<p>Actually no I read that paper. 3240 surveys were taken. I have not found a quote where it says these students did have that particular choice. Many times they "generated" their own "head to head tournaments" based on the other choices. No where in the document is geographic bias mentioned. The divide the study up into the nine census groups however they do not mention the relative weights of each (including mentioning that some regions are small enough that they do not have pertinent data). All this is then used to generate a statistical model. </p>
<p>As any person who has experience developing models (and I am being published, have been employed and have won awards for developing stat models...nothing amazing but enough to critique), this isn't going to be amazingly accurate. </p>
<p>you can search cc for all kinds of comments about the RP, but it comes down to initial data selection: 1) the authors wanted to survey kids who went to selective colleges; 2) the vast majority of those colleges are in the NE; 3) the authors then surveyed high school GCs that sent a lot of students to the highly selective NE colleges; 4) As a result, many of the highly selective prep and private high schools were included (wanna guess where they are located?) 5) The authors assumed that a poor admittee to a highly selective college would choose the exact same college as a full pay customer, i.e., poor kid from Lansing would choose H over Michigan State. And, not surprisingly, they found a preference for NE colleges which have a majority of full pay customers. </p>
<p>The point is the following. If there is a discrepancy, why on earth would Duke's "supposed" cross-admit data be trusted over not one but two studies that both show Duke losing out on top kids. I can understand the distrust of these kind of studies. But, give me one reason why Duke's data is more believable to you? </p>
<p>And for the record, I WENT TO DUKE FOR LAW SCHOOL. I clearly have no reason to bash a school I attended. With that said, I feel like the school has a lot of positive attributes and some negative ones as well. Academically, it is great.</p>
<p>NUGrad, I just think the Duke admissions office wouldn't lie about information that clearly markets itself while Penn, Columbia, Dartmouth, and Brown watch idly...thats pretty ridiculous. If you are asking: would I trust the school itself which has access to actual data, or a biased study, I would trust the school itself. I would also trust large scale facts rather than personal experience.</p>
<p>How many students get accepted from your HS varies from place to place to a certain college. I mean, from my high school, more people apply to Penn, but a higher percentage get in too. I'm from the tri-state area. Columbia admissions (me included) was 3/3 in my school district. Duke has 2 for 5, Penn was probably more than 10 for about 20. It just depends on who applies and to what schools. Anecdotal evidence such as local acceptances at your high school vary widely from place to place. </p>
<p>Its not how many kids get rejected...its the quality of the kids who get accepted and attend that matters...
I think the statistics I provided in post 48# showed that the students who attend each school are veeery comparable. </p>
<p>Also, the reason Duke beats Penn's SAT scores might be because Penn's student body is a bit larger...which would support my basic argument that the schools are pretty much equals for undergrad.</p>
<p>These two are equals. If one chooses between Penn or Duke based on prestige rather than fit I personally feel that person is making a huge mistake.</p>
<p>um...well I can respect your experiences. However, with that said, in my area, the only kids that get into penn are the ones with strong legacy and those who are ED applicants. Last year (my brother just graduated), there were 28 kids that applied to Penn. And Penn knows my school very well. In fact, one of the directors of admissions attended it back in the day. Anyways, only 1 ED kid was admitted and the other one who was admitted RD went to MIT instead. The point is that the kids who got denied in the end, ended up at places like Dartmouth, Columbia, and many to Duke. In fact, a close friend of mine, who just graduated from Duke, applied to Penn ED (CAS) 4 years ago and got deferred and rejected. he ended up at Duke. I mean, it is all relative. In my eyes, I think Penn is a more difficult school to get into, simply b/c there is higher demand for it. Duke has very low yield compared to it, even before the lacrosse scandal . And it is not hard for it to get high scoring kids. Who do you think is coming off those wait lists. It is a perfect opportunity to grab kids who have 1550 SAT scores. Most of the kids coming off the list are kids who obviously weren't already enrolled at top schools. The point is that a lot of wait listers who get in, don't end up going if they are already at a comparable school. Go look around CC. A lot of kids got off Duke's wait list and decided to stay put at their respective schools. Penn rarely uses its wait list, simply b/c it is a hot school</p>
<p>Initial quote for this forum: "My personal belief is that the Ivy education is great if for no other reason but that one is in an environment with some exceptionally talented peers."</p>
<p>Talented students are EVERYWHERE, and talent is not directly related to the Ivy League. While Ivy League universities are home to distinguished student bodies and academic environments, many student bodies are filled with talented, brilliant students. </p>
<p>Students truly need to assess where their academic interests are when finding the perfect school. When initially researching the Ivies back in high school, I was so excited invisioning myself on the various campuses, particularly Harvard. It wasn't until I looked at their academic programs that I realized that the Ivies I was considering didn't offer undergraduates any of the programs that interested me. Do these schools offer distinguished graduate programs relating to my interests? Definitely. There are several Ivies I am considering for graduate school, but none of these schools offer such programs to undergrads. </p>
<p>At USC, I am currently content taking courses relating to subjects that correspond with my passions, in addition to a combination of courses that could not be taken at any Ivy League university.</p>
<p>I think we are getting way too hung up on whether Duke and U Penn and Dartmouth and Columbia are equals. The fact is that about 13,500 kids enroll each fall TOTAL at the eight Ivy League schools. There are probably 50,000 students (or more) who are statistically comparable and they are now ending up at other places (Duke, Rice, WashU, Northwestern, Emory, etc.). As a result, this broadening enrollment of highly talented students brings more schools to the level of the Ivies, particularly those not named HYP. Prestige in the Northeast likely perpetuates the Ivies winning many cross admit battles, but the ultimate quality of the enrolled student bodies at the USNWR schools ranked 5-20 is very, very, very similar. BTW, the TOTAL freshman enrollment at the USNWR Top 20 is only 32,000 students. The Ivies are terrific schools, but the real story is that now there are another dozen or so schools that have nearly the same level of student talent. That is a good thing for everybody.</p>
<p>ColumbiaHopeful...again, HS acceptances into top colleges varies from place to place.</p>
<p>My point is that the students who go to Duke are just as good as the ones who go to Penn. Post 48 illustrates that. Before graduation they are very similar, and after graduation (ie corporate survey reports and professional feeder school rates) they are again, very similar.</p>
<p>Saying Duke and Penn aren't on the same level is ... well...not true.</p>
<p>
[quote]
You haven't seen much research, high school student.
