national universities are remarkable. There is great similarity between the overall LAC rankings and the PA rankings. There are also many colleges considered tops for classroom teaching excellence who are near the top of the comparison. Here is the full listing:

Difference Between USNWR Rank and PA Rank , USNWR Rank , PA , PA Rank , School

6 , 52 , 3.4 , 46 , Denison
6 , 52 , 3.4 , 46 , Spelman***
5 , 24 , 4 , 19 , Bates***
5 , 24 , 4 , 19 , Mt. Holyoke
5 , 59 , 3.3 , 54 , Lawrence
5 , 59 , 3.3 , 54 , Agnes Scott
5 , 59 , 3.3 , 54 , Coll of Wooster
5 , 67 , 3.2 , 62 , Beloit
5 , 67 , 3.2 , 62 , Hendrix
4 , 44 , 3.5 , 40 , Rhodes
4 , 44 , 3.5 , 40 , Earlham***
4 , 58 , 3.3 , 54 , Wheaton
3 , 11 , 4.2 , 9 , Wesleyan
3 , 17 , 4.1 , 14 , Bryn Mawr
3 , 17 , 4.1 , 14 , Macalester***
3 , 22 , 4 , 19 , Colby
3 , 22 , 4 , 19 , US Military Acad
3 , 49 , 3.4 , 46 , Dickinson
3 , 49 , 3.4 , 46 , Skidmore
3 , 49 , 3.4 , 46 , DePauw
2 , 11 , 4.2 , 9 , Davidson***
2 , 11 , 4.2 , 9 , Oberlin***
2 , 28 , 3.9 , 26 , Reed***
2 , 34 , 3.7 , 32 , Occidental
2 , 37 , 3.6 , 35 , Sewanee***
2 , 37 , 3.6 , 35 , U Richmond
2 , 37 , 3.6 , 35 , St. Olaf***
2 , 48 , 3.4 , 46 , Centre***
2 , 56 , 3.3 , 54 , Gettysburg
2 , 56 , 3.3 , 54 , Wabash
2 , 71 , 3.1 , 69 , Williamette
1 , 2 , 4.7 , 1 , Amherst***
1 , 7 , 4.3 , 6 , Grinnell***
1 , 7 , 4.3 , 6 , Smith***
1 , 10 , 4.2 , 9 , Pomona***
1 , 15 , 4.1 , 14 , Vassar
1 , 15 , 4.1 , 14 , Harvey Mudd
1 , 20 , 4 , 19 , Colgate
1 , 20 , 4 , 19 , US Naval Acad
1 , 30 , 3.8 , 29 , Bucknell
1 , 30 , 3.8 , 29 , Kenyon***
1 , 33 , 3.7 , 32 , Scripps
1 , 36 , 3.6 , 35 , Trinity (CT)
1 , 47 , 3.4 , 46 , Bard
1 , 63 , 3.2 , 62 , Wheaton (IL)
1 , 63 , 3.2 , 62 , Drew
1 , 63 , 3.2 , 62 , Hobart & Will Smith
1 , 63 , 3.2 , 62 , Kalamazoo
0 , 1 , 4.7 , 1 , Williams***
0 , 3 , 4.6 , 3 , Swarthmore***
0 , 4 , 4.5 , 4 , Wellesley***
0 , 5 , 4.4 , 5 , Carleton***
0 , 9 , 4.2 , 9 , Middlebury***
0 , 26 , 3.9 , 26 , W&L
0 , 26 , 3.9 , 26 , Barnard
0 , 32 , 3.7 , 32 , Hamilton
0 , 40 , 3.5 , 40 , Furman
0 , 40 , 3.5 , 40 , F&M
0 , 40 , 3.5 , 40 , Connecticut Coll
0 , 40 , 3.5 , 40 , Pitzer
0 , 54 , 3.3 , 54 , Whitman
0 , 54 , 3.3 , 54 , Union
0 , 69 , 3.1 , 69 , Illinois Wes
0 , 69 , 3.1 , 69 , Southwestern
0 , 75 , 2.8 , 75 , Muhlenberg
-1 , 5 , 4.3 , 6 , Bowdoin***
-1 , 28 , 3.8 , 29 , Colorado College***
-1 , 34 , 3.6 , 35 , Holy Cross
-1 , 71 , 3 , 72 , VMI
-2 , 17 , 4 , 19 , Claremont McK
-2 , 44 , 3.4 , 46 , Lafayette
-2 , 71 , 2.9 , 73 , Wofford
-2 , 71 , 2.9 , 73 , Ursinus
-3 , 11 , 4.1 , 14 , Haverford***
-3 , 59 , 3.2 , 62 , St. Lawrence
, , , ,
***Colleges recognized by USNWR for classroom teaching excellence , , , ,

