The Bruins have just beaten the usb trogans by 110. Oh, and we beat Cal by 10 at the same time.
Forbes has released its annual ranking of the 650 American undergraduate colleges, and the results are much more believable than recent US News & World Report rankings.
Apparently, when you subtract "How rich and spoiled are you?" from the equation, the answers make a lot more sense.
U.C.L.A. was the number 3 public school in the country, behind the University of Virginia and The College of William and Mary. At number 55 overall, the Bruins placed 15 spots ahead of Big Brother Berkeley (#70) and are a whole page ahead of the triple digit trogies (#165).
When small private liberal arts colleges are subtracted, and the rankings compare major research universities, U.C.L.A. sits at #28 in the nation.
Unlike the USN&WR rankings, which puts a heavy weight on a school's endowment, the Forbes rankings weigh more heavily toward a school's performance as a function of it's monetary value.
The rankings are based on five general categories: Post Graduate success (30%), which evaluates alumni pay and prominence, Student Satisfaction (27.5%), which includes professor evaluations and freshman to sophomore year retention rates, Debt (17.5%), which penalizes schools for high student debt loads and default rates, Four Year Graduation Rate (17.5%) and Competitive Awards (7.5%), which rewards schools whose students win prestigious scholarships and fellowships like the Rhodes, the Marshall and the Fulbright.
Details of the methodology used to compile the rankings can be seen here.
The Bruins' ranking would undoubtedly be higher were it not for the always high costs of Westwood living and the more recent tuition increases, both of which are big contributors to the average student debt for Bruins upon graduation.
Of course with any data set and ranking system, there will be inherent biases, which may explain how Williams College placed first overall in the Forbes list. I have to admit I really wasn't aware that a Williams College even existed (turns out it's in Western Massachusetts, in, naturally, Williamstown), which goes to show the value of a successful athletic program - ahem, Guerrero. But athletics aside, a metric like alumni pay and prominence is intuitively a better indicator of a school's value and performance than a metric like alumni inheritance, and explains why U.C.L.A. is ranked highly, and the usb trogans are found on the following page.
This is also why if Forbes competitor Fortune comes out with a ranking system that gives heavy weight to Senora Ross academics and mathematic fraud and trust fund balances and rooftop liasons with sexual ballers, then Southern Cal can proudly ascend the overall rankings and call themselves number one by a landslide. Until then, we'll just let Forbes reinforce what The World University Rankings and Washington Monthly and anyone with any intellectual honesty already knows to be true.