D3 tennis

Faker

Semi-Pro
I don't know...these are your opinions that these rankings are off. What are you basing these statements on? "Amherst is probably the best LAC" where did you decide that? I feel like forbes bases their rankings on important traits of colleges that I stated above, traits more important than you thinking one school is better than the other.

"If I had any knowledge of college admissions"-okay thanks. Why can't you have a discussion without being demeaning?
I never meant to demean you by that, it was a statement. You interpreted it as demeaning. Amherst is probably the best LAC based on the people I know who got admitted/denied and go there compared to other LAC. I base my statements off the quality of people who go to schools, the quality of people denied, and what employers say.
 

Faker

Semi-Pro
I don't know...these are your opinions that these rankings are off. What are you basing these statements on? "Amherst is probably the best LAC" where did you decide that? I feel like forbes bases their rankings on important traits of colleges that I stated above, traits more important than you thinking one school is better than the other.

"If I had any knowledge of college admissions"-okay thanks. Why can't you have a discussion without being demeaning?
graduation rates, job placement, and class interestingness.

Graduation rates isn't something you shoudl take too much into consideration if you are going to a top 30 school and are planning to go places in life anyways.

Pomona definitely doesn't have better job placement than HYPSM or Amherst. Columbia definitely has steller job placement compared to pretty much all LAC too.

If you've been in this college process for your whole life and will be for a couple more years, you should understand that Forbes' ranking is completely off too.
 

tennisbuck

Professional
I never meant to demean you by that, it was a statement. You interpreted it as demeaning. Amherst is probably the best LAC based on the people I know who got admitted/denied and go there compared to other LAC. I base my statements off the quality of people who go to schools, the quality of people denied, and what employers say.
Ultimately, I think Forbes has access to all the information that matters to ranking colleges and they put countless hours into their rankings. I consider them a reliable resource. I say rankings aren't the be all end all because there is room for air, and I think that the schools in the top 10 are all so close for example, it's really hard to rank them. I feel like Forbes has access to more information than you do and thus can produce a more reliable ranking, but that is just my opinion. In my opinion, Amherst is a top 10 school, but that's fine if you disagree.
 

tennisbuck

Professional
As for your statement, maybe "demeaning" isn't the right word, but I do think your statement was "incorrect". I know enough about colleges admissions to get accepted to a top 50 school on Forbes, so while I certainly don't know a lot, to infer I don't know anything is "false".
 

Faker

Semi-Pro
Ultimately, I think Forbes has access to all the information that matters to ranking colleges and they put countless hours into their rankings. I consider them a reliable resource. I say rankings aren't the be all end all because there is room for air, and I think that the schools in the top 10 are all so close for example, it's really hard to rank them. I feel like Forbes has access to more information than you do and thus can produce a more reliable ranking, but that is just my opinion. In my opinion, Amherst is a top 10 school, but that's fine if you disagree.
Sure you can believe that. There is nothing I can do to stop you. It is obvious that you aren't an employer or someone with any connection to these colleges, but if you want to argue with the CEO of the company you work for about these rankings, then be my guest since they have more authority than me.
 

Faker

Semi-Pro
As for your statement, maybe "demeaning" isn't the right word, but I do think your statement was "incorrect". I know enough about colleges admissions to get accepted to a top 50 school on Forbes, so while I certainly don't know a lot, to infer I don't know anything is "false".
I mean, you can go ahead and ask your classmates about these rankings then. They will tell you that you are incorrect in putting Amherst at number 10 and saying that the Forbes ranking is even somewhat reliable. Having Pomona at #1 alone is enough to deem it unreliable. I think have enough first hand and second hand accounts to know enough about this stuff to determine where colleges rankings are supposed to be. Its like predicting the winners for grand slams(although obviously not as volatile). You should know enough to make your own predictions not follow other's on google or major websites.
 

Ihatetennis

Hall of Fame
I mean, you can go ahead and ask your classmates about these rankings then. They will tell you that you are incorrect in putting Amherst at number 10 and saying that the Forbes ranking is even somewhat reliable. Having Pomona at #1 alone is enough to deem it unreliable. I think have enough first hand and second hand accounts to know enough about this stuff to determine where colleges rankings are supposed to be. Its like predicting the winners for grand slams(although obviously not as volatile). You should know enough to make your own predictions not follow other's on google or major websites.
i found the algorithm for forbes

http://thekenyonthrill.com/2013/07/25/kenyon-isnt-nearly-as-prestigious-as-it-was-last-year/

http://www.forbes.com/2010/08/01/best-colleges-methodology-opinions-colleges-10-ccap.html


forbes puts a lot of effort into this list with very specific factors. I know more harvard or princeton grads trying to make a living as tutors because their degrees are worthless as compared to small liberal arts schools.
 

tennisbuck

Professional
I mean, you can go ahead and ask your classmates about these rankings then. They will tell you that you are incorrect in putting Amherst at number 10 and saying that the Forbes ranking is even somewhat reliable. Having Pomona at #1 alone is enough to deem it unreliable. I think have enough first hand and second hand accounts to know enough about this stuff to determine where colleges rankings are supposed to be. Its like predicting the winners for grand slams(although obviously not as volatile). You should know enough to make your own predictions not follow other's on google or major websites.
Why would I ask my classmates? As I said earlier, I don't think prestige and popular vote are reliable metrics in ranking colleges. On the otherhand, the factors Forbes considers are things that are very important to anyone picking a college. While you keep thinking that some CEOs will favor certain schools, that factor is already weighed in Forbes rankings(post graduate success).

As for Pomona being 1, there is room for error as I said earlier. However, Pomona is certainly a top 10 school imo.

