@bernie12 I never used these two data to “paint the overall full picture.” In fact I listed them with no comments at all. It is up to everyone to interpret.
Do SAT scores matter for MD admissions? No.
“Talk of foreigners views are kind of irrelevant in an undergraduate output,” Yes but it is your fellow emory student who writes “who cares what foreigners think” and I am saying this is wrong.
https://www.usnews.com/education/best-global-universities/emory-university-139658 (Engineering effect/not having influence in physical sciences maybe, but at least it has a couple of top 20 rankings here)
https://www.usnews.com/education/best-global-universities/washington-university-in-st-louis-179867 (I lied, and should have known it because WUSTL cleans all of our clocks in many global rankings)
https://www.usnews.com/education/best-global-universities/rice-university-227757
https://www.usnews.com/education/best-global-universities/vanderbilt-university-221999
According to these metrics, Emory, Rice, and VU are in the same tier globally in terms of impact. I do not think either of them get much play in terms of branding, and WUSTL does not get as much as it should either and it does very well in global rankings (including others). As far as getting a reaction: Schools must market better/spread their names…or else you cannot expect anything. Need to be consistent across several global rankings and sell your programs to the world well or you get no play…and what all 3 of these need is some impact in academia. The other older elites have and continue to make a much bigger mark there whether you talk about current faculty or students produced. This Doctor, Lawyer, Businessperson limitation goes but so far. They also have comparatively little oriented towards the political arena.
There are some other ranking that puts Emory a bit behind all of these, but generally they end up less relevant than many other peers.
Oh, and yes they should! VU should have substantially higher MCAT scores because the SAT scores are higher…most of the 6 year (or whatever programs) heavily screen applicants by SAT scores because they know that higher scores are likely to get higher MCATs. The MCAT is afterall a multiple choice. Ideally and maybe especially the ACT should correlate with the MCAT. What SAT should ideally not correlate with (according to data after the first year) is GPA, especially if comparing academically elite students (high scores, beyond 1350/1600). One one would hope that instructors at these schools use constructed response items more often so that HS GPA correlates better. I have heard data that Emory MCAT test takers usually have about an average of 29.5. VU is 30.7. I think WUSTL is much higher than both of ours but I need to go look. Idea is that hopefully VU is on par with WUSTL.
@bernie12 the ARWU ranking of the four schools are
WUSTL 23
Vanderbilt 60
Emory 101-150
Rice 72
But what you are saying makes sense/objective.
The average SAT score of the overall student population is higher at Vanderbilt, yes. But you don’t know if the average SAT scores of pre-med students are higher at Vanderbilt than at Emory
Vandy’s average MCAT score in 2016 is actually 32.4.
https://as.vanderbilt.edu/hpao/documents/2016_HPAO_Annual_Report.pdf
@Otemach : The national average went up though…https://as.vanderbilt.edu/hpao/documents/2014_Annual_Report.pdf by 2.2 points. I don’t know what that means. Maybe those taking the old one were self-selected for who knows what. That is quite the increase and that cohort for VU was not too much better score wise than the previous so I would attribute that to that national blip.
Also, I don’t know. Yes, the scores in STEM tend to be more compressed, but when you have like 25-30something percent coming in claiming they are pre-health…then I don’t know. I am curious and may have to take a guess based on intro. course enrollment data. I will just scale for incoming class size (since Emory has Oxford, ECAS is smaller, but then Oxford continuees add to the applicants as well, but I guess I can just look at main). VU has a 100 points + on Emory in terms of a mean, I am not sure that STEM vs. non-STEM will completely erase that gap. But something tells me from my experience, that almost anyone, their grandma, and pets will come to Emory to try pre-med, so the stats of students may be less compressed than other schools. Maybe the gap closes some, because more of those in VU’s top 25% go to engineering. I can say that physics is small at Emory so it isn’t like all the top folks are leaking to physics. And most math majors do double or joint. The life sciences are “it” at Emory. I think among them, only neuro has a comparable amount of majors at VU. But Biology and chemistry have tons of majors at Emory and tons are pre-health. I would say that many of the students in the life sciences there are more consistently in the 1400s (as opposed to a mixture of 12, 13, 14, 15) I guess. Bet on VU having most in STEM solid at 15/1600+ (it is seriously time to add more analytical rigor to those lower division STEM courses now…the profs. need to suck it up and make the students do it. With near perfect students, time to build skills in areas that could likely be developed more).
