Are there differences in faculty quality & access to them among the USNWR Top 30?

College Search & Selection
41

<p>
[quote]
you do realize that all you 'proved' was that ND is recruited same as Chicago.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>i'm well aware, i was offering an opposing viewpoint, over and over i used the words "equal," i didn't imply that i was offering an ultimate answer to the question or even answering that notre dame was better, just challenging your dismissive implication that there was a huge quality discrepancy between the two universities.</p>

<p>
[quote]
That certainly did nothing but disprove your much repeated argument that academic schools don't serve their students well.

[/quote]

you are committing a straw man fallacy here in miscontruing what i said to mean that academic schools don't serve their students well. That is not what i said or even what i implied, i was providing some data that seemed to imply that at least in certain fields, a well-rounded education is valued as a top commodity over a strictly academic education. </p>

<p>UChicago is also on that list, MIT is on that list, so the straw man argument you set up was by no means what i was arguing.</p>

<p>
[quote]
And what data would that be?

[/quote]

recruitment data for top consulting firms.</p>

<p>
[quote]
What data did you use to show your point that 'well balanced' schools produce more viable graduates?

[/quote]

the fact that they are apparently more in demand by top consulting firms.</p>

<p>
[quote]
You know, I just love when people who start an argument all arrogant go all 'stop picking on me' whiny when they realize the other person isn't going to be bullied

[/quote]

what are you talking about, once people start getting too personal i usually stop responding, because.. this is the internet... but i'll humor you for now. How would it be picking on me? i meant it was unfair to the schools, to notre dame, you were unnecessarily discrediting its reputation on your own personal bias that academics are the only thing important in a school, and it is an elitist, snobby bias at that. And since we're now bringing schools into it, the kind of bias that causes chicago to have a 40% acceptance rate and a 1/4 yield.</p>

42

<p>Elsijfdl, you post often enough that everyone reading is well aware that you try and take posts personal whenever you're on the defensive. Loslobos, MomofWildChild, myself and others have all been at your attempt at putdowns.(remember your crack about my age dear?)</p>

<p>As for:</p>

<p>"i meant it was unfair to the schools, to notre dame, you were unnecessarily discrediting its reputation on your own personal bias that academics are the only thing important in a school, and it is an elitist, snobby bias at that."</p>

<p>You seriously, seriously need to learn to read.(And seriously need to stop with all the over the top hyperbole) Exactly where was I discrediting ND? Exactly where was I saying academics was the only thing important in a school?</p>

<p>I was addressing the PAless rankings in which ND moved up to number 9 or 10 and Chicago slid to 20 or so. ND/Chicago is a very good example for those who despise the PA to defend rankings without it. A simple explanation of why ND deserves to be in the top ten should have been far easier than accusing me of being elitist. I don't believe I have ever seen any rankings that have ND higher than Chicago, I've never seen any department rankings that has ND kicking Chicago's butt in any field. I don't believe ND sends more kids to grad school and they don't win more big time scholarships than Chicago.(Rhodes/Marshall, etc) So asking Hawkette and others how they feel about ND ranking so much higher than a school that is generally accepted to be a tad higher isn't me being snobby. It's me trying to shed more light on this PA/PA less argument.(And yes, the only one who has stooped to school bashing on this thread is you...imagine that, some things always stay the same)</p>

<p>As for me saying academics are the only important thing....again learn to read. Read the whole thread. Sue me for thinking academics should be a major part of what makes an elite school elite. The rankings are about top universities, top educations. They aren't the USNews most balanced and fun schools in the US. Saying that, all I've done on this thread is disagree that academic schools are lacking. No more, no less.</p>

43

<p>ramses 2,
Somehow I missed your post #30 and would like to comment on several items:</p>

<ol>
<li><p>If I am reading your comments correctly, it appears that you have a balanced view of how seriously to accept and interpret PA (which is to say don’t worry too much about it). If only others took a less judgmental route about the quality differences of these schools as measured by PA and what that means. As for the absolute scores themselves, unfortunately I think they have a little more consequence than asking a chef for a restaurant recommendation. </p></li>
<li><p>Re faculty quality and access to it, I think you make a very good point about the variety of experiences that are offered at the USNWR Top 30 colleges. That perceptive comment actually supports the idea that the learning environments can be successful at a great many schools. However, it appears that the PA scores of academics favor the excellence at certain types of schools (more technical, research oriented, not religious, not Southern, etc.). </p></li>
<li><p>Re your suggestion that I am pushing one type of school, I am sorry to give that impression. I concede a personal fondness for the schools that offer a well balanced undergraduate experience, but that does not dim my respect and appreciation for the schools that don’t fit this mold as cleanly, eg, U Chicago, Johns Hopkins, most of the Ivies, etc. I have a very high regard for all of these schools and think that they can offer a truly outstanding education (as can the balanced schools that I often refer to). </p></li>
<li><p>I can imagine elsijfdl at U Chicago as I think he/she, like most Northwestern students, probably has the social ability to adapt to different environments while still having the intellect to handle it. Now whether he/she would like to be on the South Side after being in Evanston is a whole ‘nother story.</p></li>
</ol>

