OT 2015 Forbes Top U.S. Colleges announced (B1G)

Submitted by MichiganPhotoRod on July 21st, 2015 at 1:04 PM

Forbes Magazine is out with its list of top colleges in the U.S.

 

B1G members:

19 - Northwestern

45 - Michigan

68 - Illinois

70 - Wisconsin

82 - Maryland

107 - Indiana

108 - Minnesota

119 - Purdue

155 - thebucksarenuts

166 - Penn St.

169 - MSU

177 - Rutgers

192 - Iowa

280 - Nebraska

The full list can be seen here: http://www.forbes.com/top-colleges/list/

Comments

karpodiem

July 21st, 2015 at 1:20 PM ^

Williams? Swarthmore? Pamona?

lol. And don't give me this "they're great schools!" nonsense. 

These Forbe articles are nothing but an open hand from Forbes to have these smaller schools get advertisement and for Forbes to get some back door money - enrollment at small liberal art schools has been in decline since the last recession. Gee, I wonder why?

They're paying to have articles/rankings written like this so they can try and reverse the declining enrollment.

 

wahooverine

July 21st, 2015 at 2:17 PM ^

Are you involved in academia or did you read that from an article linked on the Drudge Report?  When have universities ever not been a primary vector and incubator of political thought and philosophy (new or old)? Across the political spectrum, professors profess and student clubs develop thought leaders and mindless drones alike.  Words like "doctrine" or "fanatic" are terms applied pejoritively to a philsophy you disagree with or feel is extreme, both subjective individual judgements.  Nothing has been "taken over", it's always been this way.

wahooverine

July 21st, 2015 at 2:29 PM ^

And if it feels like "leftist" political doctrine is taking over university liberal arts programs it's merely a sign of the times - the prevailing political zeitgeist  - not a cause of it, nor a malevolent coordinated plan.  Millenials tend to be liberal. The opposite was true during the Reagan era with those damn free market, small government fanatics (for instance at U Chicago and USC) preaching their doctrine of monetarism and supply-side economics...

LS And Play

July 21st, 2015 at 2:48 PM ^

I will be entering my senior year at Michigan this fall, and while I never said that 99 out of 100 are soft, there are a lot more than there used to be. I've seen girls on several occasions take offense when I held doors open for them around campus. What used to be called "being nice" is now a sign of male patriarchy. And I know that's just one small anecdote. I could go on, but I won't.

BornSinner

July 21st, 2015 at 3:26 PM ^

Funny story about one of those articles. 

Benovolent Sexism and Hostile Sexism popped up on my actual MCATs. 

I lost like 3 minutes on 1 question cuz I was so dumbfounded at the fact that something called benovolent sexism can actually exist haha. 

The term just strikes me as someone not being able to get over the fact that men are biologically superior and thus like to help women out in certain circumstances. 

Another example of what over-analyzation can do to society. An unfortunate byproduct of advancing tech and knowledge. 

glewe

July 22nd, 2015 at 12:47 AM ^

 

I was so dumbfounded ... that something called benovolent [sic] sexism can actually exist

 

Oh, okay. I can easily explain this concept to you. Let me just make sure I don't miss any part of your point....

 

men are biologically superior and thus like to help women out in certain circumstances.

 

You are kidding, right? I mean, hey, at least you're honest.

I cannot even begin to fathom this remark. It's like you have not even the basest grasp of what the word "biologically superior" actually means. Anthropologists used to think this way based on measuring the circumference of the skulls of non-white humans. They found that the skulls of non-white people were smaller. Therefore, they argued, their brains were smaller. The narrative they then fed was that whites are intellectually superior.

Look--anyone can look at Twitter flame wars and Tumblr microaggressions blogs and then claim they're ridiculous. But if you do not have even the most basic understanding of all the political theory and philosophy that underly critiques of Western cultural constructions, then PLEASE do not remark upon them. That'd be like me saying, "Ugh, Linux operating systems are the worst," based on five (or five hundred!) remote interactions with the interface. In reality, I know nothing about Linux: I have never used it, and I do not intend to use it. I might not like the aesthetic, and I may think that because I have seen it in action, I understand it enough to pass judgment. In reality, I have not spent any time trying to understand deeply why it is so commonly used, and I am therefore not remotely qualified to comment on the efficiency of the OS or the wisdom of its users. In turn, I should trust that Linux has some degree of utility and makes sense to at least a certain user base. Otherwise, it would not be so popular.

This thread is swiftly becoming a candidate for closure because it is becoming political. But my point is this: Instead of just deeming something foreign as bad and wrong because it offends your sensibilities of what should be said and done, consider that there are literally millions of people--many of them both more successful and resonant than either you or I--who have over the course of centuries studied, written, and organized against sexism, including benevolent sexism. Until you have engaged with that interface on more than the most basic level, please refrain from commenting.

Kapitan Howard

July 21st, 2015 at 4:28 PM ^

Of all the things that definitely happened, this definitely happened the most. If the evil feminzazi scourge was upset with him, it was for sure because he was trying to be polite, and not for some faux pas he definitely didn't commit.

BornSinner

July 21st, 2015 at 3:01 PM ^

I just graduated last year and have never had that happen to me. I've heard stories of it, but you're falling into a classic representative heuristic... you know anecdotes and all... 

Again... in college these things will be higher than the norm. You're not going to see anybody doing this in real life. 

As a small example, the amount of my friends that were involved in SJW activities in college dropped significantly in real life when they realized that many of the peripheral shit emphasized in the classroom don't mean anything in the real world. (ie your door holding example) 

LS And Play

July 21st, 2015 at 3:19 PM ^

That's fair, and I also want to point out that I did mention what I was saying is simply an anecdote. And you used an anecdote as well, which is fine! While probably a majority of SJW's do what you are saying, I think there are many who are unlikely to change. 

