<p>"Quote:
Originally Posted by AO930
Cornell would fare better if we excluded the schools that Yale Law or Harvard Business wouldn’t be relevant to (e.g. agriculture, hotel administration). </p>
<p>No, it wouldn’t."</p>
<p>Anyone familiar with Cornell will recognize that the results would be substantially different if the percentage numbers were reported segregated by its individual colleges. Only 1/3 of undergraduates attend its Arts & Sciences College, and ILR is teeny. It is quite likely that these two colleges alone produced all of the 45 Cornell students matriculated to Harvard Law, while its other 5 colleges produced none. Or nearly so. And those two colleges are not the same as each other, either. Several of its colleges probably produce future MBA applicants, but again the proportional matriculation into top programs would not be identical, if these could be isolated by college. The individual colleges there are all different.</p>
<p>I suppose the same can be said for the individual colleges at Penn, though I imagine that, other than its small nursing school, the extent of the differences between colleges there may not be as substantial.</p>
<p>"If we play that game, then the state schools in CA can take away their other colleges, their transfers out of the total. "</p>
<p>Depending on what you are trying to determine, perhaps that’s exactly what you should do.</p>
<p>People don’t apply to a multi-college university as an aggregate, they apply to a particular college there. If the programs at each college there are different, the students there are different, then the results from each one are likely to be different. Merging them all together may cause one to draw misleading conclusions about the nature of the particular one college there that they are applying to. I know for a fact that this is the case for Cornell, quite likely it is true elsewhere also.</p>
<p>If one does not keep this in mind then they will be making tables and drawing conclusions that can be highly misleading.</p>
<p>That truth may be inconvenient for your little tables, but it’s still true.</p>
<p>All percentage calcs need to be done by individual college, where differences between colleges may be material. Mentally at least, if data does not permit actual. Really, to be meaningful they should be done by # of actual comparably-qualified applicants from each college. For diverse universities, given the large #s of students with diverse objectives, the gross #s may be more telling than the %s. If 45 of your classmates can go to harvard Law from your school, then perhaps, if you want to and are good enough, you have a shot to go there too. Even if many architects, engineers, hotel and agriculture majors who also attend the university don’t have these objectives, or others there have lower LSAT scores than you do.
But it will be about you, and your individual capabilities, not some aggregate of others who happen to also attend the university, likely doing something else, but are not you.</p>
So you agree the Ag school sucks and dragged down the aggregated stats?
Tell that to hmom5 who thinks your farmer classmates slowly turn you into a hillbilly and impede your intellectual growth.</p>
<p>Venkta89: “Y7,
I’m assuming you got your Harvard physics numbers from the list of past Thesis because I can’t find a list of undergrad schools for Harvard PhD students anywhere else. If it is, Penn has one undergrad listed and two Master’s students listed. That doesn’t include Penn students who are currently in the program nor ones who never finished.”</p>
<p>Thank you for point out that there are two master degree students Penn students at Harvard. Do you realize that at schools such s Harvard Physics, only PhD is awrded. Masters degree is only awarded to those who can not finish the PhD Program?</p>
<p>Penn students are not able to complete the rigorous requirements at Harvard. The failure rate is so high that Harvard physics discounts Penn education. That explains why there are few Penn students at Harvard physics PhD Program.</p>
<p>Thank you for validating my arguments unintentionally.</p>
<p>^no, what I said was that Penn had two students graduate from Penn’s Master’s programs and later go on to get PhDs from Harvard. The students completed undergrad elsewhere. One did undergrad Lehigh and I forget the other one. Harvard didn’t discount a Penn education. I strongly doubt Harvard would discount the education or any major national research university.</p>
<p>
[quote=]
Originally Posted by RML
Can you post how many students got into Harvard Law - which for me is the most prestigious law school in the universe - from Berkeley, Michigan, UVA, UCLA, William & Mary, UNC and Wisconsin? And, if it’s possible, kindly include USC too.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Interesting info… do you have the same for Illinois, Texas, Washington, and Florida?</p>
<p>you are a CC celebrity- every thread you start hits 100 posts- by bashing Penn.</p>
<p>I don’t have any affiliation with Penn but I know college recruiting quite well from working at Merrill Lynch on the derivatives and prop trading desks in London and New York for about three years before graduate school.</p>
<p>Penn was the #1 most recruited school at Merrill in the United States and also #1 at Goldman Sachs and Citigroup. I saw a PPT presentation of global recruits when I went to a GS milk round at Oxford, and Penn was first, followed by Princeton, Columbia and Harvard for US universities.</p>
<p>So if you’re status obsessed, which I suspect you are, Wharton + Penn CAS + Penn SEAS are among the highest represented in jobs that can hit 7 figures by your late 20s/early 30s. How this has changed post credit crunch is still to be determined…</p>
<p>What kind of idiot can’t account for the fact that the % of people at each college who a) desire to go to law school and b) within that, aspire to Yale may be dramatically different?</p>
<p>Pizzagirl: Where does Penn Stand in Washington Monthly’s PhD Productivity Ranking?</p>
<p>PhD Productivity ranking based on Washington Monthly 2009 College Ranking:</p>
<p>1 California Institute of Technology
2 Massachusetts Inst. of Technology
3 Yale University (CT)
4 Rice University (TX)
5 Princeton University (NJ)
6 Brown University (RI)
7 Stanford University (CA)
8 University of Chicago
9 Cornell University (NY)
10 Harvard University (MA)</p>
<p>11 University of Rochester (NY)
12 Duke University (NC)
13 Dartmouth College (NH)
14 College of William and Mary (VA)*
15 Brandeis University (MA)
16 University of California, Berkeley*
17 Johns Hopkins University (MD)
18 Northwestern University (IL)
20 Columbia University (NY)</p>
<p>21 Case Western Reserve Univ. (OH)
22 Carnegie Mellon University ¶
23 Vanderbilt University (TN)
24 University of Notre Dame (IN)</p>
<p>25 University of Pennsylvania</p>
<p>26 University of Virginia*
27 Rensselaer Polytechnic Inst. (NY)
28 University of Michigan, Ann Arbor*
30 Georgetown University (DC)</p>
<p>Penn is 25th! </p>
<p>The schools I am accused of ■■■■■■■■ HYPMSCCCDBC are well above Penn.</p>
<p>Again, Penn is at the bottom of Ivy, no where near CalTech, MIT, Stanford, Chicago or Duke.</p>
<p>Pizzagirl, I am soory to deliver the bad news to you.</p>