thinkforyourself

I think Forbes reasoned that if their list resembled USNWR too closely, not only would it attract less attention, but less people would value its utility. Therefore, they designed a (poor) methodology intended to create controversy, not an accurate evaluation of higher education.

West Point is a great college. #1? No. Even in the top 10? maybe 150 years ago, right before the civil war broke out. . . Now? In the top 50 for sure.

JustAMomOf4

Actually no. This statement proves you know nothing about the quality of academics or he curriculum at West Point.
The Academic curriculum is quite thorough and extremely well-rounded. West Point consistently has a number of prestigious scholarship winners - 13 this past year.
Their graduates are also sought out in the business world.

bluebubbles

I think Forbes had good intentions. They clearly state that their methodology is geared towards what matters to students and in this day and age, students should look closely at how much debt they will incur after college and if they get jobs. So yes, USMA is tops when considering the fact that virtually all graduates obtain employment.

However, a great college should cater to students in all career and interest ranges. West Point isn't that place. Add in the fact that apparently a substantial amount of professors at West Point don't have PhDs (which was talked about in one of the companion articles) and I don't think West Point is the #1 academic experience. Still, college should be about preparing you to obtain employment and giving you the skills you need to do it, so technically, West Point wins.

Flawed rankings? Maybe, but this is another interesting way to look at things. The scariest part isn't the result but the fact that 25% of the criteria was based on Rate My Professors ratings....okay then...

leanid

bluebubbles - You make college sound like little more than vocational training.

thinkforyourself - Don't you mean 'fewer people' not "less people"?!

al6200

These rankings are idiotic. Here is the methodology:

1. Listings of Alumni in the 2008 edition of Who's Who in America (12.5%)

2. Salaries of Alumni from PayScale.com (12.5%)

3. Student Evaluations from Ratemyprofessors.com (25%)

4. Four-Year Graduation Rates (16.66%)

5. Students Receiving Nationally Competitive Awards (8.33%)

6. Faculty Receiving Awards for Scholarship and Creative Pursuits (5%)

7. Four-year Debt Load for Typical Student Borrowers (20%)

I was originally planning to write up criticisms of these methodologies - but I really think they speak for themselves. The only criteria that makes any sense is the 4 year debt load.

bluebubbles

@leanid Not really, college should prepare you for your future jobs and the real world but my second paragraph highlights on the importance of broad student interests and great professors, which has nothing to do with vocational training, but pure intellectual learning, which is another huge part of the college experience (something USMA lacks apparently compared to other schools).

Tboonepickens

lolz @ cornell college being placed 100 spots ahead of Cornell university

Luigi59

Really?

What is your criteria for "pure acadamia?" What metric can we measure?

I've got an idea, let's use "Number of Rhodes Scholarships Awarded" shall we?

Being #4, as West Point is (behind Harvard, Yale, and Princeton - ahead of Dartmough, MIT, U of Chicago, and Stanford) would seem to refute your theory, wouldn't it?

I, too, think the ratings are flawed, but no one can question the academics at the US service academies.

bluebubbles

@Luigi59, I think epicwinguy meant faculty quality and research proficiency.

sailfish

Get over it, people. The methodology may be ridiculous, but no more ridiculous than the one used by US News. Arguments could be made that Forbes criteria are as valid as the US News criteria which emphasize reputation "you're great because everyone we asked thinks you're great" and yield, which can be and is gamed. Using Rate my Professor may be silly, but it begins to get at the truth that a lot of professors at highly regarded research institutions don't care about teaching undergraduates and aren't very good at it. Or, teaching is pawned off onto TA's at those schools. And why shouldn't ratings look at outcomes (salaries or graduates in Who's Who) as opposed to ranking colleges highly because of their selectivity. Of course these ratings are silly--they all are! But maybe Williams is better for undergrad education than Harvard. I know plenty of people who went to both, and the Williams grads I've met were far more satisfied with their experience that those who were at Harvard as undergrads.

making_a_point

Which is worst.

West Point teaches you the art of war, i.e, rape, plunder and destruction of life and earth resources. Case in point, Iraq.

Harvard teaches you the art of greed, i.e. rape, plunder and destruction of someone else wealth for your own greed and maintain ones opulent lifestye. Case in point, Wall Street.

Ann

"Add in the fact that apparently a substantial amount of professors at West Point don't have PhDs "

In my mind, a more important detail is that the are no TA's at West Point.

chaospaladin

Thanks for the link.

Dbate

Are you an idiot? West point teaches war strategy those things you are discussing occur because of the reckless actions of those soldiers typically in a non-officer capacity. I bet you don't know anyone who has gone to west point and probably know nothing of war. The things that you are saying are stupid and are completely ridiculous.

Maligning the brave men and women who serve our country makes you look stupid.

al6200

Don't feed the troll. There is no point in correcting someone who claims that investment bankers and military officers are rapists without citing any evidence.