xiggi

Hawkette, you may want to check your numbers

Difference Between USNWR Rank and PA Rank , USNWR Rank , PA , PA Rank , School
1 , 7 , 4.3 , 6 , Grinnell***
1 , 7 , 4.3 , 6 , Smith***
1 , 10 , 4.2 , 9 , Pomona***
-2 , 17 , 4 , 19 , Claremont McK

Grin and Smith ranked 7th and Pomona 10th? I don't think so, at least not in this century!

Erin's Dad

Thanks Hawkette. Putting aside typos, it is interesting how close the rankings and PA lie for LACs. I'm still trying to figure out if I would want to attend a school in which the numbers differed a great deal - would that indicate a bargain (better "performance" than peers think)? Do the closeness of ranking and PA indicate the LACs are more aware of their competitors' data than U's? Just interesting.

xiggi

Hawkette, here's the result for the same exercise with revised 2008 numbers.

Schools with the largest negative differences between and PA and overall rank. The objective data of these schools rank them higher than their PA.

-17 37 54 3.3 Whitman College (WA)
-15 17 32 3.7 Hamilton College (NY)
-14 40 54 3.3 Union College (NY)
-12 34 46 3.4 Lafayette College (PA)
-11 15 26 3.9 Washington and Lee University (VA)
-9 37 46 3.4 Bard College (NY)
-8 11 19 4.0 Claremont McKenna College (CA)
-6 48 54 3.3 Gettysburg College (PA)
-5 58 63 3.2 St. Lawrence University (NY)


Schools with the largest POSITIVE differences between and PA and overall rank. These schools would be ranked lower on the overall rankings if the PA would have a lesser influence. In other words, the objective data does not support their overall ranking.

+29 69 40 3.5 Earlham College (IN)
+29 75 46 3.4 Spelman College (GA)
+28 54 26 3.9 Reed College (OR) 10
+21 75 54 3.3 Berea College (KY) 11
+19 54 35 3.6 St. Olaf College (MN)
+17 71 54 3.3 College of Wooster (OH)
+12 26 14 4.1 Macalester College (MN)
+11 17 6 4.3 Smith College (MA)
+11 20 9 4.2 Oberlin College (OH)
+10 24 14 4.1 Bryn Mawr College (PA)
+9 28 19 4.0 Mount Holyoke College (MA)

hawkette

xiggi,
I had two flaws in my data above-problem with formulas in data sort and then a limit of only the first 75 LACs ranked for 2008 by USNWR. Thanks for catching it. Here is the revised data from top to bottom for the Top 75 LACs:

Difference Between USNWR Rank and PA Rank , Overall USNWR Rank , PA , PA Rank , School