Lastly, your first and second hand accounts, will not add up to the same amount of data that Forbes has. Why should I do all that research when I reliable site has done it for me using an algorithm?
 

tennisbuck

Professional
i found the algorithm for forbes

http://thekenyonthrill.com/2013/07/25/kenyon-isnt-nearly-as-prestigious-as-it-was-last-year/

http://www.forbes.com/2010/08/01/best-colleges-methodology-opinions-colleges-10-ccap.html


forbes puts a lot of effort into this list with very specific factors. I know more harvard or princeton grads trying to make a living as tutors because their degrees are worthless as compared to small liberal arts schools.
Thanks for getting the actual algorithm. I couldn't find it.
 

Faker

Semi-Pro
i found the algorithm for forbes

http://thekenyonthrill.com/2013/07/25/kenyon-isnt-nearly-as-prestigious-as-it-was-last-year/

http://www.forbes.com/2010/08/01/best-colleges-methodology-opinions-colleges-10-ccap.html


forbes puts a lot of effort into this list with very specific factors. I know more harvard or princeton grads trying to make a living as tutors because their degrees are worthless as compared to small liberal arts schools.
Do students incur massive debts while in schools? Do most students graduate in a timely fashion, typically four years?

While student debt is a huge problem right now, it should absolutely not be a factor in determining ranking and prestige. Whether they graduate in a timely fashion or not is not necessarily a fault of the school itself rather than the fault of the student. Cornell is seen as a hard school to graduate from. If you are inclined to work hard and want to go somewhere in life then you will succeed.

Hmmmm Harvard and Princeton degree worthless okay. I also know Harvard and Princeton grads who earn six figures right out of college and nearing seven at this point. Don't know any who are living as tutors right now with their degree worthless. Yes HYPSM lets idiots in who have tons of legacy or other connections, but you think the 95% of kids who go there who worked their asses off throughout their first 18 years of life become tutors? There are always exceptions but don't make it sound like that is actually a possibility and going to Pomona would eliminate that "possibility".

Why would I ask my classmates? As I said earlier, I don't think prestige and popular vote are reliable metrics in ranking colleges. On the otherhand, the factors Forbes considers are things that are very important to anyone picking a college. While you keep thinking that some CEOs will favor certain schools, that factor is already weighed in Forbes rankings(post graduate success).

As for Pomona being 1, there is room for error as I said earlier. However, Pomona is certainly a top 10 school imo.

Lastly, your first and second hand accounts, will not add up to the same amount of data that Forbes has. Why should I do all that research when I reliable site has done it for me using an algorithm?
There has to be a lot of room for error with Forbes then. Its like saying you got a 25% on a huge test and saying "Yeah I should have got 100, there is room for error".

Pomona is definitely top 10? Okay, HYPSM is definitely 5 right? Don't try to argue with me on that point since it is impossible. Then lets add in caltech Columbia Uchicago and Upenn. You should know the quality of students who get denied or accepted by these schools. Don't pull up stats on me since there are so many factors like athletes and legacy and such. Look at your own school's and friends from other schools' stats for admissions and factor in sports and legacy. For the sake of satisfying you we will put Amherst at 10. Is Pomona a top 10? Definitely not. I won't judge you if you choose Pomona over any of those 10. Everyone has their own tastes and reasons; but, IF you would choose Pomona over any of those 10 with one of the factors being that you think Pomona is a top 10 school over any of those, then good luck in life.
 

Ihatetennis

Hall of Fame
Do students incur massive debts while in schools? Do most students graduate in a timely fashion, typically four years?

While student debt is a huge problem right now, it should absolutely not be a factor in determining ranking and prestige. Whether they graduate in a timely fashion or not is not necessarily a fault of the school itself rather than the fault of the student. Cornell is seen as a hard school to graduate from. If you are inclined to work hard and want to go somewhere in life then you will succeed.

Hmmmm Harvard and Princeton degree worthless okay. I also know Harvard and Princeton grads who earn six figures right out of college and nearing seven at this point. Don't know any who are living as tutors right now with their degree worthless. Yes HYPSM lets idiots in who have tons of legacy or other connections, but you think the 95% of kids who go there who worked their asses off throughout their first 18 years of life become tutors? There are always exceptions but don't make it sound like that is actually a possibility and going to Pomona would eliminate that "possibility".


There has to be a lot of room for error with Forbes then. Its like saying you got a 25% on a huge test and saying "Yeah I should have got 100, there is room for error".

Pomona is definitely top 10? Okay, HYPSM is definitely 5 right? Don't try to argue with me on that point since it is impossible. Then lets add in caltech Columbia Uchicago and Upenn. You should know the quality of students who get denied or accepted by these schools. Don't pull up stats on me since there are so many factors like athletes and legacy and such. Look at your own school's and friends from other schools' stats for admissions and factor in sports and legacy. For the sake of satisfying you we will put Amherst at 10. Is Pomona a top 10? Definitely not. I won't judge you if you choose Pomona over any of those 10. Everyone has their own tastes and reasons; but, IF you would choose Pomona over any of those 10 with one of the factors being that you think Pomona is a top 10 school over any of those, then good luck in life.
my tutor from last year went to harvard and can't find a job. apparently math isnt the best choice for a degree? And did you even read through the whole methodology? debt is only 5%, cuz lets be fair, if you graduate with a phycology degree and incur 200k in debt to go to harvard, then you might really have screwed yourself.

and also kenyon, a lower level school, has their anthropolgy graduates earning a median salary of 75k out of college. that means they probably have a good chunk of graduates in high paying jobs within 10 years if you look at normal progression of salary increase.
 

Faker

Semi-Pro
my tutor from last year went to harvard and can't find a job. apparently math isnt the best choice for a degree? And did you even read through the whole methodology? debt is only 5%, cuz lets be fair, if you graduate with a phycology degree and incur 200k in debt to go to harvard, then you might really have screwed yourself.

and also kenyon, a lower level school, has their anthropolgy graduates earning a median salary of 75k out of college. that means they probably have a good chunk of graduates in high paying jobs within 10 years if you look at normal progression of salary increase.
Math is a pretty good choice for a degree at Harvard......Well we come from different backgrounds I guess, evidently. Ever single person I know who has graduated from HYPSM has been very successful so far at a young age. Every single person I know who goes to HYPSM right now has been very successful in high school and I wouldn't be surprised to see their names on headlines for scientific discoveries or world politics some day.

