but you should form your own rankings based on what you are looking for in architecture. there are plenty of great schools that didn't make the top 10.

if there exists a national ranking system, i've yet to encounter it

I think its ridiculous to pick a school based on a ranking without knowing exactly how they earned that rank to begin with. Vague firm surveys are hardly reliable. Ask any person in America what the best college is, most will say something like Harvard or Yale, even if they have no idea why.

I would like to see a ranking based on the % of students accepted vs those that graduated, and the % of those that graduated that found meaningful employment. I know there was someone on Archinect that compiled alot of this info, but I can't remember which thread it was in...it was all shown in graphics...I personally would rather see the raw numbers.

But is that really an indication of quality education though?

For instance, students graduating from arch schools in China are probably a lot more likely to find 'meanngful' employment right now than are their counterparts in the southern USA.

Furthermore, how does one operationalize 'meaningful employment' anyways?
If I graduated architecture school but am now working as a set designer or a installation artist, is that considered 'meaningful'? What if I work for a government agency, or a non-profit group? Does a type designer, a carpentor, a sculptor, or home-builder make the cut?

Sorry if I'm going off on a bit of a tangent, but I firmly believe that architectural education opens many doors in a number of different fields. It isn't always just a stepping stone to liecensure, so measuring it as such might not be particularily useful.

By meaningful employment I mean being able to support oneself, as opposed to working for minimum wage at Home Depot.