29 , 69 , 3.5 , 40 , Earlham***
29 , 75 , 3.4 , 46 , Spelman***
28 , 54 , 3.9 , 26 , Reed***
19 , 54 , 3.6 , 35 , St. Olaf***
17 , 71 , 3.3 , 54 , Coll of Wooster
12 , 26 , 4.1 , 14 , Macalester***
11 , 17 , 4.3 , 6 , Smith***
11 , 20 , 4.2 , 9 , Oberlin***
10 , 24 , 4.1 , 14 , Bryn Mawr***
9 , 28 , 4 , 19 , Mt. Holyoke
9 , 49 , 3.5 , 40 , Pitzer
9 , 49 , 3.5 , 40 , Rhodes
9 , 63 , 3.3 , 54 , Agnes Scott
9 , 71 , 3.2 , 62 , Hendrix
6 , 52 , 3.4 , 46 , Denison
5 , 11 , 4.3 , 6 , Grinnell***
5 , 24 , 4 , 19 , Bates***
5 , 40 , 3.6 , 35 , Sewanee***
5 , 40 , 3.6 , 35 , U Richmond
5 , 67 , 3.2 , 62 , Kalamazoo
5 , 67 , 3.2 , 62 , Beloit
4 , 30 , 3.9 , 26 , Barnard
4 , 36 , 3.7 , 32 , Occidental
4 , 44 , 3.5 , 40 , Connecticut Coll
3 , 22 , 4 , 19 , Colby
3 , 22 , 4 , 19 , US Military Acad
3 , 32 , 3.8 , 29 , Kenyon***
3 , 49 , 3.4 , 46 , DePauw
2 , 11 , 4.2 , 9 , Wesleyan
2 , 56 , 3.3 , 54 , Wheaton
2 , 56 , 3.3 , 54 , Lawrence
1 , 2 , 4.7 , 1 , Amherst***
1 , 7 , 4.3 , 6 , Bowdoin***
1 , 15 , 4.1 , 14 , Harvey Mudd
1 , 20 , 4 , 19 , US Naval Acad
1 , 30 , 3.8 , 29 , Bucknell
1 , 47 , 3.4 , 46 , Skidmore
1 , 63 , 3.2 , 62 , Drew
1 , 63 , 3.2 , 62 , Hobart & Will Smith
0 , 1 , 4.7 , 1 , Williams***
0 , 3 , 4.6 , 3 , Swarthmore***
0 , 4 , 4.5 , 4 , Wellesley***
0 , 5 , 4.4 , 5 , Carleton***
0 , 9 , 4.2 , 9 , Davidson***
0 , 40 , 3.5 , 40 , F&M
-1 , 34 , 3.6 , 35 , Trinity (CT)
-1 , 71 , 3 , 72 , VMI
-2 , 7 , 4.2 , 9 , Pomona***
-2 , 17 , 4 , 19 , Colgate
-2 , 33 , 3.6 , 35 , Holy Cross
-2 , 44 , 3.4 , 46 , Centre***
-2 , 44 , 3.4 , 46 , Dickinson
-2 , 52 , 3.3 , 54 , Wabash
-3 , 11 , 4.1 , 14 , Vassar
-3 , 26 , 3.8 , 29 , Colorado College***
-3 , 37 , 3.5 , 40 , Furman
-3 , 59 , 3.2 , 62 , Wheaton (IL)
-4 , 5 , 4.2 , 9 , Middlebury***
-4 , 10 , 4.1 , 14 , Haverford***
-4 , 28 , 3.7 , 32 , Scripps
-4 , 58 , 3.2 , 62 , St. Lawrence
-4 , 69 , 2.9 , 73 , Ursinus
-4 , 71 , 2.8 , 75 , Muhlenberg
-6 , 48 , 3.3 , 54 , Gettysburg
-6 , 63 , 3.1 , 69 , Williamette
-8 , 11 , 4 , 19 , Claremont McK
-9 , 37 , 3.4 , 46 , Bard
-10 , 59 , 3.1 , 69 , Illinois Wes
-10 , 59 , 3.1 , 69 , Southwestern
-11 , 15 , 3.9 , 26 , W&L
-12 , 34 , 3.4 , 46 , Lafayette
-14 , 40 , 3.3 , 54 , Union
-14 , 59 , 2.9 , 73 , Wofford
-15 , 17 , 3.7 , 32 , Hamilton
-17 , 37 , 3.3 , 54 , Whitman

For the relationship between Overall USNWR rank and PA rank, there is a broader distribution than I had originally posted, but I still think it is a tighter distribution than is found in the national universities list. It was also interesting to find those colleges ranked highly for classroom teaching mostly in the top half. This is very different from the national universities.

erin's dad,
I wouldn't read too much into these numbers. They are fun to look at, but I wouldn't overanalyze them or make any significant decisions based on them. The classroom teaching data is from 1995 and much could have changed on many of these campuses over this time (but I think that students would be well advised to check this out, especially for colleges that are highly ranked but which are not recognized for classroom excellence).

