College Rankings from 1966

Applying to College
61

<p>I remember Stanford had a 1300 SAT avg for the class of '91. Don't know what it would have been more historically. At the time, that was a top 3%SAT score. Somehow, I get the feeling now that a 1380 SAT would be something lower than a top 3% score, so I feel the scale is changing in addition to what willow is point out above. </p>

<p>Just like hs grade inflation, standardized tests are getting bumped up. The 55%ile for the Chem SAT II in 1989 was 550. By 2005, the 55%ile was 670. How else can you explain it? The same way the avg hs GPA was 2.4 in 1990 and 2.8 in 2005. By jamming up everyone more on top of each other, it's actually served to make things more competitive and random rather than less because it's harder to stand out based on pure achievement. Hence, the intro of ECs and volunteering as a more important component of the college admissions process.</p>

62

<p>Percentiles from college board in 1966, for all senior boys</p>

<p>verbal 650= 99th
math 700=99th, 650 = 95th</p>

<p>For those boys who later entered college</p>

<p>verbal 700=99th
650=95th</p>

<p>math 700=96th
650=87th</p>

<p>So that year, you might deduce that a 1350 (650V, 700M) would have been 99th percentile, or slightly lower if you use only those who actually entered college.</p>

63

<p>
[quote]
Old scores may be recentered to compare to 1995 to present scores by using official College Board tables, which in the middle ranges add about 70 points to Verbal and 20 or 30 points to Math. In other words, current students have a 70 and 30 point advantage over their parents."

[/quote]
</p>

<p>The difference in 75 percentile score between 1995 and 1996 is 80 points for Yale. I remember the difference for Northwestern was less than 100 points also. I'd use 80. 100 seems too high.</p>

<p>Maybe one of you would have time to do this on a spreasheet:
Add 80 points to those 1966 averages.
Compare those values to 2006 average (don't used 2007 data as many colleges put out "admitted" stats instead of "enrolled"; then we can see who are the biggest gainer or losers.</p>

64

<p>88 and 89 are missing. The first number is 1987 ranking and the second is for 1990. </p>

<p>Princeton University 4 4 4 2 2 2 2 1 1 4 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Harvard University 2 1 1 1 1 1 3 1 1 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 2
Yale University 3 3 2 3 3 2 1 3 1 4 2 2 2 3 3 3 3
Stanford University 1 2 3 4 6 4 6 5 4 6 6 5 4 5 5 5 4
Massachusetts Inst. of Technology 11 6 6 5 4 5 5 6 4 3 5 5 4 4 5 7 4
California Inst. of Technology 21 5 5 5 5 7 9 9 9 1 4 4 4 5 8 7 4
University of Pennsylvania 19 13 13 14 16 11 13 7 6 7 6 5 4 5 4 4 7
Duke University 7 7 7 7 7 6 4 3 6 7 8 8 4 5 5 5 8
Columbia University 18 10 9 10 11 15 11 9 10 10 10 9 10 11 9 9 9
Dartmouth College 6 8 8 7 8 7 7 7 10 11 9 9 9 9 9 9 9
University of Chicago 8 11 10 9 9 11 12 14 14 13 10 9 12 13 14 15 9
Washington University 23 24 18 20 18 20 17 17 16 17 15 14 12 9 11 11 12
Cornell University 11 9 12 11 10 13 14 14 6 11 10 14 14 14 14 13 12
Northwestern University 17 23 14 13 13 13 9 9 10 14 13 12 10 11 11 12 14
Brown University 10 12 17 18 12 9 8 9 10 14 15 16 17 17 14 15 15
Johns Hopkins University 16 15 11 15 15 10 15 14 14 7 15 16 15 14 14 13 16
Rice University 14 16 15 12 14 16 16 17 18 14 13 12 15 16 17 17 17
Vanderbilt University 26-51 26-51 19 25 20 22 20 19 20 20 22 21 21 19 18 18 18
Emory University 25 26-51 26-51 21 25 17 19 9 16 18 18 18 18 18 20 20 18
University of Notre Dame 26-51 26-51 26-51 >26 25 18 17 19 18 19 19 19 18 19 18 18 20
University of California-Berkeley 5 13 16 16 19 26 27 23 22 20 20 20 20 21 21 20 21
Carnegie Mellon University 26-51 22 24 19 24 23 28 23 25 23 23 23 21 23 22 22 21
Georgetown University 26-51 19 19 17 17 21 23 21 20 23 23 23 24 23 25 23 23
University of Virginia 15 18 21 22 21 19 21 21 22 22 20 21 23 21 22 23 24
University of Michigan-Ann Arbor 8 21 22 24 23 24 24 23 25 25 25 25 25 25 22 25 24
University of California-Los Angeles nr 17 23 23 22 28 31 28 25 25 25 26 25 26 25 25 26</p>

65

<p>mjlxstar wrote:</p>

<br>


<br>

<p>See, post #s 23 and 34. Stanford's avg combined SAT score was 1300 as late as 1970. And Gellino, in post #61 confirms that was its score well into the late eighties.</p>