Four-year Debt Load for Typical Student Borrower (12.5%). Don't think this should be this much of a factor either. As a student, you know what you are in for and it isn't the university's fault.

No. 2: Postgraduate Success (30%)

Salary of Alumni from Payscale.com (15%)

Listings of Alumni in Who’s Who in America (10%)

Alumni in Forbes/CCAP Corporate Officers List (5%)

All of these should be weighted more. College is only 4 years and the rest of your life is.....hopefully a long time. People don't got to Harvard necessarily for the environment, one of the biggest hooks that Harvard gives is the prestige along with connections and almost guarantee of a great future as long as you still pursue it.

No. 1: Student Satisfaction (27.5%)

Student Evaluations from RateMyProfessor.com (17.5%)

Freshman-to-Sophomore Retention Rates (5%)

Student Evaluations from MyPlan.com (5%)

Yes college environment is still big though. Don't see why this Student Evaluations from RateMyProfessor.com (17.5%) is so big though. Student evaluations are 100% affected by bias and whoever decides to rate their professor. I've read some reviews before and a lot of the time they are all over the place. Lectures will naturally be given less, but schools like Harvard still give their undergrad opportunities to see their professors and by the time you are a sophomore you will be taking courses with great professors anyways.
 

jcgatennismom

Professional
The Forbes rankings appear to be biased in favor of smaller schools, esp D3 schools. I checked a couple of states-Washington and Lee ahead of University of Virginia, Emory ahead of Georgia Tech, little Davidson in NC ranked #31 almost as high as Duke and higher than UNC Chapel Hill? It takes longer to graduate from big schools-students may have trouble getting all classes in 4 years, they may change majors or double major, they may co op, etc. Big schools will have more attrition. The % for student evaluations is too high. Also as far as post graduate success, does Forbes give all the credit to the undergraduate school if students continued on to grad school? A D3 school may be a great stepping stone to a prestigious grad school, but a student can go to GA Tech and land a great job straight out of school. I think we have to look at all the rankings list with a grain of salt. It is probably more important what school is ranked highest in the field of a student's major than the school's overall ranking. Some schools are stronger in business, some in engineering, some in health sciences. My daughter, non tennis player, went to a school that was prestigious in certain areas, but the overall university was not one of the top two colleges in that state.However, she was accepted into the PhD program of her field with a BS degree when many students seeking the same PhD program have to pay for a Masters before acceptance into a PhD program. For my son who is a tennis player, he has entirely different interests and as a result, no overlap in schools of interest. Choose the major, then the school. Also remember some of the big public schools have honors colleges within the big school. Classes within the honors colleges will have smaller faculty student ratios, and underclassmen may be taught by professors who usually teacher upperclassmen and grad students. Underclassmen may have research opportunities usually reserved for upperclassmen or grad students. The honors colleges of many public universities would match D3s and LACs on many of the Forbes' stats at a much cheaper cost, esp if honors college is in state. My daughter majored in a small program (usually only offered as a graduate degree) of about 50 students per year at an out of state public university that was founded by professors who came from a prestigious D3 university and modeled the program after the one at that D3. Once she got through core courses in the honors college, she probably received an education similar to what she would have received at said D3 college at 1/3 of the cost. Instead of trying to get in the schools with the highest ranking, look for top notch under the radar programs in your field of interest, esp in the sciences. Maybe for finance, banking, prelaw, etc, an undergraduate degree from a top 50 school means more, but at least in the sciences, students can find affordable gems of programs without going to the most expensive and prestigious schools. A school with an overall Forbes ranking of #400s or #500s could have some programs equivalent to those of schools ranked in the top #75.
 

Ihatetennis

Hall of Fame
The Forbes rankings appear to be biased in favor of smaller schools, esp D3 schools. I checked a couple of states-Washington and Lee ahead of University of Virginia, Emory ahead of Georgia Tech, little Davidson in NC ranked #31 almost as high as Duke and higher than UNC Chapel Hill? It takes longer to graduate from big schools-students may have trouble getting all classes in 4 years, they may change majors or double major, they may co op, etc. Big schools will have more attrition. The % for student evaluations is too high. Also as far as post graduate success, does Forbes give all the credit to the undergraduate school if students continued on to grad school? A D3 school may be a great stepping stone to a prestigious grad school, but a student can go to GA Tech and land a great job straight out of school. I think we have to look at all the rankings list with a grain of salt. It is probably more important what school is ranked highest in the field of a student's major than the school's overall ranking. Some schools are stronger in business, some in engineering, some in health sciences. My daughter, non tennis player, went to a school that was prestigious in certain areas, but the overall university was not one of the top two colleges in that state.However, she was accepted into the PhD program of her field with a BS degree when many students seeking the same PhD program have to pay for a Masters before acceptance into a PhD program. For my son who is a tennis player, he has entirely different interests and as a result, no overlap in schools of interest. Choose the major, then the school. Also remember some of the big public schools have honors colleges within the big school. Classes within the honors colleges will have smaller faculty student ratios, and underclassmen may be taught by professors who usually teacher upperclassmen and grad students. Underclassmen may have research opportunities usually reserved for upperclassmen or grad students. The honors colleges of many public universities would match D3s and LACs on many of the Forbes' stats at a much cheaper cost, esp if honors college is in state. My daughter majored in a small program (usually only offered as a graduate degree) of about 50 students per year at an out of state public university that was founded by professors who came from a prestigious D3 university and modeled the program after the one at that D3. Once she got through core courses in the honors college, she probably received an education similar to what she would have received at said D3 college at 1/3 of the cost. Instead of trying to get in the schools with the highest ranking, look for top notch under the radar programs in your field of interest, esp in the sciences. Maybe for finance, banking, prelaw, etc, an undergraduate degree from a top 50 school means more, but at least in the sciences, students can find affordable gems of programs without going to the most expensive and prestigious schools. A school with an overall Forbes ranking of #400s or #500s could have some programs equivalent to those of schools ranked in the top #75.
Maybe then the bias is correct on the 4 year graduation? who wants to pay an extra 1-2 years tuition at a big school because a class filled up?

and private schools are often cheaper for the average family. my instate tuition cost at UT Austin is 25k a year, any private school with good funding? 17k a year. that totals at 24K difference over 4 years.

and washington and lee is a very prestigious school, thats in almost every way better than unc

http://colleges.startclass.com/comp...-Chapel-Hill-vs-Washington-and-Lee-University

notice lower acceptance rate, higher sat and act scores and significantly higher median salary out of college
 

tennisbuck

Professional
Do students incur massive debts while in schools? Do most students graduate in a timely fashion, typically four years?

