If the Ivy League added 2 schools, which would they be?

<p>
[quote]
I didn't mean for you to take offense and interpret 'superior' so harshly in a comparing Harvard to South Dakota State sort of way

[/quote]
</p>

<p>i wasn't offended, really. just wanted clarification.</p>

<p>
[quote]
If you want to cite acceptance rates, Brown has gone from 30% to 13%, while Colgate has only gone from 33% to 27% over the last 40 years.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>well, it's actually 30% to 17% (13% is the change or delta) but for kicks, let's see - just cutting and pasting from Collegehelp's original list:</p>

<p>university, acceptance rate 1964, acceptance rate 2006, change</p>

<p>Columbia University in the City of New York 50 13 -37
Massachusetts Institute of Technology 48 16 -32
Yale University 35 10 -25
Harvard University 29 11 -18
Princeton University 30 13 -17
Stanford University 30 13 -17
Cornell University 45 29 -16
Dartmouth College 34 19 -15
Brown University 30 17 -13</p>

<p>Just taking a quick look at the above data, Brown's admission %-age "delta" (-13) is smaller than Columbia's (-37), MIT's (-32), Yale's (-25), Harvard's (-18), Princeton's (-17), Stanford's (-17), Cornell's (-16) and Dartmouth's (-15). </p>

<p>So Brown is hardly an outlier in this sense. If anything, HYPSM, Cornell and Dartmouth would seem to have made much bigger "astronomical" rises.</p>

<p>Back in the day, when dinosaurs roamed in Providence, there was a time Brown was considered the lowest of the low Ivies in the Ivy pecking order, by a wide margin. Serious top students didn't want to go there. I applied to a few Ivy schools but never considered Brown. Neither did my friends. Make no mistakes, though. Brown had a plenty of prestige. We just thought of it as a school for someone who didn't quite have the stats but wanted an Ivy name (prestige wh0re) or a smart slacker. So, I wouldn't be surprised some people preferred Colgate over Brown, although I don't think that would have been the norm. As for me, I was rejected, waitlisted by them all. Come to think of it now, Brown would have been a perfect school for me, as I was a bit of a slacker. lol.</p>

<p>Duke, William and Mary</p>

<p>really guys, who cares what colleges were like 30 years ago? planning on taking a trip in a time machine anytime soon?</p>

<p>Brown is absolutely one of the best colleges in the nation. Period. Anything anyone else tried to "claim" about what things were like 30 years ago should come up with some hard proof, but at the end of the day, DOES IT REALLY MATTER?</p>

<p>If you really want to beat that horse, you ought to get, and post, the SAT stats. They're in the book, no doubt.</p>

<p>Back in like 1701, 31% of Harvard applicants who rode sidesaddle were accepted, even though they were dudes. At William and Mary you were lucky to make the thou-waitest list if you were a dude and even THOUGHT about riding sidesaddle. Stick THAT in your blunderbuss and smoketh it.</p>

<p>OK, so many thanks to Collegehelp for digging this info:</p>

<p>Colgate's SAT average: 584 V 613 M in 1964
Brown's SAT average: 650 V 700 in 1966 </p>

<p>Brown did not release SAT info (at least that Collegehelp could find) in 1964 but did so in 1966 (I have also requested Collegehelp to look into comparable numbers for Colgate in 1966, but I can't imagine that they'd be hugely different in the span of two years). </p>

<p>Bottom line: Brown's SAT numbers for both Verbal and Math are considerably higher than Colgate's.</p>

<p>gellino, we are all witness to undeniable hard facts now:</p>

<ul>
<li>Brown's acceptance rate was lower than Colgate's in '64 </li>
<li>Brown's Verbal SAT average was 66 pts higher</li>
<li>Brown's Math SAT average was 87 pts higher</li>
</ul>

<p>What more do you want? How can you look at that and claim that Colgate was in any way shape or form "superior" to Brown? </p>

<p>I hope that this settles any lingering questions about your claims and we can all put this silly debate to rest.</p>

<p>Come on now this a silly debate. Brown is clearly at least equal, if not superior, to Colgate. I can understand someone saying Colgate was as "good" as Brown (which all depends on who you ask and how you are measuring the schools) but to say that Colgate is flat-out better than Brown as if it is fact is insanity.</p>

<p>Brown is WAY better than Colgate now, and WAS better than Colgate 30 years ago - looks like the_prestige did a solid job researching that.</p>

<p>Any claims otherwise has been sucking on too much Colgate toothpaste.</p>

<p>The Prestige, Brown's numbers seem to have been normalized. In 1990, Harvard's mean SAT score was 1350. I very much doubt that Brown's mean SAT was 1350 in 1965.</p>

<p>Not so fast Alexandre,</p>

<p>There are plenty of reports of how SAT averages have declined over the last 30 years.</p>

<p><a href="http://mwhodges.home.att.net/education-a.htm%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://mwhodges.home.att.net/education-a.htm&lt;/a>
<a href="http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1282/is_n18_v46/ai_15844204%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1282/is_n18_v46/ai_15844204&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>Average per Pupil Teacher School
SAT Score (1993 Dollars) Ratio District Size
1960 975 $1,700 25.8 868 Pupils
1970 948 2,830 22.3 2,550
1980 890 3,835 18.7 2,570
1985 906 4,342 17.9 2,512
1990 900 5,193 17.2 2,682
1994 902 5,400 17.3 2,988</p>

<p>Just a quick look at the above shows a drop of over 70 points in SAT average from 1960 to 1994.</p>

