<p>Another interesting ranking of colleges with an excellent showing by Carleton......
America's</a> Best Colleges List - Forbes</p>
<p>I find it odd to include the military academies with liberal arts schools, but a variety of ranking styles gives a variety of perspectives....</p>
<p>Regardless of methodology, top-schools lists always seem to rank Carleton higher than many might expect. The fact that it exceeds expectations is one of the many things that attracted me to Carleton.</p>
<p>What I don't like is, Haverford and Claremont McKenna ranked higher than Carleton. I think it should be in the top 10. :)</p>
<p>As should Swarthmore (I'd say top 3); that said, these are all great schools and Carleton deserves national recognition as being a top tier institution.</p>
<p>"What I don't like is, Haverford and Claremont McKenna ranked higher than Carleton. I think it should be in the top 10. :)"</p>
<p>Based on what? The methodology is freely available at <a href="http://centerforcollegeaffordability.org/uploads/2011_Methodology.pdf%5B/url%5D">http://centerforcollegeaffordability.org/uploads/2011_Methodology.pdf</a> . I think this is the highest we have been ranked in the US (15th) with all universities put together (not liberal arts/national universities separately like the U.S. News does it) by any more or less prestigious ranking. So you like (maybe you don't) that the methodology Forbes chose puts us on the spot #15, but at the same time you think that this methodology is wrong by letting Haverford and Claremont McKenna be above Carleton? Unless you are suggesting that the data for these two schools/Carleton was misrepresented, they deserve to be ranked as they are thanks to the methodology. And precisely because of this methodology, we rank #15 compared to other schools. You can argue that some of the websites (e.g. ratemyprof) used in the methodology are highly subjective, but the general criteria of the ranking itself were the same for all schools (unless you suggest that picking these specific websites was immediately more beneficial to Haverford/Claremont McKenna and a downer for Carleton).</p>
<p>I'm not a big fan of rankings list in general, but I can't really take this list seriously because it claims to measure the relative worth of schools that are impossible to compare. No one is going to be able to convince me that it's meaningful that Williams is "better" than the US Military Academy which is "better" than a university like UVA. Apples to oranges to...pears?</p>
<p>Of course, it's always nice to see Carleton appreciated, but I doubt this is going to change anything about the below-the-radar state of its awesomeness.</p>
<p>It's like the HS rankings to me: pretty meaningless, but I'd rather be on the list than not on the list. :)</p>
<p>I am not a big fan of rankings, either but I wanted to be able to say 'Guys, it is in the top 10' to all those Carleton-illiterate friends of mine. It looks like Carleton is doing something right, moving from 54 to 23 to 15. Hopefully, I will be able to say it in a year or two. :)</p>
<p>The Forbes rankings seem to give preference to small LACs.</p>
<p>For example, Columbia was ranked only #40, or something like that.</p>
<p>Agreed. It feels more like comparing apples to oranges to Ferraris. Or something like that. I understand the ranking system and it makes me happy to see appreciation to Carleton. but honestly they don't make much sense to me.</p>