This is better than 99% of the studies out there.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>The study authors themselves state that their findings are not definitive. Their paper is merely an example of how one COULD construct a revealed preference ranking if one could get all the data. They constructed a model based on limited data as a way of showing how one would go about it. It is clearly a methodological paper. The posters here who keep talking about the quality of this study don't have to take my word for it--the authors say so themselves. It's not an issue of quality, it's an issue of data.</p>
<p>As for Duke's Cross-Admit stats, it is possible to "methodically track" admitted students cross-admits and enrolls. The College Board has a survey that does this called the ASQ+. Some of you may get it this year from colleges to which you were admitted. It is limited by response rates (in that you don't hear from 100% of your admitted students) but I expect if Duke did the ASQ+, they heard from a good number and got a reasonably representative sample on which it could draw conclusions about its competitive position against other colleges. The ASQ+ reports provide this information.</p>
<p>Penn is more selective in the New York area but much less selective in other parts of the country. Similarly trying to get into Dartmouth from the Boston area is more difficult than it is from Arizona. All schools have regional preferences so anecdotal experiences are often moot. At my high school (still) Penn is much easier than Brown, Dartmouth and about on par with Duke.</p>
<p>Columbiahopeful you just got into Penn and WL at Dartmouth and columbia (and Duke in the past). So lets put this all into perspective.</p>
<p>As you can see, THERE ARE A LOT more kids hailing from the east coast to Penn than they are from other parts of the country. So naturally it is much harder to get into. However, with that said, it is also reflects how Penn is a major player in the north east whereas Duke has more control in the South. If one wants to live on the east coast (particularly in the NE), I think Penn is the better choice, simply because there are more alums in the area, especially in positions of influence.</p>
<p>and as i recall in a Duke article, Duke said itself it accepts around 50 percent of kids that score above a 1550 on their SATs. Just look at Penn's acceptance rates for kids scoring above a 750 on the verbal section (under 30 percent).</p>
<p>Columbiahopeful you just got into Penn and WL at Dartmouth and columbia (and Duke in the past). So lets put this all into perspective.</p>
<p>last year, this is an anecdote. Four students in my school applied ED to penn. 1 was accepted. The other three deferred, rejected. 1 ended up at Duke, the other at Wash U, and the other at Dartmouth. Admissions is a crap shoot. But from my area, I would say is as hard to get into as H Y P. No one gets in. Maybe in other parts of the country, this isn't the case.</p>
<p>It's interesting to read the comments on here about U Penn. While their Wharton school has always been highly regarded, U Penn was not always held in such high regard and certainly was no where as selective as it is today. From what I gather, the folks running that school have done a very good job of leveraging the Wharton brand and the rest of the school has caught up. Furthermore, the neighborhood has reportedly gotten a lot better (though West Philly is never going to be a garden spot). Perhaps my historical perception of the school ranks it too low within the Ivy League universe as, in terms of selectivity and prestige, I still lump it more with Cornell than with Dartmouth or Columbia.</p>
<p>Columbiahopeful...
Duke has a higher percentage of kids that enroll who have over a 1550 - and enrollment is sort of the bottom line, not acceptances or rejections. 25% of students have over a 1550 in Duke's class of 2010, while 25% of students have over a 1510 in Penn's class of 2010. Again, I believe this difference doesn't make Duke better than Penn, and instead I believe they are in the same peer group of schools along with the rest of the non-HYP ivies.</p>
<p>You'd be suprised by how unimportant geography is - the top firms go after talented students, it doesn't matter where the students are coming from. And there are as many top students at Duke as Penn. A Penn grad hiring for Morgan Stanley isn't going to skip over targeting Duke students because he didn't go there, or because its far away.</p>
<p>I agree that the revealed preference study is modest in its claims.<br>
Have people ever been to an American Educational Research Assn. annual convention? Literally thousands of poorly conceived and executed studies. Finding a decently executed one on a question worth posing IMO is a lesson in futility.
The authors of the revealed preference study are highly credentialed and at least are aware of some of the weaknesses of their approach.
This study has been hashed over plenty here.
I agree with those who think that Duke, Penn, Dartmouth, Columbia and Brown are overall peers.</p>