VU is also peer universities with Cornell, Brown, UPENN, Northwestern, Duke, and Dartmouth. An argument can be made Vandy is bring in more talent than the above universities. VU should be considering the next step. What it needs to accomplish to be compared to H,P,Y,S,C.
^Higher test scores don’t necessarily mean more talent. Any top-20 schools these days can get their test score to be the same or higher than HYP if they hyper-focus on test scores at the expense of more holistically qualified candidates.
In the absence of well-known programs and stronger reputation compared to the peers you mentioned, it’s hard to see how it would attract more talented pool at the first place. The following ACT profile reports (page 26) show that for the 2016 admission cycle, VU attracted less percentage of top scorers (33-36 on ACT) from TN than most of its peers did from their respective states.
https://www.act.org/content/dam/act/unsecured/documents/P_43_439999_S_S_N00_ACT-GCPR_Tennessee.pdf (Vanderbilt, 6%)
https://www.act.org/content/dam/act/unsecured/documents/P_33_339999_S_S_N00_ACT-GCPR_New_York.pdf (Cornell, 16%)
https://www.act.org/content/dam/act/unsecured/documents/P_30_309999_S_S_N00_ACT-GCPR_New_Hampshire.pdf (Dartmouth, 20%)
https://www.act.org/content/dam/act/unsecured/documents/P_34_349999_S_S_N00_ACT-GCPR_North_Carolina.pdf (Duke, 4%)
https://www.act.org/content/dam/act/unsecured/documents/P_39_399999_S_S_N00_ACT-GCPR_Pennsylvania.pdf (Penn, 15%)
https://www.act.org/content/dam/act/unsecured/documents/P_26_269999_S_S_N00_ACT-GCPR_Missouri.pdf (WashU, 10%)
https://www.act.org/content/dam/act/unsecured/documents/P_14_149999_S_S_N00_ACT-GCPR_Illinois.pdf (Northwestern, 14%)
https://www.act.org/content/dam/act/unsecured/documents/P_40_409999_S_S_N00_ACT-GCPR_Rhode_Island.pdf (Brown, 5%)
@bud123 and @IWannaHelp : Not “more” talent, different talent. I do not think VU has an edge over many of those schools talent wise. It just cherrypicks higher SAT/ACT scores on average. I get the feeling that looking at EC backgrounds would tell a different story where the other schools get very good students that tend to be “pointed” in certain areas even if they were not perfect on the SAT. Many of the Ivies and similar schools require SATIIs for example. This will skew it toward students who have “deep” talents or passions so these students may end up with more access to top awards on a more consistent basis. In this sense, some of the schools in that pack are more comparable to HYP even with lower scores.
Also, S has lower scores than VU…are their students less talented/Stanford has less talent? What exactly distinguishes it from Duke, Penn, JHU, etc (others near its scores) so that VU has more talent than those other places but still less than S? Let go of the scores argument. It doesn’t hold but so well. Scores are generally pretty high at these schools so you are really just splitting hairs or cherry-picking if you select for perfect scores. The schools with more consistently strong outcomes select on scores up to a certain threshold and then distinguish somehow else (like maybe some will take a Seimens Finalist who is slightly imperfect score wise over the 1600 student who is indeed well rounded, but doesn’t have many ultra deep accomplishments in anything). To improve the outcomes even more, you must offer something to the student with more “deep” ambition, or else they will go elsewhere. Or perhaps a focus on scores causes the adcoms to overlook the student unless they applied for a scholarship.