While student debt is a huge problem right now, it should absolutely not be a factor in determining ranking and prestige. Whether they graduate in a timely fashion or not is not necessarily a fault of the school itself rather than the fault of the student. Cornell is seen as a hard school to graduate from. If you are inclined to work hard and want to go somewhere in life then you will succeed.

Hmmmm Harvard and Princeton degree worthless okay. I also know Harvard and Princeton grads who earn six figures right out of college and nearing seven at this point. Don't know any who are living as tutors right now with their degree worthless. Yes HYPSM lets idiots in who have tons of legacy or other connections, but you think the 95% of kids who go there who worked their asses off throughout their first 18 years of life become tutors? There are always exceptions but don't make it sound like that is actually a possibility and going to Pomona would eliminate that "possibility".


There has to be a lot of room for error with Forbes then. Its like saying you got a 25% on a huge test and saying "Yeah I should have got 100, there is room for error".

Pomona is definitely top 10? Okay, HYPSM is definitely 5 right? Don't try to argue with me on that point since it is impossible. Then lets add in caltech Columbia Uchicago and Upenn. You should know the quality of students who get denied or accepted by these schools. Don't pull up stats on me since there are so many factors like athletes and legacy and such. Look at your own school's
Do students incur massive debts while in schools? Do most students graduate in a timely fashion, typically four years?

While student debt is a huge problem right now, it should absolutely not be a factor in determining ranking and prestige. Whether they graduate in a timely fashion or not is not necessarily a fault of the school itself rather than the fault of the student. Cornell is seen as a hard school to graduate from. If you are inclined to work hard and want to go somewhere in life then you will succeed.

Hmmmm Harvard and Princeton degree worthless okay. I also know Harvard and Princeton grads who earn six figures right out of college and nearing seven at this point. Don't know any who are living as tutors right now with their degree worthless. Yes HYPSM lets idiots in who have tons of legacy or other connections, but you think the 95% of kids who go there who worked their asses off throughout their first 18 years of life become tutors? There are always exceptions but don't make it sound like that is actually a possibility and going to Pomona would eliminate that "possibility".


There has to be a lot of room for error with Forbes then. Its like saying you got a 25% on a huge test and saying "Yeah I should have got 100, there is room for error".

Pomona is definitely top 10? Okay, HYPSM is definitely 5 right? Don't try to argue with me on that point since it is impossible. Then lets add in caltech Columbia Uchicago and Upenn. You should know the quality of students who get denied or accepted by these schools. Don't pull up stats on me since there are so many factors like athletes and legacy and such. Look at your own school's and friends from other schools' stats for admissions and factor in sports and legacy. For the sake of satisfying you we will put Amherst at 10. Is Pomona a top 10? Definitely not. I won't judge you if you choose Pomona over any of those 10. Everyone has their own tastes and reasons; but, IF you would choose Pomona over any of those 10 with one of the factors being that you think Pomona is a top 10 school over any of those, then good luck in life.
"Don't pull stats"- I don't understand this. I'm gonna use stats to back my arguments because I don't think they carry much weight if I'm just stating my opinions; I need to back them up.

I'm confused with what you are trying to say about the legacy thing. It seems like you are saying its a significant factor sometimes and other times down playing it. I think that the students who get in for those reasons are still part of the class and not a reason to not use statistics related to the class.

As for picking schools, I think we agree that using rankings as the only criteria is a bad way to go. For me, I wanted to go to a d3 school where tennis would take less time. I'm an introvert and do better with small classes and I like the community feel of small rural campuses. Additionally my parents said that I had to stay in the *******. So using those criteria, I developed a list of schools by picking the top schools that fit my criteria-Oberlin, Carleton, Kenyon, Macalaster, Grinnell, and maybe a couple others. So while rankings weren't the main focus of my search, I do think they highlight the difference between elite liberal arts schools like the ones above vs schools like Hendrix or College of Wooster.


Do you agree with the algorithm that Forbes used to create their rankings? Are those characteristics you value? For me, yes which is why I think it is an accurate list. If you don't value the same things as Forbes, then I would understand why your college rankings are so much different.
 
Last edited:

jcgatennismom

Professional
Certainly if you can get a top D3 education for $20k a year, go for it. However, I read the boards on College Confidential too and hear stories about athletes who either signed a NLI for a D1 school or did ED for a D3 school. They planned to attend expensive private schools that were reported to meet 100% need after EFC. However the schools came up with 85% need packages made up of mostly loans. Some players had to ask to be released from NLI or ED because they could not make up the gap. Then they had to scramble to find roster spots and aid the spring of their senior year. I hope your D3 school comes through for you with all they promised.

I did not post to argue merits of different schools. I just wanted to point out that rankings look at schools as a whole, and that honors colleges of public universities are often similar to LACs within a big school. They can be an affordable option that leads to success either in grad school or career. Since the "sticker price" of the honors colleges is much cheaper, there is less need for need-based aid and less risk if the net price after financial aid package turns out different than expected. Also since honors colleges are smaller, athletes may be able to manage a pre-med or science degree even though they attend D1 schools. Their advisors probably work with the professors and coaches to schedule labs. On this board, one gets the impression, a pre-med student has to attend D3. I know one of the female tennis players at my daughter's university was pre-med and graduated in 4 years, and my daughter tutored other athletes in organic chemistry so they were likely premed or science majors too.