44

<p>". If I am reading your comments correctly, it appears that you have a balanced view of how seriously to accept and interpret PA (which is to say don’t worry too much about it)"</p>

<p>I think the PA, along with the rest of the USNews rankings should be used simply as a guide. We looked at schools up and down the rankings and only used the PA as one small part of the equation. For instance Brown has a lower PA than other peer schools but our experience with the school and more importantly, it's wonderful faculty assured us that it was a better fit for us than some other ivies. Saying that, a prof friend's opinions on various schools eerily echoed the PA scores of USNews. When asked why, he had very interesting reasons that had nothing to do with class size or prof quality.(For that reason I maintain that PA is very similar to what an Wall street analyst does....gives informed opinions that you MUST sift through and judge for yourself, but the info is there and it's not made up to keep schools running on 15 year old reps) Absolutely everyone, from prof friends to various business people all seemed far more impressed with Chicago than Brown and the other schools he was considering. In the end, my son chose the place that excited him the most. Chicago. The PA and opinions of others? I have no idea what he took into account when he decided but I have no doubt it's the best fit.(And I have no doubt that PA played only a tiny, tiny part of his decision)</p>

<p>I wouldn't worry about people going by absolute PA scores, if anything people seem far more swayed by selectivity. Or should I say the acceptance rate number. They may give lip service to SAT score range and quality of student body but in the end for some, lesser SATs matter not a bit if the acceptance rate is low enough.</p>

<p>"learning environments can be successful at a great many schools. However, it appears that the PA scores of academics favor the excellence at certain types of schools (more technical, research oriented, not religious, not Southern, etc.). "</p>

<p>Can I agree and disagree...or at least ponder and maybe get into trouble? Would a business evaluation be any different? It's easy to rate Tech/research schools higher...these kids have the stats going in and need perserverance to get out. If rankings are about the end product how can one argue that the schools turning out these scholars are lacking simply because they don't offer history or anthro? In the end I think PA is about a certain something that stamps the students as future possible scholars in their fields...it's not just about fantastic students but about the higher possibility that a student from that school will further the chain of learning/thinking. Caltech kids may be lacking in a lot of things but it's hard to argue that their method of teaching might produce far more interesting things than say Lehigh.(Which by the way is a school that should be ranked higher than Caltech if you were ranking for companies that needed rock steady engineers. Way, way more well balanced) </p>

<p>Religious schools have from time to time a habit of trying to determine what their kids should be exposed to, and what they shouldn't be....that's got to be a sticking point for an academic. Thought shouldn't come with constraints.(Am I in trouble yet?) Georgetown seems in fine Jesuit tradition to embrace thinking and probably has a much higher PA?...other schools are still iffy and have been known to block stuff that might earn them demerits in the PA.(I'm guessing here, but common sense tells me that if religious schools are leery of academics then I'm sure the reverse is true)</p>

<p>I firmly believe southern schools are on the ascent. I don't think PA matters a bit here, I think people who used to count on the ivies and northern LACs are being pointed in a southernly direction. There's little difference to most people in a 3.9/4.1/ and slightly higher when you're trying to find a good fit for your kid. Unless you're looking for a academic powerhouse(and few people seem to be), none of these are bad scores and none signal 'better' school. </p>

<p>Regarding your pushing you're favorite type of school: I find it refreshing. It's wonderful to find someone who wants to explore schools outside of the same old same old. I just don't buy into a cut and dried definition of well balanced. Since being accepted into chicago my kid's been night and day online and on the phone talking to new chicago friends. He's hung out with a group on South Street in Philly. He's made tons of plans and having watched many nephews go off to 'well balanced' schools I have to tell you I don't see much difference. Fun has this tendency to happen to the young, I don't think they need a special school for it.:) But that's just my opinion.</p>

