<p>"i dont think that it would be possible for 30% to have scored over a 1350."</p>
<p>change that 1350 to a 1400 and it makes atleast some sense...</p>
<p>dartmouth in group 2 was what i was thinking. cool.</p>
<p>Yes, Dartmouth is an awesome school...arguably the best in the country and certainly as good as Michigan. But it is very different from Michigan. A person cannot possibly like both schools. That's the beauty applying to those two schools. When it comes down to decision time, it is so easy to differentiate between the two.</p>
<p>"How can you put a school like Vanderbilt with a group like Rice and Wash U....Wash U was not even a top 25 school before the late 1990s and Rice has always been in the top 20 since as long as I can remember. Vanderbilt, I have nothing against it is defintely not on part with Rice and that is a complete fabrication if you think so."</p>
<p>What rankings are you referring to? I'm looking at a USN&WR from 1993 that has Wash U as #18. Vanderbilt at #20. 1990 WashU was #24 (and from what I can see, the major measures between 1990 and 93 didn't change all that much, rather the way the rankings tallied financial and faculty resources.</p>
<p>Dog, I agree that Rice is better than Vanderbilt and Washington U in some ways, but they are all pretty much at the same level overall. IF there is one schools in my group 3 that could make a strong case for group 2, it is Rice. Rice is truly spectacular. I really respect that school.</p>
<p>Somebody asked for the Wall Street Journal feeder list</p>
<p>Actually, among state schools, #2 was the New College of Florida, #3 was Virginia, #4 was Berkeley. New College is, technically speaking, a public school as it is supported by the Florida state government and falls under state auspices.</p>
<p>However, it is the opinion of me (and others) that the WSJ feeder list is a bit skewed, and in particular, seems skewed against the West Coast. In particular, when determining feeder schools, it is important to talk to ask the question "being fed into what?" If you look at the methodology of the ranking, you will see that of the professional schools that these feeder schools are feeding into, only 1 is located in California (UCSF Medical School). That might be understandable if there really was only 1 elite professional school on the West Coast. But I do not believe this to be true. For example, the WSJ list includes both Michigan Law and the University of Chicago law schools in its list of elite professional law schools that are being 'fed into'. While I agree that Michigan and Chicago are top-flight law schools, I don't think they're better than Stanford Law, and yet Stanford Law was not included. The same could be said for the choice of, say, Dartmouth Tuck for its MBA schools that are being fed into, but not the Stanford Graduate School of Business. I think it's hard to make the case that Tuck is better than Stanford. </p>
<p>The point is that many people prefer not to have to move. Many West Coasters prefer to attend professional school in the West Coast, including the professional schools at Stanford.</p>
<p>Sakky, Michigan and Chicago Law schools are definitely not better than Stanford Law...but they are just as good, so including them in favor of Stanford is not necessarily wrong. </p>
<p>But I agree with you 100%. I wish the WSJ would extpand their study to include the top 15 programs in each field and to include Engineering in their study. And you are correct in saying that the West coast is as a disadvantage. But even the Midwest is hurt because only 3 of the 15 programs were from the Midwest, and Midwestern schools, like Western schools, tend to stick together. Let us face it, 11 of the 15 programs chosen were Eastern...and 9 of them were Ivies. Three of those 15 programs were Harvard and two were Yale! LOL There is nothing fair about that study. The Ivies were unfairly favored. To make matters worse, top schools like CalTech and MIT were at a disadvantage because many of their best students go to graduate programs in Engineering. I would recommend theWSJ include the following schools in their next study:</p>
<p>BUSINESS:
Columbia University
Cornell University
Dartmouth College
Duke University
Harvard University
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
New York University
Northwestern University
Stanford University
University of California-Berkeley
University of California-Los Angeles
University of Chicago
University of Michigan-Ann Arbor
University of Pennsylvania
University of Virginia</p>
<p>ENGINEERING:
California Institute of Technology
Carnegie Mellon University
Cornell University
Georgia Institute of Technology
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Northwestern University
Pennsylvania State University
Purdue University-West Lafayette
Stanford University
Texas A&M University
University of California-Berkeley
University of Illinois-Urbana Champaign
University of Michigan-Ann Arbor
University of Southern California
University of Texas-Austin
University of Wisconsin-Madison</p>
<p>LAW:
Columbia University
Cornell University
Duke University
Georgetown University
Harvard University
New York University
Northwestern University
Stanford University
University of California-Berkeley
University of California-Los Angeles
University of Chicago
University of Michigan-Ann Arbor
University of Pennsylvania
University of Texas-Austin
University of Virginia
Yale University</p>
<p>MEDICINE:
Baylor University
Columbia University
Cornell University
Duke University
Harvard University
Johns Hopkins University
Stanford University
University of California-Los Angeles
University of California-San Francisco
University of Michigan-Ann Arbor
University of Pennsylvania
University of Washington-Seattle
Washington University-St Louis
Yale University</p>
<p>I think you would get a very different picture if WSJ included all those programs.</p>