Regardless: Please let us set a higher bar. Being able to take a non-subject multiple choice test better than other already elite test takers should not quantify talent at top schools. If it does, then it reflects badly upon the curriculum and the offerings for those students, because hopefully beyond elite (1350-1400), the curriculum would be so good that much beyond it on that specific test would be less meaningful. Instead SATIIs, competitions, AP/IB tells more about the credentials. In addition, These schools have different patterns in the enrollment patterns/course selection patterns of their talented student bodies. Some clearly have students who are maybe more ambitious academically so these schools have higher demand for and enrollment in accelerated courses and special programs meant for ultra strong or ambitious freshmen. I think such data is actually worth looking at when available because it is nice if you get a bunch of people who look great on paper, but who (and how many) among them actually go to the school to push themselves harder (I for example, like to show the article where Harvard features the equivalent of an Advanced or intermediate biophysical chemistry course at even elite schools, LSci 50 for freshmen! And then in the inaugural year has 100+ students apply! I’m sorry, but most schools, if not in H’s tier will not have anywhere near that demand and would get a lower positive response even if they gave invitations for such a course).
@IWannaHelp : Is it possible that state influences it. Like some southern states may a) have lower scorers on average and then in cases like Tn, which are less populated, a higher scorer may be more desired by other elites. In NC and Georgia, there is much more competition for in-state students by other in-state universities (Chapel Hill, NC State, Georgia Tech, even UGA in Georgia because of HOPE scholarship. Emory has 7% apparently…The spread among those reporting a score to it is bigger than either UGA or GT! Also, naturally the interest is lower. Why go to Emory, when you can go to Tech and UGA for comparatively little cost on HOPE? And then maybe there are more SAT takers who consider it, Duke, and VU?)
Either way, it is well known that southern schools tend to get a great deal of talent from out of the state and even pride themselves on that “regional diversity”. The exception among the big 4 is likely Rice I would guess.
BTW, thanks for posting that data. It is a goldmine for interesting state trends and things like that. Didn’t even know it existed. Turns out my home state (GA) only enough does better than a couple of other southern states(thought it would be dead last), maybe in large part carried by portions of metro Atlanta (ya know, over half the state lol). Texas has a surprisingly poor showing 
^It is very possible. For example, Brown attracted a higher percentage from New Hampshire. Purdue did the same from Illinois, likely because the candidates from IL are self-selecting applicants for its highly-regarded engineering program. The data are incomplete obviously; unfortunately, we don’t have consolidated reports by schools.
That said, I am pretty positive that VU has been aggressively focusing on test scores; the trajectory in test scores has been abnormal in the past 6-7 years without any gain in reputation and graduate rankings, which take a lot more effort and time to do. As I mentioned, raising scores is very easy. The top schools reject lots of candidates scoring above 1500s while admitting many in the 1300s/low 1400s range; it’s an easy adjustment if they really want to.
The commoditization of higher ed accelerates.
I don’t like Olympic “sports” that need judges (vs referees), and I’m magnificently underwhelmed by awards that are voted on.
The school with the highest percentages going into inner city or rural teaching or medicine (also inner city or rural), or the school with the highest percentage going into the Peace Corps or service produces graduates who do good.
Those are alumni accomplishments worth bragging about.
I’ve seen nothing showing VU cares about test scores more than any other top university. I’ve seen nothing showing VU is less holistic than any other top university. If you look at posts from incoming classes they are full of high test students getting waitlisted or rejected from VU. 100% of VU accepted students have received major awards, held major leadership positions or had significant achievements in sports or the fine arts in order to get accepted. 100%.
In other words high test scores and grades aren’t enough to gain admission. In addition to enrolling the top academic students VU students are also winning NCAA championships in baseball and women’s tennis, & SEC basketball tournaments. So from a diversity standpoint they are enrolling top 1% athletes that other elite U’s aren’t.