Our daughter was accepted into schools ranked in the Forbes top 100 but chose a much lower ranked school (overall) because of the program offered. In the sciences/health majors, the lower ranked school was a much better choice; in certain fields the school was a leader in receiving research grants, and undergrads got to do research too. Colleges should not be chosen to impress your neighbors nor your classmates, but because they are the best overall affordable fit for a student. If Harvard or a top D3 is affordable with aid, attainable as far as admissions, and appropriate as far as interests, students should apply to those schools. One of my son's friends is going that route.

Readers of posts and of college rankings should not make assumptions. Don't assume you have to play D3 and can't play D1 or vice versa. Determine your passion besides tennis, find the best affordable program where you can play tennis and manage your major, and don't worry so much about the college rankings. Look at the lead professors and their backgrounds in your major. Determine if you will have access to the best profs as an undergrad. Honors colleges may have an orientation weekend for applicants, interviews, etc where you can find out this type of information. Even for students with the same GPA and SAT scores, there are different schools that would be the best choice for students based on major, athletic ability, and other factors.
 

Ihatetennis

Hall of Fame
"Don't pull stats"- I don't understand this. I'm gonna use stats to back my arguments because I don't think they carry much weight if I'm just stating my opinions; I need to back them up.

I'm confused with what you are trying to say about the legacy thing. It seems like you are saying its a significant factor sometimes and other times down playing it. I think that the students who get in for those reasons are still part of the class and not a reason to not use statistics related to the class.

As for picking schools, I think we agree that using rankings as the only criteria is a bad way to go. For me, I wanted to go to a d3 school where tennis would take less time. I'm an introvert and do better with small classes and I like the community feel of small rural campuses. Additionally my parents said that I had to stay in the *******. So using those criteria, I developed a list of schools by picking the top schools that fit my criteria-Oberlin, Carleton, Kenyon, Macalaster, Grinnell, and maybe a couple others. So while rankings weren't the main focus of my search, I do think they highlight the difference between elite liberal arts schools like the ones above vs schools like Hendrix or College of Wooster.


Do you agree with the algorithm that Forbes used to create their rankings? Are those characteristics you value? For me, yes which is why I think it is an accurate list. If you don't value the same things as Forbes, then I would understand why your college rankings are so much different.
College of Wooster is a good liberal arts school, usually a kenyon applicants backup tho

I'm likeyou, tennis takes a backburner and school needs a small feel in class but medium or small feel in population
 

Ihatetennis

Hall of Fame
Certainly if you can get a top D3 education for $20k a year, go for it. However, I read the boards on College Confidential too and hear stories about athletes who either signed a NLI for a D1 school or did ED for a D3 school. They planned to attend expensive private schools that were reported to meet 100% need after EFC. However the schools came up with 85% need packages made up of mostly loans. Some players had to ask to be released from NLI or ED because they could not make up the gap. Then they had to scramble to find roster spots and aid the spring of their senior year. I hope your D3 school comes through for you with all they promised.

I did not post to argue merits of different schools. I just wanted to point out that rankings look at schools as a whole, and that honors colleges of public universities are often similar to LACs within a big school. They can be an affordable option that leads to success either in grad school or career. Since the "sticker price" of the honors colleges is much cheaper, there is less need for need-based aid and less risk if the net price after financial aid package turns out different than expected. Also since honors colleges are smaller, athletes may be able to manage a pre-med or science degree even though they attend D1 schools. Their advisors probably work with the professors and coaches to schedule labs. On this board, one gets the impression, a pre-med student has to attend D3. I know one of the female tennis players at my daughter's university was pre-med and graduated in 4 years, and my daughter tutored other athletes in organic chemistry so they were likely premed or science majors too.

Our daughter was accepted into schools ranked in the Forbes top 100 but chose a much lower ranked school (overall) because of the program offered. In the sciences/health majors, the lower ranked school was a much better choice; in certain fields the school was a leader in receiving research grants, and undergrads got to do research too. Colleges should not be chosen to impress your neighbors nor your classmates, but because they are the best overall affordable fit for a student. If Harvard or a top D3 is affordable with aid, attainable as far as admissions, and appropriate as far as interests, students should apply to those schools. One of my son's friends is going that route.

Readers of posts and of college rankings should not make assumptions. Don't assume you have to play D3 and can't play D1 or vice versa. Determine your passion besides tennis, find the best affordable program where you can play tennis and manage your major, and don't worry so much about the college rankings. Look at the lead professors and their backgrounds in your major. Determine if you will have access to the best profs as an undergrad. Honors colleges may have an orientation weekend for applicants, interviews, etc where you can find out this type of information. Even for students with the same GPA and SAT scores, there are different schools that would be the best choice for students based on major, athletic ability, and other factors.

oh for sure, you have to look at how they meet aid. Look at trinity tx vs colorado college, both amazing schools with large enowment and aid but cc has students graduate with less debt.

I took into account a lot of the ways they do it, and the estimator only has me pull 2k for self help, and even then it is wayyyy cheaper than in state.
 

Faker

Semi-Pro
"Don't pull stats"- I don't understand this. I'm gonna use stats to back my arguments because I don't think they carry much weight if I'm just stating my opinions; I need to back them up.

I'm confused with what you are trying to say about the legacy thing. It seems like you are saying its a significant factor sometimes and other times down playing it. I think that the students who get in for those reasons are still part of the class and not a reason to not use statistics related to the class.

As for picking schools, I think we agree that using rankings as the only criteria is a bad way to go. For me, I wanted to go to a d3 school where tennis would take less time. I'm an introvert and do better with small classes and I like the community feel of small rural campuses. Additionally my parents said that I had to stay in the *******. So using those criteria, I developed a list of schools by picking the top schools that fit my criteria-Oberlin, Carleton, Kenyon, Macalaster, Grinnell, and maybe a couple others. So while rankings weren't the main focus of my search, I do think they highlight the difference between elite liberal arts schools like the ones above vs schools like Hendrix or College of Wooster.


