Are the Ivies worth all the bother?

College Search & Selection
521

<p>

</p>

<p>I wonder why! We form a very congenial bunch. Heck, “we” embraced JymJunior with open arms! Of course, that is … Houston!</p>

<p>Perhaps the Nascar and SEC crowd will like us more since we did dispatch our prodigal Aggies as Ambassadors. </p>

<p>PS Now that I did upset Wisconsin and Arkansas, I am prepared to called to order by Sally for my prejudice against the College Station boys and Texas A$M. And perhaps against Houston --which would be entirely true in the case of the armpit of Texas! ;)</p>

522

<p>xiggi, I only try to come to the defense of the underdog states. No one messes with Texas. :)</p>

523

<p>More regional school data: the West</p>

<p>Based on data on 2010 enrolled freshmen provided by the U.S. Dept of Education, the student bodies at elite private colleges in the West are nearly as regionally inflected as the Ivies.</p>

<p>Stanford: West 50% (inc. CA 37.5%); Northeast 16.5%; Midwest 8.9%; South 12.2%. California is represented at a little over 3 times its weight in the national population; the rest of the West is just slightly overrepresented relative to population. The other regions are underrepresented relative to population, the Northeast a little less so than the other two. Outside of CA, the top producers of Stanford students are TX (80), NY (67), and WA (61). </p>

<p>Caltech: West 39.6% (inc. CA 31.1%); Northeast 23.4%; Midwest 16.2%; South 13.5%. Definitely heavy on Californians, but better geographic balance than most; South most underrepresented relative to population. We’re talking really small numbers here, though. After CA (69), top producers of Caltech students are IL (12) and NY (11) though WA again does well with 7.</p>

<p>University of Southern California: West 66.1% (inc. CA 58.2%); Northeast 12.2%; Midwest 8.2%; South 9.1%. Pretty much just a local school, with all other regions underrepresented; relative to population, the South is most underrepresented. Seems like Californians don’t much care for the South and the feeling is mutual. Top producers of USC students: CA (1,731), followed by (an order of magnitude smaller) TX (129), NY (117), IL (94), though WA (58) and OR (57) also chip in a few.</p>

524

<p>More regional school data: the Midwest</p>

<p>Based on data on 2010 enrolled freshmen provided by the U.S. Dept of Education, the student bodies at elite private colleges in the Midwest are a little less regionally dominated than most schools in other regions. While they do draw heavily from their home turf, they also draw heavily from the Northeast (some more than others). The West and South are underrepresented relative to population, but there are substantial numbers of Californians, as everywhere except the South; though generally speaking, Californians seem more drawn to the Northeast than to the Midwest.</p>

<p>University of Chicago: Midwest 31.5%; Northeast 27%; South 13.2%; West 16.5% (inc. CA 10.2%). Definitely Midwest-heavy but not by a wide margin; Northeast actually overrepresented relative to population; West, and especially California, fairly well represented. The South, not so much. Biggest producers of Chicago students: IL, naturally (243), CA (141), NY (122), NJ (67), TX (64), but OH (53), MN (33) and MI (31) send a few. I’d characterize this as a “Northern” school with good balance between Midwest and Northeast and good representation from the West. </p>

<p>Northwestern: Midwest 41.5%; Northeast 22.6%; South 12.5%; West 11.6% (inc. CA 8%). Hmmm . . . Very different profile from the University of Chicago, across town. Much more Midwestern and a bit less Northeastern; the Northeast is still well represented (about proportional to population) but there are almost twice as many Midwesterners whereas at U of C it’s much closer. Lighter on Westerners, including Californians, and even lighter than Chicago on Southerners. I’d characterize this as more a Midwest-Northeast school, with the Midwest the dominant partner. Top producers: IL (a hefty 558), CA (170, actually more than at Chicago albeit a smaller percentage), NY (162), TX (100), OH (90), FL (83), MI (81), MN (78), NJ (74). NU draws between 2 and 3 times as many from every Midwestern state as Chicago does. Big Ten sports? Attractive “safe” suburban location? Who knows?</p>

<p>WUSTL: Midwest 32.2%; Northeast 27.6%; South 17.2%; West 15.1% (inc. CA 9.1%). Wow! Similar Midwest-Northeast balance to Chicago, but more Southerners—not surprising, perhaps, given the climate, geography (smack in the middle of the country), and history. Historically St. Louis was at least as much as Southern city as a Midwestern one. Still a bit light on Southerners, and a tad lighter than Chicago on Westerners, but this may be as close as any school comes to a geographically balanced student body. Biggest producers: IL (206) (it’s right across the river), CA (149), NY (142), MO (126), TX (104). Doesn’t really draw that well from the Midwest once you get beyond IL & MO.</p>

