Endoftheworld, your comment made me laugh out loud. You start by telling the OP that the statement is ridiculous (which it is - the gap is narrowing as students become more familiar with the top LACs. Besides does anyone really think there is a real difference in quality among the top 10-15 LACs?) but you then go on to say,
“If anything, I think Williams/Amherst/Swarthmore/Pomona/Bowdoin will maintain their positions in the top 7 (which I would call the most elite group of LACs), whereas Carleton, Middlebury, and Wellesley will be replaced by CMC and Harvey Mudd due to their rise in prestige and endowment”
I’m not sure what this statement is based on. Wellesley and Middlebury have always been ranked up with your “most elite group of LACs” and, at times, ahead of Pomona and Bowdoin. Additionally, what do you think has been happening to the prestige and endowment at these schools? Do you think it’s been falling. They’re rising just like all the others. Middlebury and Wellesley, like your other top five have endowments over 1B. Now that Hillary is running for President do you believe wellesley’s prestige will fall?
All these schools are great. It’s ludicrous for students, parents or guidance counselors to search for reasons to characterize one as better or worse than the others. Amongst this group, fit should be the only consideration.