45

<p>I am in no way defending USNEWS, but a ranking of recruiting preferences would hardly challenge a ranking of "academic quality". They are looking at two different things.</p>

<p>The thread cited served to convince to me that no one knows which schools are preferred by these corporate recruiters. Someone presented an analysis of which colleges received onsite recruiting from one or more consulting firms. Several people almost immediately pointed out that the information was incorrect. One person noted that the list of places recruited by at least one of the firms was much longer than indicated in the initial post.</p>

<p>So that thread does not at all support the contention that ND is as popular with consulting firm recruiters as is Chicago. This may be true, but there is no evidence of it.</p>

<p>PA is the opinion of a large number of academics and admissions deans. Anyone is welcome to disagree. </p>

<p>But these complaints seem not to be "ND is as good ACADEMICALLY as Chicago, and here is why". </p>

<p>Instead the complaints seem to be "I do not like the ranking this produces, so I wish the academics had never been asked. Now that they have been asked, and the results reported, I want to argue that they should be ignored. My reason why they should be ignored is that I do not agree with the results."</p>

46

<p>ramses 2,
I have posted often that I see the USNWR rankings as a first step for a student doing his/her college search. IMO, the key to college selection is “fit” and I believe that the vast, vast majority of students would be happy at many different schools. We really are blessed in this country to have so many wonderful colleges. Hopefully, my comments and others’ will spur some students to look beyond the “same old same old” as you call it. </p>

<p>Re PA, I don’t expect (or even want) the academics to mark down the high scoring colleges, eg, the tech or research colleges. Academics clearly value the work that is being done (whether by undergraduate or graduate students) and so if that is a critical part of their evaluative process, then so be it. However, I do object to this limited view of the world as there are a lot of great schools with great teachers that are not focused on such matters, including many of the previously mentioned schools that get left choking on the dust of the academics’ preferred list. It is my view that this ill serves the interests of students looking at various colleges and who are trying to accurately judge the faculty and the academic quality of a college. </p>

<p>As you correctly point out, religious schools have their own issues with academia. They clearly would be served better by a ranking system that incorporated a broader range of views. I just don’t think that these institutions (Catholic, Jewish, Mormon, Christian) can get a fair shake from the academics.</p>

<p>Re the South, I concur that these schools are on the rise among high school applicants, but I wonder about their acceptance into the upper tiers of academia. I consider Rice (4.1), Vanderbilt (4.1), and Emory (4.0) as academic peers to several of the Ivies not named HYP and yet their PA scores lag considerably behind Columbia, Cornell (4.6) and U Penn (4.5) and Brown, Dartmouth (4.4). Only Duke (4.5), among Southern universities, is held at a similar level of regard among academics. Some will respond that these differences are small and why bother caring, but imagine for a minute the wailing that would be heard if these scores were reversed. Frankly, I doubt that academics would EVER let that happen. I think that this regional penalty is also paid in other parts of the country, eg, USC (3.9) or Wash U (4.1). </p>

<p>Best of luck to your son at U Chicago. And be sure that he packs a warm winter coat. :)</p>

47

<p>The reason southern universities score lower is because they don't measure up in NAS members, faculty major award winners, and outstanding research. You can look at the numbers in the Top American Research Universities and the SJTU rankings.</p>

48

<p>I understand what you are trying to say, Hawkette. You are right that great students come from those schools with lower PA scores...No bone of contention here. BUT, you should not take this to mean that PA scores are meaningless. They are nothing like ..."asking a waiter in a restaurant for a recommendation." These academics are highly regarded in their fields, just as are the doctors who are polled by Castle Connolly in determining best doctors in particular areas, or the nation's best hospitals. Making the waiter in a restaurant analogy is really kind of silly.
Also, those stats have a particular importance and value when considering academic "fit." A student may want to consider if he/she might fit better at what is at least considered to be an academic powerhouse, or at one that is very well respected, but not really a powerhouse. Does that student want to work hard, or does he want to coast? Will he/she work up to potential in a school with a less intensely competitive environment, or will he/she thrive in that atmosphere? If that child is really bright, will he not work hard in an environment that is not intense? In this regard, peer assessment lets the "consumer" know what he/she is potentially getting into. This, aside from letting the public know what academia thinks of the particular institution regarding educational quality.
By the way, Hawkette, I have no professional affiliation with Hopkins. I do have a child who attends, and I am sooooo impressed with that institution. This is why I speak so highly of it, and hopefully, will continue to do so. It is a phenomenal place, with phemonenal faculty and administrators. A student must, however, be able to handle the academic rigor. My son fell in love with the school on a visit, and ultimately chose it over Cornell and Dartmouth, hating both locations. Also, my daughter attended law school at Cornell, and disliked its location so intensely, which obviously had a huge effect on my son. By the way, she had a great education at Vassar (4.1 PA), which she chose over several Ivys, so PA is not the be-all and end-all for me. I just understand the value of that stat as one important indication of "fit." Tearing down student's confidence in this number is much more harmful than beneficial, and unwarranted...IMO.</p>