<p>Notre Dame: Midwest 40.9%; Northeast 24.2%; South 16.2%; West 14% (inc. CA 8.4%). Similar Midwest-Northeast ratio to Northwestern, but a few more non-California Westerners and a few more Southerners. ND likes to think of itself as a truly national school but it’s more a Midwestern one with a strong Northeastern presence, and weaker but still substantial numbers from the West & South. Top producers: IL (268) (it’s 90 minutes from Chicago), CA (174), OH (140), IN (130), PA (110), TX (106), NY (102), MI (92), plus substantial numbers from other Midwestern states.</p>

525

<p>

</p>

<p>Two different issues here. Someone is asserting that the people in North Dakota or whatever are “dumber” and that’s why they don’t get into Harvard. I’m saying regardless of the dumbness or smartness of people in North Dakota, the predilection to apply to Harvard is higher in Massachusetts (eastern seaboard) than it is in North Dakota.</p>

526

<p>

</p>

<p>This is why horizontals (what % of a school’s students come from state x) are nowhere near as important as the index of (% of a school’s students come from state x)/(% of the US population is found in state x). bclinton, if you produced the actual index (which you have the data for), that would really tell the story. All of the nation’s top schools - ALL of them - overindex strongly to their home geographies.</p>

527

<p>More regional school data: the Northeast (non-Ivies)</p>

<p>Based on data on 2010 enrolled freshmen provided by the U.S. Dept of Education, the student bodies at most non-Ivy elite private colleges in the Northeast are at least as regionally dominated as the Ivies, if not more so; MIT, a bit less so.</p>

<p>MIT: Northeast 35.5%; Midwest 13.7%; South 17.8%; West 18.8% (inc. CA 13.9%). Definitely Northeast-heavy but not by an extreme margin; all other regions underrepresented relatively to population, the West the least so and the South the most so relative to its larger population (about 32% of the nation). California slightly overrepresented relative to population. Pretty good regional balance, though. Top producers of MIT students: CA (148), MA (99), NY (91), TX (71), FL (50), MD (46), IL (42).</p>

<p>Johns Hopkins: Northeast 61%; Midwest 9.8%; South 9.3%; West 14% (inc. CA 9.2%). A Northeast regional school all the way; quite a few Californians but still light relative to their percentage in the population, and definitely a smaller percentage than at most Ivies or MIT. Top producers: NY (196), NJ (158), MD (139), CA (114), PA (87), MA (65). Must be the come for the lacrosse?</p>

<p>Georgetown: Northeast 52.1%; Midwest 9.6%; South 12%; West 14.2% (inc. CA 10.3%). Classic Northeast profile where Northeasterners + Californians = almost 2/3; everyone else is light. Top producers: NY (183), CA (162), NJ (149), MD (103), PA (101), CT (87). Amtrak must love this school.</p>

<p>Carnegie Mellon: Northeast 52.6%; Midwest 9.2%; South 9.4%; West 14.6% (inc. CA 10.2%). Almost a carbon copy of Georgetown’s formula except even fewer Southerners, maybe because it’s north of the Mason-Dixon line? Top producers: PA (252), CA (152), NY (147), NJ (127), MD (80), MA (68), OH (62). 5 of these 7 states border on PA. </p>

<p>As I said, it’s all regional.</p>

528

<p>thanks, bclintonk. Keep 'em coming.
The comment I made earlier about the preponderance of Rice students being from Texas is that in

And back then, Rice was free to those who could gain admission. So while Rice has dropped the 2/3 from Texas rule and has expanded its enrollment (and charges tuition/room/board), its still heavily attended by Texans and unfortunately still struggles with lack of name recognition in many areas. But yes, as xiggi said, they were quite welcoming to jymson #1.</p>

529

<p>Umm…</p>

<p>Are the Ivies worth all the bother?</p>

530

<p>bclintinK-
Could you do this for Tulane? They will load hgeavily for Louisiana because of some financial incentives for in-state students, but the rest of the distribution might surprise you.</p>

531

<p>

</p>

<p>I don’t get it. Nowhere near as important for what? For proving that the drawing power of so-called “national universities” is in fact more regional than we thought?</p>