As for my anecdote, I'm more fascinated by that kind of behavior than anything else. I truly don't understand why doing nice things is offensive. Maybe I'm just ignorant. 

BornSinner

July 21st, 2015 at 3:30 PM ^

Yeah I get what you're saying. 

With regards to my anecdote vs yours', it was just an example of the opposite happening. I would also say my scenario is more "generalizationable" if we're going that path given trends in history and Occam's Razor. 

Blog typing is tough. 

Cheers. 

MGoBender

July 22nd, 2015 at 9:11 AM ^

The problem is, you're saying there's a "significant amount" of these door-holding-hating feminists based on your extremely limited anecdotal experience.

A certain top-polling presidential candidate has been in trouble for calling a miniscule segment of a population "significant."  

Stats and facts and such should be playing a bigger role in any discussions like this.

drjaws

July 21st, 2015 at 8:33 PM ^

I'm in my mid-thirties and have held the door open for people out of habit since I was a kid. I was taught to be polite. Probably overdone as my family is from the south and I am a first generation Yankee, as they say.

I have never had someone, male or female "take offense." I've had people not say "thank you." Thats about as far as it went. And I went to the "liberal bastion of femininity" UC Berkeley.

Sounds like you got other issues you are either ignoring or shouldn't be feeding.

Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad

wolverine1987

July 21st, 2015 at 5:12 PM ^

Since, well, always, they have hired business and law grads. That hasn't changed. what's changed is consumer choice and preference. Though I know it's super easy to be anti employer, espcially for people of a certain, loveable POV, this might actually be the result of choice. Not to mention that liberal arts schools tend to be hugely expensive compared to others.

BornSinner

July 21st, 2015 at 1:55 PM ^

Umm... SLAs are actually pretty good schools. Swat is a great school even if the kids are weirdos that go there (live right next to Swat) 

It's right up there with Middlebury, Amherst, Haverford, Bryn Mawr etc.. 

These schools are huge on the east coast... so... I don't expect them to get much play nationally. Hence why a lot of the MGoBloggers don't even know them LOL. 

They generally aren't even ranked with your typical big schools anyway. 

This list is very biased against public schools tho. 

BornSinner

July 21st, 2015 at 2:07 PM ^

I did too. They're huge especially for the children of hippies, so obviously it depends on your crowd and most people know of them. I would also say they are more popular in PA and NJ than they are in CT and MA. And well... they're not typically for your standard professional career trajectory types either. 

A lot of the smartest people I know went to SLAs vs Ivies. I just don't understand how kids can like the campuses. They're beautiful, but most of their student bodies are smaller than your average high school in Michigan LOL. 

If my social experience at college was like high school where the whole school would find out about my stupidity and escapades the next day, I wouldn't have survived. 

 

wahooverine

July 21st, 2015 at 2:22 PM ^

Those are sort of the equivalent of schools like Kenyon or Denison in the mid-west. Small, artsy, sometimes hippy-ish, liberal schools. I'm generalizing from own experience, but most people I've met who attended those type schools don't have to worry about "marketable skills" in the real world (due to their backgrounds) and instead study something interesting to them - art, writing, history.  Can't blame them.

mackbru

July 21st, 2015 at 2:31 PM ^

OP, you don't know what you're talking about. Williams and Pomona are, by almost any standard, top-ten colleges. (US News ranks them both in the top five.) Academically, they're on par with the top Ivies, and their acceptance standards are among the highest in the world. The whole "declining enrollment" thing doesn't really apply to these schools. And, anyway, the broader decline in college enrollment isn't about quality. it's about cost. Private colleges are more expensive than public ones. In a recession, guess what happens?

Also, your logic is bizarre. So these tiny little colleges, with their relatively small endowments, are buying off Forbes? But the huge top-flight universities, with their massive endowments, are helpless lambs? 

eth2

July 21st, 2015 at 4:36 PM ^

As background, I am married to a Williams grad. So I have learned quite a bit about the school, have met many Williams alums, and have visited the campus many times.  Based on everything I have learned and witnessed, I have no reason to question the legitimacy of Williams' ranking specifically or similar schools broadly.

And I call b.s. on your assertion that their enrollment is declining at liberal arts colleges, at least the ones at or near the top of this list. They remain some of the most selective schools in the country with significantly lower acceptance rates than most schools including Michigan.

The idea that these schools would have to pay magazines for favorable rankings in order to drum up more applicants is ludicrous. 

 

 

 

bronxblue

July 21st, 2015 at 8:51 PM ^

I don't know about the relative merit of the schools in the rankings, but I used to work for a company that did press with Forbes and they absolutely will cater to those who will give them some copy to fill pages.  At this point, Forbes is basically Buzzfeed with a slightly more traditional name attached to it.  There is no world in which f*ing Williams College (a perfectly fine school) is ranked 6 spots ahead of Harvard.  And while the the service academies provide a good education, Forbes conveniently ignores the whole "you have to serve in the military" part of the equation.  

rockediny

July 21st, 2015 at 1:22 PM ^

That seems low for us.

 

Edit: After actually looking at the list, I've learned not to take this ranking seriously. Never heard of half those schools. What is this ranking based on?

El Jeffe

July 21st, 2015 at 1:21 PM ^

Looks like Chapel Hill's the best bargain at #50 and a mere $45K per year. Plus you don't actually have to go to class to get a degree, apparently, so you can work two full time jobs to pay for it.

East German Judge

July 21st, 2015 at 1:51 PM ^

Little brother is well, proving to be little brother as they continue to bring up the rear in most academic surveys.  Guess people don't value the school of animal husbandry like they once use to.