<p>I think some miscounting is to be expected, since I was going quickly, but I think I might have counted two students in an “other” area that was wedged between two pure areas. Here are the graduate students:</p>
<ol>
<li>Anderson, Theresa (Algebra or number theory)</li>
<li>Collins, Daniel Jack (algebra or number theory)</li>
<li>Negron, Cris (algebra or number theory)</li>
<li>Wolff, Sarah (algebra or number theory)</li>
<li>Wood, Victoria (algebra or number theory)</li>
<li>Heilman, Steven (analysis)</li>
<li>Robinson, Richard (analysis)</li>
<li>Healey, Vivian (geometry)</li>
<li>McMillan, Benjamin (geometry)</li>
<li>Pechenik, Oliver (combinatorics)</li>
<li>Fletcher, Sarah (combinatorics)</li>
<li>Tebbe, Amelia (combinatorics)</li>
<li>Chodosh, Otis (geometry)</li>
<li>Perry, Alexander (algebra or number theory)</li>
</ol>
<p>Maybe not pure math (the “others”):
Appelhans, David (computational math modeling)
Parzygnat, Arthur (topological quantum field theory)</p>
<p>I would argue that topological quantum field theory is probably a pure math field, but again, I am not in math.</p>
<p>And the unknowns - same undergrad and grad institution:
Berger, Emily Rita
Brodsky, Sara Brina
Palmer, Aaron
Viscardi, Michael</p>
<p>14 out of 42 is 33%, making the undergraduate students 66%. I’d also like to point out that we can’t be positive that those who listed that they are currently at the same institution as their undergrad aren’t in an MA program that they continued into, but assuming they aren’t, that’s still not 80%. It’s a majority, but not 80%.</p>