<p>and in one article, it states: </p>

<p>
[quote]
In 1960, the average entering Harvard freshman had a combined SAT score of 1373.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>So, I'd rather not send another dozen PM's to poor Collegehelp, but I think it's safe to say that even if Brown's numbers are somehow "normalized" in any way, than they are also "normalized" for Colgate's - though I doubt it since SAT averages have declined over the last 30 years anyway.</p>

<p>Put another way, if Harvard's SAT average was approx. ~1400 in 1960, then I think it's pretty reasonable to think that Brown's SAT average was about ~1350.</p>

<p>Just the same The Prestige, I'd like to see the official numbers. You may be right, but for some reason, I recall seeing a significant and steady increase in mean SAT scores at top universities from 1960 to 1990. I could be wrong though, but I need to see it to believe it. We are, afterall, discussing universities, not faith! hehe!!!</p>

<p>Alex, I'm not "making these numbers up"!</p>

<p>Here is another article on historical SAT averages:</p>

<p>
[quote]
In 1952, for example, the Harvard freshman class was overwhelmingly WASPish, drawn from the rich, high-toned Eastern prep schools and from the families of Harvard alumni. In terms of brains, however, Harvard wasn't particularly exclusive. The overall chances of being admitted were roughly two out of three and close to 9 to 1 if the applicant's father was a Harvard man. The mean verbal SAT score was only 583, well above the national mean but "nothing to brag about."</p>

<p>Just eight years later, Murray and Herrnstein report, Harvard had changed dramatically. There were more public than private school graduates in the freshman class. They came from all over the country; the proportion from New England dropped by a third. Admission was more difficult; only one out of three applicants was selected. SAT scores soared to an average of 678 on the verbal section and 695 on the math scale: "Many of the students who would have been admitted in 1952 were not even bothering to apply in 1960." By 1964 the average freshman at Harvard ranked in the 99th percentile on the SAT-Verbal. The other "highly selective" schools, in the Ivy League and elsewhere, reported the same phenomenon -- ''average" students who placed in the top 1 per cent of the nation's youth.

[/quote]
</p>

<p><a href="http://www.cosmos-club.org/web/journals/1995/harwood.html%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.cosmos-club.org/web/journals/1995/harwood.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>Alex, more info:</p>

<p>"Normalization" pre-1996 actually boosts scores pre-1996 NOT lower them:</p>

<p>Old New New
Verbal Math
800 800 800
790 800 800
780 800 800
770 800 790
760 800 770
750 800 760
740 800 740
730 800 730
720 790 720
710 780 700
700 760 690
690 750 680
680 740 670
670 730 660
660 720 650
650 710 650
640 700 640
630 690 630
620 680 620
610 670 610
600 670 600
590 660 600
580 650 590
570 640 580
560 630 570
550 620 560
540 610 560
530 600 550
520 600 540
510 590 530
500 580 520</p>

<p>(see link below for scores below 500)</p>

<p><a href="http://www.greenes.com/html/convert.htm%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.greenes.com/html/convert.htm&lt;/a>
When you mentioned "significant and steady increase in mean SAT scores at top universities" earlier - you were likely referring to the "normalization" of SAT scores which happened in 1996. As the chart demonstrates - the "boost" in scores are likely post-96 numbers. </p>

<p>Therefore, taking Harvard's 1960 example (678 V and 695 M) = 740 V and 685 M in "today's normalized" score for a combined: 1425.
Brown's 1966 example: (650 V and 700 M) = 710 V and 690 M in "today's normalized" score for a combined: = a combined 1400.</p>

<p>another article about the decline in SAT scores during late 60s - 70s:
<a href="http://darwin.nap.edu/html/hs_math/ch8.html%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://darwin.nap.edu/html/hs_math/ch8.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>
[quote]
Beginning in 1964, average scores on the SAT dropped slowly but steadily for about 15 years. This led to much speculation and considerable hand-wringing about possible causes of the apparent decline in education quality in the U.S.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>funny, the_prestige seems to be the only person who seems to come up with hard facts, data, links, etc.</p>

<p>yet, on the flip side, any detractor seems to just get away with what they "feel" or "think" is right or wrong. if you have evidence to the contrary - then let's see it. put up or shut up.</p>

<p>geez, let's try and have some semblance of objectivity - let's give some credit where credit is due.</p>

<p>Uh, thethoughtprocess definitely does the same, and I'm sure he counts as a "detractor." Take your own advice about giving credit where credit is due.</p>

<p>uhm, this is a debate about Colgate's supposed "superiority" over Brown 30 years ago - when did thethoughtprocess participate in this debate exactly?</p>

<p>I thought this was an all-purpose fight about anything you want to thread. Didn't realize you were only referring to the most recent argument. </p>

<p>Never mind then.</p>

<p>banana...go through my arguments and see which ones are invalid since you've been following what I write for a while (appreciate it btw). My most cited sources are established rankings (US News, THES, WSJ, collegeboard.com). I also cite Dean Guttentag of Duke U admissions. I mean, he's a dean, so I figure he's pretty reliable. More reliable than 3000 high school students and a survey that has a biased sample frame (assuming its biased, don't actually know if it is or not, but it must be if it reflects reality this poorly). </p>

<p>Spend a Friday or a Saturday evening going over my last...like 100 posts I suppose and let me know lol (jk).</p>

<p>lol... hey thoughtprocess, i think banana was trying to defend you there, not attack you!</p>