http://news.emory.edu/stories/2019/04/er_fulbright-peace-corps-chronicle-ranking/campus.html
Note that Emory also is apparently really good at empowering its lower income/disadvantaged students to pursue opportunity. For example, it is really pushing the Gilman scholarship program very hard and has been very successful sending folks abroad through that program:
http://news.emory.edu/stories/2019/03/er_gilman_scholars/campus.html
And also very importantly, seems Emory doesn’t just want students to take for granted that “our top school status means the best possible academics”. No, it recognizes that even elite schools can always improve their academics/academic environments and Emory has always invested a lot of money in improving STEM curricula:
http://news.emory.edu/stories/2014/05/upress_hhmi_chemistry_grant/campus.html
http://news.emory.edu/stories/2017/09/er_chemistry_curriculum/campus.html
And is still investing in it to further improve things.
http://news.emory.edu/stories/2019/02/upress_aau_stem_grant/campus.html
It also tends to pay attention to humanities and social sciences than a lot of other research universities (especially among those that have reputations as “pre-professional” schools) and has been working on this for a while:
http://news.emory.edu/stories/2019/04/upress_mellon_grant/campus.html
So for those who take the academic quality a bit more seriously than normal, maybe check out Emory and other schools that go out of their way to constantly invest in and innovate their academics (often these places will post similar articles on their university webpage OR the separate webpages of undergraduate units. You have to do the research!). Unfortunately, among elites, rank and differences in selectivity are not the best predictor for how aggressive the schools are at keeping their undergraduate academic experience “fresh” and it certainly may not mean anything with regards to how aggressively the school empowers (and then directly facilitates successful placement) its high achieving students to pursue certain opportunities that develop them. I think the ability to innovate at the undergraduate level at research universities more so correlates with financial resources, which explains why many of the top 10 USNWR schools are exceptionally good and can constantly stay at the forefront.
However, other privates not as well-endowed as a Harvard, Yale, Stanford, Princeton (whoever else has 15 billion + endowments up there), in the top 30 or so can do something similar (or do things in their own way) and keep things fresh through pursuing these sort of external grants/joining these initiatives (which some of those ultra elite schools join as well). In this group, I think Emory, WUSTL, Rice, Hopkins, and some others have been very successful using this method and it seems to make a difference in providing (or at least giving students easy access to. It is up to the student to be deliberate and take advantage of it) a richer experience than some similar caliber places, higher or lower ranked. Just something to think about. Again, if very serious about your academic experience, think about this as well as potential special programs you can join at the school that allow you to deeply engage in your area(s) of interest. It isn’t the easiest to research (yes, instead of looking at rankings and incoming stats, you will have to look at the Universities’ webpages critically and maybe even search departmental webpages). Those of you who have been asking about things like class sizes, how to choose professors, etc, are already on the right track and doing more than what a lot of folks do. And you should, because these schools cost lots of money for most people. Ensure you can get the most for your money.