Do you agree with the algorithm that Forbes used to create their rankings? Are those characteristics you value? For me, yes which is why I think it is an accurate list. If you don't value the same things as Forbes, then I would understand why your college rankings are so much different.
No I don't agree with Forbes I explained why in my previous post.Of course legacy is a huge factor. I have no legacy to prestigious institutions so there is no reason I would back it. Yes they are still part of the class and they should be included in statistics, but do take that into account when determining college stats like SAT and such. For an unhooked person to get in to these schools, it is harder than stats dictate.

I'm not judging you based on your choices, but you shouldn't be basing rankings on personal bias for your type of school. Amherst is not top 10 and Pomona for sure isn't either. For your ranking it is, but for a general ranking that most of the world would use, Forbes is not reliable at all. The first few sentences of JCGA's post also illustrate my concerns with Forbes' list. Student evaluation would inevitably favor LACs and having it at that high of a percent doesn't do the true top 10 any favors.
 

tennisbuck

Professional
College of Wooster is a good liberal arts school, usually a kenyon applicants backup tho

I'm likeyou, tennis takes a backburner and school needs a small feel in class but medium or small feel in population
I agree; good school I just don't consider it quite the level of the others mentioned is all.
 

tennisbuck

Professional
No I don't agree with Forbes I explained why in my previous post.Of course legacy is a huge factor. I have no legacy to prestigious institutions so there is no reason I would back it. Yes they are still part of the class and they should be included in statistics, but do take that into account when determining college stats like SAT and such. For an unhooked person to get in to these schools, it is harder than stats dictate.

I'm not judging you based on your choices, but you shouldn't be basing rankings on personal bias for your type of school. Amherst is not top 10 and Pomona for sure isn't either. For your ranking it is, but for a general ranking that most of the world would use, Forbes is not reliable at all. The first few sentences of JCGA's post also illustrate my concerns with Forbes' list. Student evaluation would inevitably favor LACs and having it at that high of a percent doesn't do the true top 10 any favors.
I think you are putting too much weight in the legacy factor. What percent of students are legacy at the institutions you are talking about?

I'm not biased. Well maybe I am but that's not what I've based any of my points on. You've complained I keep getting statistics which would be a sign of not being biased. I merely think that Forbes rankings are accurate; I think Amherst is an incredible top 10 institution and I think their recruits reflect that.
 

Faker

Semi-Pro
I think you are putting too much weight in the legacy factor. What percent of students are legacy at the institutions you are talking about?

I'm not biased. Well maybe I am but that's not what I've based any of my points on. You've complained I keep getting statistics which would be a sign of not being biased. I merely think that Forbes rankings are accurate; I think Amherst is an incredible top 10 institution and I think their recruits reflect that.
We're talking about Ivys here. Legacy plays a huge factor. From my own school alone a lot of legacy have got in when they shouldn't have if they weren't legacy. Same with race. Legacy and race won't help you if you are hopeless, but they are a pretty big factor. This is just a rough estimate, but having legacy is like having a 150 point boost to your SAT while being Asian is about minus 150 points to your SAT. Obviously its not as exact as that, but you get my point. You hear of Harvard being almost impossible to get into without perfect scores yet you look at their stats and it isn't perfect. It is almost impossible to get in without perfect scores, if you aren't hooked.

You never refer to other rankings. US news you never refer to that yet it is probably the more referred to ranking system with Liberal arts and national ranked separately, but it is more accurate which is why we no one here even references Forbes and we all look at us news. Ranking liberal arts with national is harder since there isn't a specific way to rank them. I don't like ranking liberal arts and national together either. But there is a reason top national universities produce so much success(not just because they have more students either). If you rank them like Forbes, then obviously liberal arts would get an advantage since student feedback is so important and future success not as important as it needs to be. Forbes is unusually biased to liberal arts colleges in their rankings. In reality, future success is what counts the most(don't need you to agree with me on this). You see Bill Gates and Mark Zuckerberg, both Harvard undergrad, yes dropout but Harvard undergrad nonetheless. 4 years is another 4 years. You'll still try to enjoy them to the fullest, but there are still many years ahead and college is another stepping stone.
 

Ihatetennis

Hall of Fame
We're talking about Ivys here. Legacy plays a huge factor. From my own school alone a lot of legacy have got in when they shouldn't have if they weren't legacy. Same with race. Legacy and race won't help you if you are hopeless, but they are a pretty big factor. This is just a rough estimate, but having legacy is like having a 150 point boost to your SAT while being Asian is about minus 150 points to your SAT. Obviously its not as exact as that, but you get my point. You hear of Harvard being almost impossible to get into without perfect scores yet you look at their stats and it isn't perfect. It is almost impossible to get in without perfect scores, if you aren't hooked.

You never refer to other rankings. US news you never refer to that yet it is probably the more referred to ranking system with Liberal arts and national ranked separately, but it is more accurate which is why we no one here even references Forbes and we all look at us news. Ranking liberal arts with national is harder since there isn't a specific way to rank them. I don't like ranking liberal arts and national together either. But there is a reason top national universities produce so much success(not just because they have more students either). If you rank them like Forbes, then obviously liberal arts would get an advantage since student feedback is so important and future success not as important as it needs to be. Forbes is unusually biased to liberal arts colleges in their rankings. In reality, future success is what counts the most(don't need you to agree with me on this). You see Bill Gates and Mark Zuckerberg, both Harvard undergrad, yes dropout but Harvard undergrad nonetheless. 4 years is another 4 years. You'll still try to enjoy them to the fullest, but there are still many years ahead and college is another stepping stone.
john greene
paul newman
lead singer of walk the moon
josh radnor (ted mosebey in how i met your mother)
all kenyon grads

there are many famous people that come from liberal arts schools

herbert lehman went to w&l and an iranian prince went to williams(due to iranian revolution did not return after freshman year)
 

