Earlier this morning, I ran across an article that has inspired me so much, I’ve decided to write about something that isn’t movie flavored.

Forbes.com came out with the list of 650 Best Colleges (which you an view here). While best lists are very commonplace, the creators of these rankings used a very interesting scale. Below you will find their reasoning.

“Our annual ranking of the 650 best undergraduate institutions focuses on the things that matter the most to students: quality of teaching, great career prospects, graduation rates and low levels of debt. Unlike other lists, we pointedly ignore ephemeral measures such as school “reputation” and ill-conceived metrics that reward wasteful spending. We try and evaluate the college purchase as a consumer would:  Is it worth spending as much as a quarter of a million dollars for this degree? “

This criteria is why the Ivy leagues didn’t take up most of the top 10 spots and why UGA (206) ranked higher than my school Georgia Tech (397). In fact a small liberal arts college Williams College took the number one spot. I especially like that they took into account quality of teaching and low debts levels. Too many times in lists such as these, people tend to forget that the students make the school and their opinions should be reflected. I go to a world class institution and thankfully will graduate in December without a cent of debt (due to a few factors like my parents making enough money, outside scholarships and a reasonably affordable tuition). This is not true for many who attend college so I’m glad to see it represented here.

While I certainly applaud Forbes for their , I am also very skeptical of it and how it can determine a best college. With that being said here are a few of my thoughts on the matter.

1. School Reputation: It’s true that a school’s reputation shouldn’t be the end all be all for determining the best schools, but they should ALWAYS be included. Why? Because the schools earned those reputations. For example, you know when choosing Georgia Tech you are going to attend one of the best schools in the country. Tech has earned the right to say that because of its world renowned engineering departments, prominent alumni, and company support. Why would that get left out of a poll determining who is best? A universities reputation is VERY key to its success. Looking at the PDF file of the report it’s astounding to see that post graduate success is worth 30% of the final grade, yet they claim that the school, which developed those alumni, should be credited for it? That foolishness leads to my next point…

2. Great Career Prospects. With this bullet alone, any school with well regarded STEM programs should be above liberal arts schools, especially if they have good engineering programs. STEM fields (especially engineering) are viewed as “recession proof” majors, so shouldn’t that give them a leg up? And if companies consistently employ graduates from your school, wouldn’t that mean that your degree is worth more due to the job security?

3. Degree of Difficulty. I will probably upset some people with this one. I am a firm believer that the more difficult the curriculum the better the graduate should be viewed. It’s also no secret that the harder the school, the more likely it is that you won’t graduate on time. In fact at Georgia Tech your advisers give you a 4 year schedule but your anticipated date on your actual registration is 5 yrs from the time you enter, not 4. Which is what surprises me about why so many liberal arts schools consistently top schools with STEM fields. Now this is not to say that I believe liberal arts is an easy or worthless degree. What I have to make clear is that it should be expected for a liberal arts student to graduate in 4 years. They pick majors they feel a connection with, can focus heavily on the parts they like, and their majors don’t rely on skills they don’t have. I’m pretty sure that as long as you can read, write, and think critically, you can graduate with your liberal arts degree. Conversely, STEM majors (speaking from experience) don’t have that luxury. Sure we’re good in math and science, but routinely we take classes of which we haven’t the slightest clue how to attempt a problem, let alone solve it. We take classes in engineering fields we don’t specialize in and that we my not use ever again, just because we have to in order to graduate as engineers. With all of that implied, it shouldn’t be shocking that strictly engineering schools have much longer graduation rates than other colleges. The focus shouldn’t be on when you graduate, more on how the curriculum has prepared you for the real world.

4. Miscellaneous Gripes. If lack of debt is included in the criteria, why do public universities rank so low? How is quality of teaching determined? Why are they counting alumni on the Forbes list? How does a school with a yearly tuition of $55,000 rank #1 and get no mention for its financial aid package?