66

<p>Yale was the first in 1969, I believe. Amherst was among the last in 1974.</p>

<p>Davidson also was a late bloomer as it commenced accepting women in 1974.</p>

67

<p>Sam Lee. At the risk of sounding like a broken record. You can't take the 75th percentile from 1966, match it to the 75th percentile from 2006, and say those two scores are equivilent. The demographics of the test takers were vastly different in 1966.</p>

68

<p>
[quote]

Princeton University 4 4 4 2 2 2 2 1 1 4 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Harvard University 2 1 1 1 1 1 3 1 1 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 2
Yale University 3 3 2 3 3 2 1 3 1 4 2 2 2 3 3 3 3
Stanford University 1 2 3 4 6 4 6 5 4 6 6 5 4 5 5 5 4
Massachusetts Inst. of Technology 11 6 6 5 4 5 5 6 4 3 5 5 4 4 5 7 4
California Inst. of Technology 21 5 5 5 5 7 9 9 9 1 4 4 4 5 8 7 4
University of Pennsylvania 19 13 13 14 16 11 13 7 6 7 6 5 4 5 4 4 7
Duke University 7 7 7 7 7 6 4 3 6 7 8 8 4 5 5 5 8
Columbia University 18 10 9 10 11 15 11 9 10 10 10 9 10 11 9 9 9
Dartmouth College 6 8 8 7 8 7 7 7 10 11 9 9 9 9 9 9 9
University of Chicago 8 11 10 9 9 11 12 14 14 13 10 9 12 13 14 15 9
Washington University 23 24 18 20 18 20 17 17 16 17 15 14 12 9 11 11 12
Cornell University 11 9 12 11 10 13 14 14 6 11 10 14 14 14 14 13 12
Northwestern University 17 23 14 13 13 13 9 9 10 14 13 12 10 11 11 12 14
Brown University 10 12 17 18 12 9 8 9 10 14 15 16 17 17 14 15 15
Johns Hopkins University 16 15 11 15 15 10 15 14 14 7 15 16 15 14 14 13 16
Rice University 14 16 15 12 14 16 16 17 18 14 13 12 15 16 17 17 17
Vanderbilt University 26-51 26-51 19 25 20 22 20 19 20 20 22 21 21 19 18 18 18
Emory University 25 26-51 26-51 21 25 17 19 9 16 18 18 18 18 18 20 20 18
University of Notre Dame 26-51 26-51 26-51 >26 25 18 17 19 18 19 19 19 18 19 18 18 20
University of California-Berkeley 5 13 16 16 19 26 27 23 22 20 20 20 20 21 21 20 21
Carnegie Mellon University 26-51 22 24 19 24 23 28 23 25 23 23 23 21 23 22 22 21
Georgetown University 26-51 19 19 17 17 21 23 21 20 23 23 23 24 23 25 23 23
University of Virginia 15 18 21 22 21 19 21 21 22 22 20 21 23 21 22 23 24
University of Michigan-Ann Arbor 8 21 22 24 23 24 24 23 25 25 25 25 25 25 22 25 24
University of California-Los Angeles nr 17 23 23 22 28 31 28 25 25 25 26 25 26 25 25 26

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Just "eyeballing" that list, its pretty clear that WashU gets the Award for biggest gainer. It goes from the mid-20s to firmly into the mid-teens by the late 90s. Just about every other school hovers around a relatively tighter standard deviation.</p>

<p>Hey, like I've said before, you kind of have to give some serious props to WashU -- they played the game instead of getting "played out"... but you have to ask yourself, is WashU a school which really has improved dramatically to the point of jumping an entire tier -- or are they just making the right moves in order to maximize their respective USNWR rank?</p>

69

<p>Willow55,</p>

<p>I know that. It was meant just for fun.</p>

70

<p>Adding 80 points to pre class of 2000 is the best way to compare (except for reasons that willow points out). 100 point spread is what it is at the midpoint for all SAT test takers, but not the midpoint for a top 50 college test taker.</p>

71

<p>Always wondered about Wash U. Never heard of it in my life, never knew anyone who went there, never met a prof that spent anytime there...I get to CC and it's WashU, WashU, WashU...I,too, just wonder if they are spectacular at marketing and wonder if the "product holds up". Now that said, I was in college in the early 70s when WashU was on no ones radar screen, but it still seems like I would have met someone in the past 30 years who actually went to school there....</p>

72

<p>Here's the deal with WashU: it's had a top medical school for a long time. It has marketed to undergrads very well so that it now attracts, and has attracted, the top high school students for several decades. If the academics weren't meeting top students' expectations, word would have eventually gotten out and the school wouldn't be so desirable. The faculty wouldn't be filled with graduates from MIT/Harvard/Oxford/etc. b/c professors wouldn't want to go there. WashU has money - lots of it. WashU knows how to spend its money. These things are making WashU a great school. Regardless of ranking, you've got to keep it together and really be comparable to other top schools in quality or eventually top students and teachers will stop coming.</p>

73

<p>I looked a little closer at the 1966 SAT numbers and the ranks for the 25 schools categorized as National Universities and compared them to their SAT numbers for 2006. A couple of interesting observations:</p>