532

<p>The local flavor of the elite college market</p>

<p>Now I’ll just list, for a few randomly selected states, the elite (top 25 or so) private schools that attracted the most 2010 freshmen from that state. No big surprises here; it’s all pretty local.</p>

<p>ME: Dartmouth (27), Brown (13)
MA: Tufts (259), Harvard (219), Brown (168), Cornell (141), Penn (104), MIT (99)
CT: Cornell (88), Georgetown (87), Yale (83), Wake Forest (68), Penn (61)
RI: Brown (57), Cornell (18), Georgetown (17)
NY: Cornell (1,034), Penn (324), Columbia (301), Harvard (202), Yale (199), Johns Hopkins (196), Brown (196)
NJ: Cornell (319), Penn (257), Princeton (180), Columbia (166), Johns Hopkins (158), Georgetown (149)
PA: Penn (380), Carnegie Mellon (252), Cornell (147), Notre Dame (110), Georgetown (101)
MD: Johns Hopkins (139), Georgetown (103), Cornell (93), Carnegie Mellon (80), Penn (76)
VA: Cornell (80), Duke (93), Wake Forest (73), Georgetown (63), Penn (59)</p>

<p>OH: Notre Dame (140), Northwestern (90), Vanderbilt (63), Chicago (53), Cornell (48)
MI: Notre Dame (92), Northwestern (81), Penn (34), Cornell (32), Chicago (31)
IL: Northwestern (556), Notre Dame (268), Chicago (243), WUSTL (206), Vanderbilt (114)
IN: Notre Dame (130), Northwestern (30), Vanderbilt (23), Chicago (20)
WI: Notre Dame (57), Northwestern (53), WUSTL (27), Chicago (24)
MN: Northwestern (78), Notre Dame (55), WUSTL (37), Harvard (34), Chicago (33)</p>

<p>NC: Wake Forest (266), Duke (209), Emory (33), Notre Dame (30), Vanderbilt (29)
GA: Emory (421), Vanderbilt (100), Duke (72), Wake Forest (54), Harvard (39)
FL: Emory (153), Duke (146), Penn (116), Cornell (91), Northwestern (83)
TN: Vanderbilt (207), Emory (52), WUSTL (30), Wake Forest (29), Notre Dame (25)
AL: Vanderbilt (64), Emory 19
TX: Rice (444), USC (129), Vanderbilt (112), Notre Dame (103), Cornell (103)</p>

<p>CA: USC (1,731), Stanford (627), Cornell (269), Harvard (236), Brown (234)
WA: Stanford (61), USC (58), Cornell (36), Yale (30), Duke (30)
AZ: Stanford (31), USC (30), Notre Dame (20), Cornell (16)</p>

<p>Even at the elite level, there’s a strong pull to stay pretty close to home.</p>

533

<p>

</p>

<p>I guess a lot of people in the Northeast and in California seem to think so. In other parts of the country, they don’t seem to care all that much. Personally, I’m more in the “don’t care” camp. But then, I’m a Midwesterner.</p>

534

<p>Again, geography doesn’t matter much if most of the kids come from the same backgrounds (as Pizzagirl and others have suggested).</p>

<p>These quotes are from a recent article about diversity at Brown (link at bottom of text). If some kind person could teach me how to do embedded quotes, I would be very grateful.</p>

<p>"But despite these increases in other areas of diversity, universities like Brown are still less accessible to students from lower-class backgrounds, said Anthony Carnevale, director of the Georgetown University Center on Education and the Workforce, who authored studies highlighting this discrepancy in 2004 and 2010. “There’s still very little socioeconomic diversity in selective colleges. In the top 200 colleges, which includes Brown, the share of people from the bottom 25 percent of the income distribution was about 3 or 4 percent in 1992 and 3 or 4 percent now,” he said. </p>

<p>Despite increases in the number of students on Pell Grants and need-blind admission, Goldberger said he does not think the socioeconomic diversity of the University has increased significantly in recent years. One issue may be that need-blind prevents admissions officers from considering advantages afforded to wealthier applicants.</p>

<p>The University “must continue to make a compelling case to middle-income families of the value proposition of a Brown education,” especially as those families experience the financial challenges of the current economy, Jim Miller wrote. </p>

<p>“Students come from much wealthier families now than they used to,” said George Borts, a professor of economics who has taught at Brown since 1950.</p>

