<p>^ Hmmm...I thought you were a Duke alum?</p>
<p>
[quote]
Every single placement stat at any top graduate school whether its HLS, y/ale law, Wharton, or Columbia business school shows places like Dartmouth, Brown, and Amherst literally "schooling" places like Michigan and Cal.
[/quote]
... at places like Stanford(#2), Cal(#6), Chicago(#7) and Michigan(#9) too?</p>
<p>
[quote]
^ Hmmm...I thought you were a Duke alum?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>nope.... its a great school though.</p>
<p>
[quote]
at places like Stanford(#2), Cal(#6), Chicago(#7) and Michigan(#9) too?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>which grad schools are those and which rankings are they referring to?</p>
<p>Law, the topic of this thread?...... according to USNWR</p>
<p>of course, you can never be sure.</p>
<p>yeah, I'd bet that that Brown / Dartmouth's placement stats are superior to Cal / Michigan's at the top 5 ranked Law Schools (according to USNW):
-YLS
-HLS
- Stanford
- CLS
- NYU</p>
<p>After the top 5, of course Cal's admit rate into Cal Law School and Mich's admit rate into Mich Law School are going to be the best, that doesn't prove anything (e.g. if Brown and Dartmouth had a Law Schools, we'd have to agree to discount those particular schools). So outside of those schools to round out the Top 10:</p>
<ul>
<li>Chicago</li>
<li>UPenn</li>
<li>Northwestern</li>
<li>UVA</li>
<li>Cornell</li>
</ul>
<p>I'd be willing to say that on average Brown / Dartmouth grads do better than Cal / Mich grads.</p>
<p>the_prestige, I would like to see the numbers that support your claim that law school admissions committees prefer Brown and Dartmouth applicants to Cal and Michigan applicants. There is a chance the admissions numbers may be slightly better (or slightly worse), but "superior", I doubt it and I will take that bet. Of course, to me, superior means significantly better. 16% of Michigan applicants to HLS got in last year. Superior would mean well overthat. 18% or 20% would not qualify as superior. Hell, even Stanford's 25% success rate is not superior. Cornell's success rate into HLS was 10% last year, and I would not say that Michigan's 16% is superior. </p>
<p>And you must include Michigan Law and Cal Law in those calculations. The average Michigan undergrad will chose Michigan law over all law schools save Harvard, Yale and maybe Stanford, and the same goes for Cal undergrads applying to Law school. </p>
<p>Now if we could only find actual application figures for Brown and Dartmouth students.</p>
<p>Truth be told, I haven't seen numbers outside of HLS and YLS (though the numbers I have seen clearly demonstrate that outside of H / Y / P / S -- Brown and Dartmouth are two of the strongest schools in per capita representation across both HLS and YLS). Further my assertion is also supported by Brown and Dartmouth's superior ranking over Cal and Michigan in the WSJ Feeder Ranking as well.</p>
<p>As for "superior", you are building in an unnecessary negative connotation. Superior is simply better. It doesn't mean (at least to me) that you are using the other party's face for a mop and dunking it in dirty water.</p>
<p>the_prestige, the per capita numbers are meaningless and you know it. They mean absolutely nothing in a vacuum. I maintain that the reason Brown andDartmouth are well represented at HLS and YLS is because of proximity and sheer number of applicants, not because applicants do better than applicants from peer institutions. Only 100 students from the University of Michigan apply to HLS each year. I would be very surprised if fewer than 200 applied from Brown. But without detailed application numbers, I guess we just won't know. </p>
<p>And the word "superior" almost always has negative connotation when used in the context of comparison.</p>
<p>I certainly do not know that per capita numbers are meaningless. You have to normalize for school size. </p>
<p>You claim that Mich only has 100 applicants to HLS per year. How do you KNOW for sure? Where is the data? This is largely based on voluntary information -- what about those applicants that never disclose? Now again, you claim that Brown has up to 200 applicants per year, but that, again, is a merely a guess. Nothing less, nothing more. We cannot RELY on these numbers.</p>
<p>As you said, the truth is only HLS really knows what the true yield numbers are. So what is truly VERIFIABLE? The number of actual enrolled students. Period. But unfortunately, HLS and as far as I know, YLS do not disclose those numbers any more (hence people referring to that 2006 data when they last did).</p>
<p>
[quote]
of course Cal's admit rate into Cal Law School and Mich's admit rate into Mich Law School are going to be the best, that doesn't prove anything (e.g. if Brown and Dartmouth had a Law Schools, we'd have to agree to discount those particular schools)
[/quote]
Why would you want to discount Cal and Mich Law School for Cal and Mich applicants? Isn't the topic of this thread "undergrad with highest acceptance rates to law school"? Having top ranked professional schools and top ranked graduate programs across the board are key advantages of being in Cal and Mich ... something that Brown and Dartmouth can't claim.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Why would you want to discount Cal and Mich Law School for Cal and Mich applicants? Isn't the topic of this thread "undergrad with highest acceptance rates to law school"? Having top ranked professional schools and top ranked graduate programs across the board are key advantages of being in Cal and Mich ... something that Brown and Dartmouth can't claim.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>They are key advantages to the extent that one wants to continue at the same school for grad school (i.e. a Cal / Mich undergrad that wants to go to Cal / Mich grad) -- I absolutely acknowledge this.</p>