Plus, IMO the PA data is an absolute travesty. Unless I was interested in a career in academia, I would place very little weight on a college's PA score.

barrons

I guess you have no use for an opportunity to study with some of the leading thinkers in their fields. People who are often highly coveted by other higher ranked schools or schools aiming for higher prestige. Today's Wisconsin professor is next year's Ivy League or Stanford professor. I don't think they lose any ability with the move.. They just gain a better paycheck and nicer office.

afan

Classroom teaching is a small part of what goes on at college, particularly during the later undergrad years for good students. Independent study and research are the foundations of the advanced part of an undergrad education. The people who respond to PA are academics, and they know this. So, if you ask them about "classroom teaching" and about overall academic quality, to them, these are two different questions. They results may be highly correlated, but should not be treated as if they are synonymous.

OF course PA is not the same as overall USNWR rank, since USNews includes other factors in the ranking. The only way one would avoid having colleges whose USNews rank differed from its PA rank would be if PA were the only ranking factor. Since it is not, the two rankings are not identical.

As Collegehelp has shown, the PA rank is very highly correlated with a few metrics of student ability and perceived quality of the faculty. Apparently these are the things that academics look at when they estimate the academic quality of a university.

hawkette

Afan,
Truth be told, I don’t place much more faith in the classroom teaching rankings than I do in the PA rankings. IMO, both are pretty suspect and neither should be included in any ranking system for undergraduate education. But I thought it was interesting to include the teaching excellence data in this comparison and see where the colleges that are considered excellent in the classroom fared in the PA and overall rank comparison.

I disagree with your description of the “small” role of classroom teaching in the later undergraduate years. IMO, for the average undergraduate, excellent classroom teaching is the single most important function (by a large margin) that college faculty perform. Undoubtedly, students perform more independent and research work, but this is hardly the majority of what is going on for the great majority of students in their junior and senior years (unless you consider things like Junior Year Abroad to be independent, research-oriented study).

afan

Well we definitely disagree on that.

At many colleges thesis writing or some other capstone experience is a required part of the degree, and usually considered the most important educational experience. In fact, getting to the point where a student is ready to do this could be considered the primary purpose of the class work that goes before.

Remember, the goal of college is to prepare the students to educate themselves in the future. During college there is a transition from high school style education to educated adult style education. High school: classroom teaching is at the core of the experience. Knowledge is meeted out in small quantities carefully planned to match the level and background of the students (which can be assumed to be homogeneous). In educated adult style the faculty may be guides who recommend resources, respond to ideas and questions, and provides support for advanced work. The students vary in their funds of knowledge on many areas that serve as background to the topic of the course. Faculty expect, and assume, that each student will have some areas where they need to play catch up, and the most interesting courses bring together students who have varying strengths in different areas.

This is why many graduate seminars (which good undergrads take), meet once per week, rather than the 5 times per week for high school style. The students are assumed to be able to manage their own time, and spend a great deal of time doing their own reading and research. The class serves to introduce new topics, expand upon the reading, and tackle tough questions from the assignments. But most of the learning takes place in the library, lab, and study groups.

For the sorts of students who go to these highly rated colleges it would be a shame if they never moved beyond high school style education.

On the other hand, the PA, as collegehelp has shown, is highly correlated with a small number of factors that most people would accept as meaningfully related to the kind of education that might be available.

If one insists on ranking colleges, then the PA captures a large measure of pure academic accomplishment of the students and faculty. My problem with ranking colleges is that it assumes that all students are homogeneous in their preferences. Only then could any one set of criteria generate a unique rank that is appropriate for everyone. As soon as you recognize that some factors are more important for some students than for others, then the whole idea of one ranking of colleges loses any rational support.

One would need a ranking for a cheerleader who wants to be on the cheerleading team, but does not want it to dominate her life, major in chemistry and go to medical school, live in a large dorm but have a community feeling among the student body, reasonable access to nightlife, but not in a large city... The student who wants to spend as much time as possible studying classics and comp lit, never gets exercise, does not play sports, and loves poetry slams, might have a totally different set of top colleges. Some grand average ranking might be useless to both students.

rjkofnovi

Well said afan. I agree.