<p>[How</a> diverse are we? - The Brown Daily Herald - Serving the community daily since 1891](<a href=“http://www.browndailyherald.com/how-diverse-are-we-1.2733909#.T_9Pc3hdBaU]How”>http://www.browndailyherald.com/how-diverse-are-we-1.2733909#.T_9Pc3hdBaU)</p>

535

<p>

</p>

<p>Don’t have time right now, but I’m familiar with Tulane. It’s almost like a Northeastern school set in New Orleans, but it does also draw heavily from Louisiana. More from NY-NJ than from Louisiana, though. Very unusual in that regard, but then, New Orleans is an unusual city.</p>

536

<p>I think one reason that you will find few lower-income kids at the über-selective colleges is that few lower-income kids can get into these colleges, especially when they’re competing against kids from wealthier backgrounds. Start with the fact that income correlates with test scores and GPA. Then add in the facts that many lower-income kids go to poorer schools; that lower-income students less often have hypersuccessful role models as parents and acquaintances; that lower-income kids are less likely to have parents with the means or motivation to push them towards being competitive for high-selectivity colleges; and that lower-income kids have less access to expensive application enhancers like SAT prep courses. So even if ability to pay one admitted was off the table, you’re going to have a qualified applicants pool that skews strongly toward the higher income brackets.</p>

537

<p>where are you pulling the data from, bclintonk? I couldnt find the geographic distribution on the CDS. Is it from USnews? Collegeboard?</p>

538

<p>

</p>

<p>I was raised in the Midwest and after 22+ years in the engineering/technology industry, it seemed to me that the Ivy-League students didn’t get “enough” for all of that competing, etc. I mean Ivy-League fresh grads are working alongside the state-flagship grads, the 3+2 grads and the 2+2 grads. You may hear some stories that certain employers offered some of the Ivy-League grads $7K-$10K more or something.</p>

<p>Excuse me?..$7 to $10K more?..than the same engineering/computer science grad who started at a community college and finished at State U?</p>

539

<p>

</p>

<p>Data on which states the 2010 entering class came from is derived from US Dept of Education and is available here:</p>

<p>[Where</a> Does Your Freshman Class Come From? - Facts & Figures - The Chronicle of Higher Education](<a href=“http://chronicle.com/article/Interactive-Freshman-Class/129547#id=160755]Where”>http://chronicle.com/article/Interactive-Freshman-Class/129547#id=160755)</p>

<p>Except that as the denominator I used the US News online edition figures for 2010 freshman enrollment, which should be the same as IPEDS and the individual schools’ common data sets for 2010-2011. The Chronicle uses US Dept of Education data on student enrollment by state. They also give you percentages, but as the denominator they’re using domestic students only. The figure I’m using as denominator should reflect all freshmen, international and domestic–which is why the regional percentage sshould in most (all?) cses add up to less than 100%, because I’m not reporting internationals although I am counting them in the class size.</p>

<p>It’s not perfect. You’ll notice the Chronicle website often shows some smallish number “unaccounted for.” But close enough.</p>

<p>Oh, here’s the Tulane data you requested:</p>

<p>Tulane: South 36.4%; Northeast 34.4%; Midwest 13.4%; West 13.9% (including CA 8%). Southeast is slightly overrepresented relative to population, Northeast substantially overrepresented relative to population, and the Midwest and West are underrepresented despite substantial numbers of Californians. Biggest sources: LA (215), NY (156), CA (130), TX (113), NJ (94), IL (77), MA (72), MD (71), FL (71). </p>

<p>Reminder: As I’m defining the regions–which departs from the US Census Bureau in that I place Maryland, Delaware, DC, and Virginia in the Northeast instead of the South–the Northeast has about 23% of the nation’s population, the Midwest has about 22%, the South has about 32%, and the West has about 23%, including the 12% who reside in California. So when I say a region is overrepresented or underrepresented, it’s relative to those population figures, not relative to applications, or to college-age population, or to college-bound seniors. Those are refinements I just don’t have time to do right now.</p>

540

<p>

</p>

<p>The fact that 112 (one must have cold feet) Texans made it at Tulane is remarkable; and remarkable considering Tulane must have sent 67,343 pre-filled free applications to that big state on the West. </p>

<p>Sorry, Jym. I never miss an opportunity to talk smack about NOLA. Still do NOT like that chicory coffee and those frozen sopapillas they pass for beignets at Caf</p>