Faker

Semi-Pro
john greene
paul newman
lead singer of walk the moon
josh radnor (ted mosebey in how i met your mother)
all kenyon grads

there are many famous people that come from liberal arts schools

herbert lehman went to w&l and an iranian prince went to williams(due to iranian revolution did not return after freshman year)
Don't start listing these people. Its useless since you can list a billion more from Harvard alone.
 

tennisbuck

Professional
We're talking about Ivys here. Legacy plays a huge factor. From my own school alone a lot of legacy have got in when they shouldn't have if they weren't legacy. Same with race. Legacy and race won't help you if you are hopeless, but they are a pretty big factor. This is just a rough estimate, but having legacy is like having a 150 point boost to your SAT while being Asian is about minus 150 points to your SAT. Obviously its not as exact as that, but you get my point. You hear of Harvard being almost impossible to get into without perfect scores yet you look at their stats and it isn't perfect. It is almost impossible to get in without perfect scores, if you aren't hooked.

You never refer to other rankings. US news you never refer to that yet it is probably the more referred to ranking system with Liberal arts and national ranked separately, but it is more accurate which is why we no one here even references Forbes and we all look at us news. Ranking liberal arts with national is harder since there isn't a specific way to rank them. I don't like ranking liberal arts and national together either. But there is a reason top national universities produce so much success(not just because they have more students either). If you rank them like Forbes, then obviously liberal arts would get an advantage since student feedback is so important and future success not as important as it needs to be. Forbes is unusually biased to liberal arts colleges in their rankings. In reality, future success is what counts the most(don't need you to agree with me on this). You see Bill Gates and Mark Zuckerberg, both Harvard undergrad, yes dropout but Harvard undergrad nonetheless. 4 years is another 4 years. You'll still try to enjoy them to the fullest, but there are still many years ahead and college is another stepping stone.
I agree that ranking national university's with LACs is tough however I think Forbes does a good job but you disagree which is fine. We are ranking colleges based on different criteria as you highlighted above.

What I was referring to is what percent of students at said schools are legacy? A very small percent I would guess so it shouldn't be too much of a factor
 

Faker

Semi-Pro
I agree that ranking national university's with LACs is tough however I think Forbes does a good job but you disagree which is fine. We are ranking colleges based on different criteria as you highlighted above.

What I was referring to is what percent of students at said schools are legacy? A very small percent I would guess so it shouldn't be too much of a factor
http://dailyprincetonian.com/news/2015/05/legacy-status-remains-a-factor-in-admissions/

A lot. Anywhere from 10-20% of a class. The graduating high school class of 2 years ago for Upenn was comprised of 13 percent legacies. You take into consideration how many legacies there are for these universities in the world and this is really high.

I don't want to turn this into a discussion about legacy, but it is probably the most bs thing about college admissions right behind affirmative action.
 

tennisbuck

Professional
http://dailyprincetonian.com/news/2015/05/legacy-status-remains-a-factor-in-admissions/

A lot. Anywhere from 10-20% of a class. The graduating high school class of 2 years ago for Upenn was comprised of 13 percent legacies. You take into consideration how many legacies there are for these universities in the world and this is really high.

I don't want to turn this into a discussion about legacy, but it is probably the most bs thing about college admissions right behind affirmative action.
Interesting. I didn't know it was that large a number. Aren't there legacies at liberal arts colleges and other schools that are not Ivy?
 

Faker

Semi-Pro
Interesting. I didn't know it was that large a number. Aren't there legacies at liberal arts colleges and other schools that are not Ivy?
Yeah, all schools that I know of. Colleges are open about it too and always make bs statements like "they are an integral part" or "they have more commitment". I think it'll be done away with eventually. Maybe not within the next two decades though since it isn't as controversial as affirmative action.

Forgot, but MIT doesn't do legacy. Only top tier school that doesn't i think.
 
Last edited:

tennisbuck

Professional
Don't start listing these people. Its useless since you can list a billion more from Harvard alone.
National Universities have way more students and have way more famous people. However proportionally, I think liberal arts colleges have a lot too taken into account how few students they have. Kenyon"s list highlighted by IHT is pretty impressive in itself.
 
National Universities have way more students and have way more famous people. However proportionally, I think liberal arts colleges have a lot too taken into account how few students they have. Kenyon"s list highlighted by IHT is pretty impressive in itself.
Kenyon's incoming class profile...

SAT
Middle 50% of Critical Reading 630-730
Middle 50% of Math 610-690
Middle 50% of Writing 620-720
Middle 50% of Combined 1860-2140
ACT
Middle 50% 28-32
 

tennisbuck

Professional
Kenyon's incoming class profile...

SAT
Middle 50% of Critical Reading 630-730
Middle 50% of Math 610-690
Middle 50% of Writing 620-720
Middle 50% of Combined 1860-2140
ACT
Middle 50% 28-32
their stats are decent; they are 25 for liberal arts colleges on US News so this is about what you would expect. Kenyon is in no way comparable to an IVY; I was just saying their list of alums was impressive

Here are the 26th ranked National Univerities stats

Middle 50% rate for SAT scores:

620-720 Critical Reading
630-740 Math
620-720 Writing

Middle 50% range for ACT composite scores: 28-33
 

Faker

Semi-Pro
their stats are decent; they are 25 for liberal arts colleges on US News so this is about what you would expect. Kenyon is in no way comparable to an IVY; I was just saying their list of alums was impressive

Here are the 26th ranked National Univerities stats

Middle 50% rate for SAT scores:

620-720 Critical Reading
630-740 Math
620-720 Writing

Middle 50% range for ACT composite scores: 28-33
^just wanted to point out. That is UVA and they are pretty much the most biased school when it comes to state school favoritism for in state vs out of state. Total VA offers: 3,594 (40.7% offer rate) Total OOS offers: 4,934 (24.46% offer rate). Virginians bringing the average down by a lot.
 