49

<p>Is Michigan better than UNC for the average undergrad...no, but its PA score is much higher because it has a stronger historic reputation.</p>

50

<p>Perhaps what would help enormously is the ability of consumers (students and parents) to set their own weights on the various factors determining rank. I might think that faculty resources or financial resources are a more telling component of institutional quality and give those factors more weight than peer assessment. Being able to manipulate the weight given to certain ranking components would not totally eliminate that component, but allow consumers to give it the emphasis they think it deserves. Wouldn't someone make a lot of money devising such a computer model?</p>

51

<p>Hawkette...Just read your response #33. I am just speechless at the tone of this diatribe, and will not respond in kind. Unfortunately, I would not be one of those polled by USNWR. But I know to listen to those who know more than I. Do you? The questions you pose of me are simply ridiculous. Ask those who actually know the answers to your questions, and then, be prepared to accept the responses, even if you do not agree with them. Please stop spreading erroneous information regarding a topic you know nothing about. It is true that I am a college professor, but trust me, I need to rely upon those with much more information than I have, to get a worthwhile opinion. I am simply not an authority. It is a good thing to understand what one does not know. One might actually learn something.</p>

52

<p>

You may have an argument for Rice, except that I think it suffers on a national basis because of its lack of geographical diversity--47% of its students are from Texas. All of the Ivies are MUCH more geographically diverse than this.</p>

<p>I think you have less of an argument with Vanderbilt and Emory. With acceptance rates of 32% (Emory) and 34% (Vanderbilt), coupled with middle-50% SAT ranges of 1270-1430 (Emory) and 1280-1460 (Vanderbilt), it's hard to consider these schools to be academic peers with the non-HYP Ivies (Cornell being the closest). Additionally, individual departments and components of the non-HYP Ivies are, in general, higher ranked than those of Emory and Vanderbilt. On top of that, the professional schools of Penn and Columbia are generally ranked much higher than those of Emory or Vanderbilt, and close to (or even higher than) the professional schools of Harvard and Yale, further enhancing their academic reputations vis-a-vis Emory and Vanderbilt (although I realize not directly related to PA).</p>

<p>Finally, it's not just US News that ranks the non-HYP Ivies so highly. As barrons points out above, other rankings and measures put them in positions similar to those they occupy in US News. See, for example:</p>

<p><a href="http://mup.asu.edu/research2006.pdf%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://mup.asu.edu/research2006.pdf&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

53

<p>By the way, Hawkette...do you have inside information regarding the questions given to academics when they are asked to assess the colleges/universities? I was just wondering because you seem to have tossed out several questions to me, which I would just assume you know are being asked of those academics. Unless this is the case, why would you posit these questions, in the first place? Of course you know nothing of the precise nature of the questions being asked of academia. Which, I think, is exactly the point. Understand that although you might assume that you know the exact nature of those questions, you do not. Let it rest, already, and accept that your opinion is only an opinion. Most would rather take the opinions of experts in the field. At least they have the credentials to back up their opinions.</p>

54

<p><a href="http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/showpost.php?p=4460384&postcount=33%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/showpost.php?p=4460384&postcount=33&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>lol. and even better: do that for dozens of schools.</p>

55

<p>
[quote]
Exactly where was I saying academics was the only thing important in a school?