Duke, NU, ND, and Stanford are the only other top 20’s who have student athletes competing at the top level in the country.
I suspect VU has accepted the elite high school students for the last 100 years but in the past 10-15 years they now are enrolling at Vanderbilt. The difference is not who VU has been accepting its that these top students now are selecting to attend VU. More and more students are applying ED showing VU is their first choice.
@IWannaHelp Your statement about Vandy not able to attract more nigher ACT scores from its own state students when comparing other respective top school as a yard stick in lacking strong programs has major flaw.
When I opened the links to see each school you mentioned, I only got my conclusion that both Duke and Vandy are located in South, and their student pools are not that competitive in ACT scores (bell shape 25-75% in ACT 16-28); whereas, those top school in Northeast area, their student pools are more competitive (bell shape of 25-75% in ACT 20-32; some states even in 24-32 range); Brown in RI such a small state and has the same issue of student pool in competitiveness).
Therefore, your links and the high ACT in state students do not provide any useful data to compare how top schools performance. In fact, it shows that the top schools are willing to accommodate its in state students by lower their overall range of test scores for them, and taking the high scorers from other more competitive states to compensate that. These school do want to contribute their own state and community. I think Vandy takes 1/6 of its income freshmen from instate.
@bernie12 I actually agree with you that VU students are no more talented than Emory/Rice students. As I mentioned before, I believe we simply have a different admissions philosophy from you guys. My question for you is…if you think Emory students are as talented as VU students (which I think they are), how do you explain the fact that Emory has a much lower medical school acceptance rate than Vanderbilt? Didn’t you use the fact that Vanderbilt has more high SAT scorers to justify the gap in MCAT/med school acceptance rate between VU and Emory?
Also, even though SAT II scores are not officially required by Vanderbilt, with an admit rate of ~10%, it is necessarily the case that almost all admits have taken SAT II’s (you can actually verify this by checking each year’s decision threads). I personally took three of them: 800, 800, 780.
@IWannaHelp Thank you for your response. I agree with you that we focus a lot on test scores. BUT…you said " without any gain in reputation and graduate rankings." How does undergraduate SAT scores help graduate school rankings, though? This statement is also kind of extreme. VUSE’s ranking has improved from the mid40s roughly 7 years ago to the mid30s. You might argue that this is a temporary thing rather than a reflection of an actual improvement in academics etc…but one counterexample is enough to refute your statement.
@bud123 Vanderbilt is not an actual peer of Penn or of the other ivies and Northwestern, Duke, by pretty much any metric. Your point about talent is far from the truth. Vanderbilt is known for accepting people with just top scores, in order to rise in the rankings because SAT scores count the most. Most students with top SAT scores are a shoo-in for Vanderbilt because of this practice. This is not true for schools like Penn, Columbia, Duke, Chicago etc which can afford to look at admissions more holistically and maintain their consistent top 10 ranking. The GPA/class rank of the incoming class at Vanderbilt is significantly lower than that of the incoming classes at these schools, which shows that Vanderbilt is less holistic and focuses on scores at the expense of other factors. As for H,Y,P, S, M, Caltech, this is the very tippy top tier of the US universities, it is highly unrealistic that Vanderbilt would ever be a peer of this group. It would first have to become a established peer of the lower top 10 schools, and also of places like Brown, Cornell, Dartmouth, Northwestern, Hopkins. Vanderbitl is a solid top #16-#20 school, but it has not established itself in the top 15 in the public consciousness and all kinds of metrics show that (yield rates, cross-admit splits, rankings performance, research output, awards, outcomes etc).