<ol>
<li><p>ALL of the schools currently ranked in the USNWR Top 20 scored in the top 25 for SAT scores in 1966. The other five schools and their 1966 SAT ranks were Brandeis-7th, Tufts-16th, Georgetown-18th, Boston College-19th, and U Virginia-21st.</p></li>
<li><p>The average gain in SAT score from 1966 to 2006 was 115.52 points. The biggest gainers were Wash U (228 points), Duke (208), Northwestern (203), Princeton (159), and Notre Dame (149). </p></li>
<li><p>The biggest losers in SAT rank (among the 25 schools ranked in 1966) from 1966 to 2006 were Brandeis (down 16 spots from 7th to 23rd), Boston College (down 9 spots from 9th to 18th), U Virginia (down 9 spots from 21st to 30th), and Cornell (down 8 spots from 12th to 20th).</p></li>
</ol>

<p>Here is the complete list of the USNWR Top 35 schools with the following data:</p>

<p>USN Rank, School, 1966 SAT, 1966 SAT Rank, 2006 SAT, 2006 SAT Rank, SAT change from 1966 to 2006</p>

<p>1 Princeton, 1321, 11, 1480, 4, 159
2 Harvard, 1389, 3, 1490, 2, 101
3 Yale, 1380, 4, 1485, 3, 105
4 Cal Tech, 1429, 1, 1520, 1, 91
4 Stanford, 1300, 14, 1440, 9, 140
4 MIT, 1428, 2, 1470, 5, 42
7 U Penn, 1309, 13, 1420, 13, 111
8 Duke, 1257, 17, 1465, 6, 208
9 U Chicago, 1329, 9, 1425, 12, 96
9 Dartmouth, 1323, 10, 1450, 7, 127
9 Columbia, 1344, 6, 1420, 13, 76
12 Wash U StL, 1222, 23, 1450, 7, 228
12 Cornell, 1313, 12, 1385, 20, 72
14 Northwestern, 1207, 24, 1410, 15, 203
15 Brown, 1330, 8, 1440, 9, 110
16 J Hopkins, 1291, 15, 1390, 18, 99
17 Rice, 1368, 5, 1435, 11, 67
18 Emory, 1223, 22, 1350, 24, 127
18 Vanderbilt, 1252, 20, 1370, 21, 118
20 Notre Dame, 1196, 25, 1345, 26, 149
21 UC Berkeley, NoRank, NoRank, 1325, 30, na
21 Carnegie Mellon, NoRank, NoRank, 1395, 17, na
23 Georgetown, 1255, 18, 1390, 18, 135
24 U Michigan, NoRank, NoRank, 1315, NoRank, NoRank
24 U Virginia, 1239, 21, 1325, 30, 86
26 UCLA, NoRank, NoRank, 1295, NoRank, NoRank
27 USC, NoRank, NoRank, 1370, 21, na
27 Tufts, 1276, 16, 1410, 15, 134
27 U North Carolina, NoRank, NoRank, 1295, NoRank, NoRank
30 Wake Forest, NoRank, NoRank, 1340, 27, na
31 Brandeis, 1337, 7, 1360, 23, 23
31 W & M, NoRank, NoRank, 1350, 24, na
33 Lehigh, NoRank, NoRank, 1305, NoRank, NoRank
34 Boston College, 1254, 19, 1335, 28, 81</p>

74

<p>It should also be noted that Amherst's composite score of 1417 and Wesleyan's 1400 score for enrolled members of the Class of 2010 would place them both comfortably within the top 25 today.</p>

75

<p>P.S., I tried finding similar scores for Swarthmore, Pomona and Williams and they were hidden in places on their websites where I did not have the time to look. But, I'm assuming they would fit somwhere between Cornell and Penn, also.</p>

76

<p>If anyone doesn't already know this, Brandeis is traditionally a Jewish school. Like the women's colleges, I think it "suffered" when the other top schools opened up to minorities.</p>

77

<p>The College Board rescaled the scores around 1995, because the average SAT scores had fallen too much below 500 on the math and verbal. I was told at the time that what used to be a 720 verbal is now an 800, and what used to be a 780 math is now an 800. So, add about 100 points to the 1966 SAT scores to get the 2007 equivalent.</p>

78

<p>Broken record, I'm sorry. VaMom3, please look at the other posts regarding comparing 1966 and 2006 test scores. No, the fact that the tests were recentered in by 100 points in 1995 DOES NOT mean that you can add 100 points to a 1966 test score to get an equivilent in 2006. It only means that you can subtract 100 points from the next giving of the test, in 1996, to get an equivilent 1995 score, because the demographics of the test takers would have been essentially the same for those two years. The nature of the test and the test takers have changed so often and so much since 1966 that you cannot compare. Theoretical center has drifted around too, not just the 1995 big shift.</p>

79

<p>From what I understand, even the difference between 1995 and 1996 is more like 70 points on verbal and 10 points on math, so 80 points total.</p>

80

<p>Interesting link, #57.</p>

<p>What happened to Oberlin and UIUC to fall so precipitiously?</p>