[/quote]
</p>

<p>"They got there because they didn't follow the crowd, they actually colored a bit outside the lines, and frankly were probably not seen as 'well balanced' in school."</p>

<p>"as long as those pesky unbalanced nerds at these schools keep doing big science, big politics, big entertainment, big literature, big med and big law, Notre Dame being ten points above Chicago and JHU will seem wrong to most."</p>

<p>
[quote]
A simple explanation of why ND deserves to be in the top ten [instead of uchicago] should have been far easier than accusing me of being elitist.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>because it has higher student selectivity, faculty resources, graduation and retention rate, financial resources, alumni giving, and graduation rate performance <a href="http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/usnews/edu/college/rankings/about/weight_brief.php%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/usnews/edu/college/rankings/about/weight_brief.php&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

56

<p>Hawkette,</p>

<p>since you have told us that </p>

<p>
[quote]
I consider Rice (4.1), Vanderbilt (4.1), and Emory (4.0) as academic peers to several of the Ivies not named HYP and yet their PA scores lag considerably behind Columbia, Cornell (4.6) and U Penn (4.5) and Brown, Dartmouth (4.4).

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Then you must </p>

<p>
[quote]
be prepared to explain how the various departments compare at these schools, eg, Engineering, Social Sciences, History, English, Biology, Business, Math, Psychology, Physical Sciences, Foreign Languages, Interdisciplinary Studies, Ethnic Studies and Visual & Performing Arts. Also, please explain the relative importance of each program to each school and to the undergraduate student, how this program is regarded within the college vis-</p>

57

<p>Higher selectivity?</p>

<p>Chicago 25th and 75th percentile
SAT Critical Reading 690 780
SAT Math 680 780</p>

<p>ND
SAT Critical Reading 630 740
SAT Math 660 760</p>

58

<p>
[quote]
By the way, Hawkette...do you have inside information regarding the questions given to academics when they are asked to assess the colleges/universities? I was just wondering because you seem to have tossed out several questions to me, which I would just assume you know are being asked of those academics.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>It's not inside information. It is (to some extent) available to all through USNews. I've outlined it before. </p>

<p>I can't speak for Hawkette, but I believe when she claims we know nothing about the PA assessment, she is referring to the fact that, as in all opinion surveys, we cannot know the minds or sources of information of the respondents. Nor do we know their personal identities of respondents (although we do know who the survey population was).</p>

<p>I do not receive the PA survey so I do not know the exact instructions given to respondents, but according to USNews, the basic question asks respondents to rate how "distinguished" their peers are. They are also asked not to rank any college about which they have too little knowledge.</p>

<p>Personally, I don't feel this is that much more mysterious than other kinds of opinion surveys that hawkette herself has advocated, such as student evaluations of instruction or employer preferences when recruiting.</p>

59

<p>Elsijfdl, go back, read the thread slowly. That quote you parsed is actually from a response to your argument that academic school graduates can't possibly compete in the real world(business) because they lack every social skill known to man. So in fact Elsijfdl, I wasn't saying academics schools are the best, I was suggesting to you that the world, even the business world, is big enough for everyone to play in. </p>

<p>I await you next post where you try and prove I hate all schools except Chicago by parsing out "play in." :)</p>

<p>Gabriellaah, I was the one who used the cooking world analogy. But I said Chef not waiter. Big difference. One can imagine that the same arguments used against PA could be used against a chef's opinion. They work in one place what would they know of the competition, they'd only give props to their friends/peer competitors, a lesser chef has no business giving opinions about master chefs, etc. Of course anyone who has ever read Bourdain's Kitchen Confidential soon learned that chefs know ALOT. Crazy inside stuff that would make you pause before entering that posh expensive place that everyone else was gaga over. Zagats may not tell you about dirty kitchens, a chef's gambling addiction that's affecting your plate, not to eat fish on Mondays...but they also can't tell you what are the places chef's themselves turn to when they're hungry. Whom chef's ultimately consider the very best and why. Only a chef could do that. So USNews gathers all the numbers and just in case asks those in the business for their opinions...who better to know all the dirty secrets as well as who's doing the stuff all the other academics respect and admire. </p>

<p>Everyone has a right to suspect the PA, but perhaps they should ask themselves why they distrust an academic's opinion so much. I know that when I asked our prof friend about a certain school that seemed lower than I would have expected, he gave me an earful about campus expansion at the expense of students done years before that was still a problem to this day. Well, wouldn't you like to know this? The school seems like it's doing great. Shiny new buildings, usually a good sign. Apparently unhappy faculty. Nothing in the USNews is going to tell you this, but you might get a sense from the PA.</p>

<p>Hawkette, I agree with you about Rice. The others have pretty reasonable scores that I think reflect their stature.(Those scores aren't bad at all, they say to me that these schools are top notch just not tippy top) I know in Fiske's if you read between the lines it sounds as if Emory is addressing some things that may make it far stronger in the future. Desmond Tutu as prof, winning the majority of Seamus Heaney's library, and working with the CDC. That stuff a prospie should notice, or at least their parents.</p>