@Otemachi I will PM you on the pre-health and talent issue: VUSE: Did VUSE grow in enrollment or faculty numbers? Departmental rankings often have a size bias. Also, VUSE is a single unit (a unit that has gotten a lot of attention over the past decade or so from prospective students, the government, and those figuring out curricular reform in STEM). It would not surprise me if VUSE is indeed a unit that got better, but that says nothing about other units. Those would have to be evaluated separately. If there was a lot of faculty turnover, then there is a chance, but if many faculty are left…chances are they teach the same way and many of the curricula are still very similar. One thing I do notice is a move towards the creation of “concentrations” (in STEM and social sciences) but this is common and mostly involves using current courses to make them as opposed to a fullsale reform or addition which would involve more than say in history: “You should elect a concentration in one of these foci and take distribution requirements within your chosen focus”. An improvement/walk towards more rigor would be: "You must choose a foci and take a colloquium or do a research paper or 2 in it).
@Penn95 : Like I said, it like any other school who wants to truly move up will have to put in the work to improve academics and activate the talent (Penn and Duke didn’t get up there by sprinkling fairy dust on their admissions policies). And yes I noticed the GPA/class rank thing. One interesting thing I observed is that some schools seemed to be selecting from more rigorous (or at least tougher grading) schools where lower GPAs still corresponded to high ranks. VU was pretty much what you would expect. I wonder what these competitive/tough grading HS’s are. It seemed my school was getting some from those types of schools (GPA corresponded less well to rank than expected when I looked at some years. A decent amount of less than perfect GPAs, high rank students). I thought HS was also all about inflation…there must be exceptions and maybe some adcoms know of them.
Still no data to show VU uses test scores more than any other top 20 or that VU is less holistic. As for GPA and the holistic process remember VU selects SEC level student athletes, participates in Questbridge, and has a music school that uses an audition and gives it more weight that test scores. Most other top 20’s are not that holistic or diverse.
@bud123 Vandy MORE holistic than peers …Now that’s just silly. No one said Vandy utilized test scores only, but seriously of course there’s no data if it want released by Vanderbilt Admissions themselves. However, knowledgeable minds whom have experience with elite college admissions can use nuance to deduce probable theories. The fact that Vandy overhauled the supplemental essay section to just basically one-two paragraphs on why you choose Vandy, a fast and stark rise into the top 25 then top 20, a lack of change in reputation that corresponds to change in ranking, and a 3-4 deviation increase in SAT scores in only 5 years or so points to a stat conscious atmosphere at Vandy Admissions.
“Vanderbitl is a solid top #16-#20 school, but it has not established itself in the top 15 in the public consciousness and all kinds of metrics show that (yield rates, cross-admit splits, rankings performance, research output, awards, outcomes etc).” True, although Vanderbilt’s yield rate is actually quite high, on par with Northwestern I think.
Also, regarding your statement that Vanderbilt is not a peer of Duke…Duke’s student newspaper actually referred to Vanderbilt as a peer of Duke.
“Historically, Duke’s yield falls in the middle of the pack compared to its peer institutions. On the higher end, Harvard University, University of Pennsylvania and Yale University reported yields of 81 percent, 63.2 percent and 66.9 percent respectively in Fall 2013, according to U.S. News & World Report. Cornell University, Dartmouth College and Vanderbilt University reported yields of 51.8 percent, 47.8 percent and 40.7 percent, respectively.”
You can check out the full article here: http://www.dukechronicle.com/article/2015/06/class-2019-potentially-largest-ever
I agree with you that Duke is ranked considerably higher than us in most departments (Duke doesn’t have an education school so can’t compare that) so I don’t think it is unreasonable to say that Vanderbilt is not an academic peer of Duke. However, due to the geographic proximity and the relative lack of elite universities in the South I personally would still say that Duke is a peer of ours. Vanderbilt’s medical school and education school have always been ranked higher than Northwestern’s so I don’t think Northwestern is THAT much better than us. It is somewhat better, though.
“a fast and stark rise into the top 25 then top 20” ???
Vanderbilt has been ranked among the top20 for the last 14 years, long before the drastic decline in admission rate starting fall 2007.