Alec

Rookie
D3 is becoming a lot more popular because players are realizing that the top D3 teams are still great at tennis and they're getting a great education. A friend of mine is committed to CMS (#1 D3) and he said he liked that he was still playing high level tennis with a great chance to win NCAA championships and getting an amazing education at the same time.
 

Ihatetennis

Hall of Fame
^just wanted to point out. That is UVA and they are pretty much the most biased school when it comes to state school favoritism for in state vs out of state. Total VA offers: 3,594 (40.7% offer rate) Total OOS offers: 4,934 (24.46% offer rate). Virginians bringing the average down by a lot.
regardless to whether they brought it down or not, the 26th school would still be in that range, lower than the 26th liberal arts it seems
D3 is becoming a lot more popular because players are realizing that the top D3 teams are still great at tennis and they're getting a great education. A friend of mine is committed to CMS (#1 D3) and he said he liked that he was still playing high level tennis with a great chance to win NCAA championships and getting an amazing education at the same time.
and absolutely, unless youre top 25 blue chip theres no reason to go d1 if youre pursuing a proffesional career or a tough undergrad. if you want to major in business then d1 is a good path, but only for the less time consuming majors.
 

mmk

Hall of Fame
There are numerous ways to rank schools, I personally look at starting and mid-career salaries. For most of us in the real world, money matters.
 

CaKid

New User
Chicago has 18 recruits over the last four years. Does carrying a large roster have any impact? Most teams only play their top 6-8 players, I would think. Many D1 teams are significantly smaller.
 

Ihatetennis

Hall of Fame
Chicago has 18 recruits over the last four years. Does carrying a large roster have any impact? Most teams only play their top 6-8 players, I would think. Many D1 teams are significantly smaller.
having a roster of 18 allows the coach to sub players in and out to rest, as well as accomadate the tough school schedule. basically 3 different a teams. Imagine it as the us dream team basketball team. No shortage of talent allows everyone to stay healthy get the grades, and compete well.

http://athletics.uchicago.edu/sports/mten/2014-15/files/teamcume.htm look at the stats to show playing time. this way they have like 3 players to fill every sspot.
 

andfor

Legend
It's not unusual for DIII and NAIA teams to carry large rosters. Seen it in other divisions as well. There may be benefits to the program financially to carry a larger roster. Any coaches have input on this practice?
 

Faker

Semi-Pro
regardless to whether they brought it down or not, the 26th school would still be in that range, lower than the 26th liberal arts it seems
Okay, I'm looking at my school's stats right now. For Brandeis we have a 50% acceptance rate for Brandeis over the past 5 years. Average SAT for getting into Brandeis for my schools is also 2050. We only had 1 kid get rejected from Brandeis with a 2000+ SAT. Then for UVA, our average SAT for acceptance is 1930. This doesn't tell the story at all. Looking further, you see kids who got in with 1500 SATs.....obviously athletes. The only other kids who got accepted had 2250+ SATs with perfect GPAs. We even had kids with perfect GPAs and 2300 SATs get rejected by UVA. I am out of state.

Don't make it seem like Brandeis is harder to get into than UVA(OOS). It is much easier. Whether you would choose Brandeis over UVA is a different question, but like I said, the athletes bring down the stats by a lot for schools like UVA. In state students also bring their stats down, but considering in state student population is so high for UVA, that is somewhat excusable I guess.
 
Last edited:

Faker

Semi-Pro
and absolutely, unless youre top 25 blue chip theres no reason to go d1 if youre pursuing a proffesional career or a tough undergrad. if you want to major in business then d1 is a good path, but only for the less time consuming majors.
If you had any choice of school and could only get in with tennis, D3 could still be better. Depending on where you are at in terms of skill level, you have one of the most prestigious schools for econ/finance/business in Uchicago. You also have CMU which isn't half bad in business and amazing in STEM. There are obviously less choices, but the reason why Uchicago is so popular is because it is the only D3 school other than MIT than can compete with HYPS in terms of prestige.
 

Ihatetennis

Hall of Fame
If you had any choice of school and could only get in with tennis, D3 could still be better. Depending on where you are at in terms of skill level, you have one of the most prestigious schools for econ/finance/business in Uchicago. You also have CMU which isn't half bad in business and amazing in STEM. There are obviously less choices, but the reason why Uchicago is so popular is because it is the only D3 school other than MIT than can compete with HYPS in terms of prestige.
Amherst and Williams are there even if you don't think so. But d3 pre med and pre law are easier to pursue.
 

tennisbuck

Professional
First weekend of d3 tennis, and here are some results I saw

UChicago over Coe 9-0(no surprise; we all know Chicago is gonna be sick)
Kenyon over Indiana Tech 8-1
Carleton over UW-La Cross 6-3 in a match betweeen regionally ranked teams (I noticed Carleton has a freshman playing 1?
 
First weekend of d3 tennis, and here are some results I saw

UChicago over Coe 9-0(no surprise; we all know Chicago is gonna be sick)
Kenyon over Indiana Tech 8-1
Carleton over UW-La Cross 6-3 in a match betweeen regionally ranked teams (I noticed Carleton has a freshman playing 1?
Chicago looks like a loaded team this year. Great to see all the coverage of Division III tennis. Looks like everyday more 4 star recruits are committing to Div III schools.
 

Ihatetennis

Hall of Fame
I wouldn't go that far lol... but they're definitely looking good
2 5star recruits and 4stars. I mean bottom top 25, but still. 2 5star recruits is really good.

I don't think they can be that good though, I just think they're recruiting that good.
 

Alec

Rookie
2 5star recruits and 4stars. I mean bottom top 25, but still. 2 5star recruits is really good.

I don't think they can be that good though, I just think they're recruiting that good.
I'm not doubting that just there is a huge level difference even with best of the best D3 times simply because of depth. I have some friends going to top D3 schools next year and they've even said this
 
Top