<p>And in conclusion, I think everyone should take note of Elsijfdl's 'proof' that ND is better than Chicago. Without the PA his proof in fact does make ND far better than Chicago. Forget that Chicago has the stronger students, forget that Chicago affords it's students the very rare opportunity to not only be taught by amazing profs but mingle with grad students and do serious research themselves. Forget it's astounding library. Forget it's method of teaching that expects all students to be scholars. Forget that virtually all it's departments rank consistently on top ten lists. Forget the opinion of every guidebook and talking head. Forget that the students of revered Deep Springs choose mostly Chicago and Harvard to continue their studies......yep, none of this matters. The fact that Chicago is self selective and takes 40% of applicants? Proof positive that it's a bum school.</p>

60

<p>gabriellah,
As my later posts make clear, my questions posed in #33 were not meant to be taken seriously. I don’t think hardly anyone, inside or outside of academia, could answer these questions about the five mentioned schools and certainly not about a great number of colleges. Yet PA is expected to consider all of this and to distill it all down to a single number. It is an impossible task and even members of the academic class are questioning its accuracy and what it tells us about educational quality at a college. At least with the other elements of the USNWR ranking, you at least have some idea of what is being measured. </p>

<p>Re the actual questions asked for PA, I think I recall seeing them posted or discussed elsewhere. As I recall, the wording was pretty simple, but open to broad interpretation for however the grader wanted to come up with his/her score. Perhaps hoedown or some other academic professional can provide the exact wording.</p>

<p>As for your charge that I am spreading erroneous information, I'm not sure what you are referring to. Clearly I am expressing an opinion against the use of PA, just as many others regularly do on CC and elsewhere, but I think it is the fact that I reach a different conclusion that you object to. I don't begrudge you your right to your view just as I would hope that you would not intend to shutter my expressions. While you and I differ on PA and its value and its application, I am perfectly okay with you having your opinion and I am perfectly willing to state my position for you and for the other readers and let them interpret as they see fit. </p>

<p>Finally, my apologies for my misinterpretation of your prior comments re your relationship with Johns Hopkins. It is truly a terrific school with a well-deserved reputation among academics and the general public and it is great that you son found the right fit for his four years of college. </p>

<p>45 percenter,
Re your challenge to my statements about the academic stature of Rice/Emory/Vanderbilt to the Ivies not named HYP, I think your points are all reasonable. IMO Rice is very underrated on a national scale and statistically stacks up exceedingly well against all of the Ivies. As I have said many times elsewhere, put Rice in Philadelphia and it would consistently rank in the Top 10.</p>

<p>Re Emory and Vanderbilt, these are more difficult arguments to make as statistically they fall just short of their Ivy peers. Emory, and especially Vanderbilt, have improved and changed rapidly over the past decade and take in a much broader geographic and ethnic mix today. I am not as focused on the acceptance rate for these schools (Emory 32%, Vanderbilt 34%) as again I think they are just underknown, especially among the Northeastern high school students (and families) who are the most active applicants to high-end colleges. Put either Emory or Vanderbilt somewhere along the I-95 corridor between DC and Boston and applications would probably go much, much higher… and acceptance rates much, much lower. Still, the acceptance rates are lower than U Chicago (38%) and very close to Northwestern (30%) so I don't think the Emory and Vanderbilt acceptance rates are so high that it is a big deal.</p>

<p>SAT-wise, however, Emory (1350) and Vanderbilt (1370) fall short of Cornell (1385) and then it is a large jump to Columbia (1420) and U Penn (1420). Vanderbilt's Music and Education Schools likely pull its average down but similar arguments could also be made for Cornell and its variety of separate colleges. However, for the ACT, Vanderbilt, Brown and Cornell all have the same average score (30). Top 10%-wise, Emory (85%) is definitely a peer to Columbia (83%) and Cornell (84%), but Vanderbilt (79%) struggles to keep up here. Still, as you can see, the overall numbers are not hugely different and my claim is plausible. </p>

<p>Given the nature of college applications today, we are likely to see greater cross-applications between Rice/Emory/Vanderbilt and the non-HYP Ivies. Nonetheless, I would agree that the historical prestige of the Ivy colleges and their known academic excellence are powerful forces that position the Ivy schools better to win the majority of these cross admit battles, particularly among non-Southern applicants.</p>