The rankings commenced with a simple thought: let’s ask college presidents to nominate the top schools in their category — National University, National Liberal Arts, Regional University, Regional Liberal Arts. In other words, the ratings began as a system of peer review. To everyone’s surprise the magazine exploded off the shelves with college applicants and their parents keenly interested in a comparative data set, something missing from the college landscape up until then. Naturally, the schools at the top touted their standing while the not-so-fortunate institutions cried foul.

US News responded by delivering a more “scientific” ranking system which while still using peer review also included variables like SAT/ACT average, the percentage of enrolled students who graduated in the top 10 percent of their high school classes, college class sizes, percent of faculty with PhDs, endowment per student, percent of alumni who give back, and other indicators of “quality.” Again, those institutions at the bottom of the ratings stomped their feet, some refusing to participate, because the ranking methodology never quite seemed to capture the unique superlatives of the benighted schools.

As a result, to this day US News is constantly tinkering with their algorithm, asking questions like, “Does measuring average test scores penalize colleges that admit and graduate lower-scoring high school students?” “Does endowment per student (or money in the bank) really indicate quality?” “Does alumni giving reflect true distinction?” US News will argue that annual revisions to the ratings equation add ever-increasing fairness and precision to their model. A skeptic might say they need occasionally to alter the race because if the same colleges always win, then why would anyone read the new edition.

I suggest you ask a different question: How can the ratings benefit my student and their college search?

First, colleges perched on close rungs of the rankings – between, say, school 20 and 23 – are distinct but not very different in terms of college wealth, financial aid, and the extent of on-campus and off-campus programming. But there is a material difference between the top 30 schools and the schools ranked 50-100. Thus, it’s useful to group colleges into cohorts to better suss out what programs and offerings will make a real difference for your student.

Second, you’ll likely find a relationship between a school’s rating and their willingness to be flexible with their financial aid dollars. The stronger the rating, the less willing to negotiate. Why? Because the ratings correlate with demand. The schools at the top possess the leverage to stick with their financial plans while the lower-ranked schools in lesser demand need your business and are more willing to discount. The important caveat is that, with few exceptions, the schools in the top 30 are also the richest in endowment per student. This results in a dynamic whereby those who can pay must, but those who demonstrate need can expect strong aid awards — that is, if you can get in. So, when it comes to funding, at the top of the heap you have “wealthy but relatively inflexible.” At the bottom, “less wealthy and more willing to negotiate.”

Third, the rankings include some basic but useful information beyond the simple rating, some of which might be relevant for you. What are a school’s most popular majors? Which programs are rated best? Are there good opportunities for research, internships, and independent study? Do students participate in high-impact learning experiences? What are the retention (first to second year) and graduation rates? Also, be sure to go back a few years to look at any long-term changes in a school’s rankings. Big swings in rankings can signal big changes on campus or in financial position.

Finally, one way to look at the rankings is through the lens of prestige, a slippery but important factor in higher education that’s driven by scarcity and intangibles. Like a diamond ring, in addition to the “objective” 5 c’s of quality, value is to a large degree determined by limited distribution and subjective perceptions. It’s the same for colleges.

In the end, the reality is that the elite few, while having some of the best faculty and facilities, are such because they are perceived as such. If it’s prestige a student is after, they must be prepared to battle with tens of thousands of other competitors for a top-rated seat. But understand that while college administrators are often taken with irrational fervor over rankings, matters of prestige don’t always correspond to the program that’s right for your student and family.

Ratings are useful tools when used judiciously. They can be an emotional nightmare if they use you.