<p>But for the TOP 3 programs across business, medicine and law? It provides you zero advantage (in other words, Cal / Mich do not have Top 3 programs across the big 3 grad schools). And so pound for pound, (across the top tiers), Brown and Dartmouth are superior. The WSJ Feeder Ranking validates this assertion. I've got a qualified ranking backing me up --> what do you guys offer aside from opinion?</p>
<p>"You claim that Mich only has 100 applicants to HLS per year. How do you KNOW for sure? Where is the data? This is largely based on voluntary information -- what about those applicants that never disclose? Now again, you claim that Brown has up to 200 applicants per year, but that, again, is a merely a guess. Nothing less, nothing more. We cannot RELY on these numbers."</p>
<p>Actually the_prestige, those statistics from the University of Michigan are not based on voluntary information. It is based on the number of transcripts and recommendations sent to the various Law schools. So the University has a way of tracking how many students actually apply.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Actually the_prestige, those statistics from the University of Michigan are not based on voluntary information. It is based on the number of transcripts and recommendations sent to the various Law schools. So the University has a way of tracking how many students actually apply.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Yeah, that's what they say, but its still subject to manipulation. There isn't an outside party "auditing" / checking those numbers. Again, the law school in question (e.g. HLS admission knows the true yield numbers) and the actual numbers that end up enrolling (and graduating) are the only truly verifiable numbers. You can't fudge a person who ends up graduating with a degree.</p>
<p>Call me a cynic, but let's face it, Michigan (or any other top school) has every motive to fudge their numbers to make it appear that their undergrads fare well in the grad school rat race. It is a potentially strong selling point and positions their program in a positive light. I don't trust those numbers (Cal's HLS numbers are a clear case and point) for a second.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Call me a cynic, but let's face it, Michigan (or any other top school) has every motive to fudge their numbers to make it appear that their undergrads fare well in the grad school rat race.
[/quote]
the<em>prestige,
Have you looked at the details Michigan disclosed?(<a href="http://www.lsa.umich.edu/advising/advisor/prelaw/um">http://www.lsa.umich.edu/advising/advisor/prelaw/um</a></em>stats) It listed 70+ law schools that Michigan students applied and enrolled in 2007. Do you think they fudged those numbers?</p>
<p>It's possible. For instance, it's very possible that they have missed applicants. Again, the only truly verifiable numbers are those that actually enroll. And the only other party that can truly verify yield is the law school in question. The rest is questionable.</p>
<p>the_prestige:</p>
<p>You have crossed the line into uncivil discourse. One doesn't repeatedly ask about the possibility of a university lying in its publications without having some evidence to support that suspicion.</p>
<p>YOu can suspect all you want privately... but to repeatedly question, without any evidence anyone else here can see, that Cal and Michigan must be fudging (lying) in their figures is very poor form.</p>
<p>I have crossed the line by questioning a web page from a university which effectively amounts to a glorified PR page? Take a look at the very last table on that web page breaking down UMich's law school applicants. LOL!</p>
<p>The message is very clear: look at the UM undergrad placement rate into UMich law school vs. national applicants. (hint: come to UM if you want to go to law school here).</p>
<p>It's a propoganda page! They didn't take all of that time and effort to pull those tables together out of charity or the goodness of their heart or had nothing better to do. Please.</p>
<p>With all due respect, I can absolutely question the veracity of those numbers. So you can save your sanctimonious sermon for someone that gives a crap.</p>
<p>the_prestige, at the end of the day, we (and that includes me) have no evidence whatsoever that Brown and Dartmouth have a higher admit rate into top graduate schools than Cal and Michigan. We do have evidence, however, that in academic circles, Michigan and Cal are as respected as Brown and Dartmouth. Whether that translates into applicants from those schools being treated equally or not is debatable. You say they aren't, I say they are. We won't know until the actual data is released.</p>
<p>Alex, I can't argue with anything that you've written on balance. Perhaps we arrive from different directions but we can agree to the same conclusion, which is admit rates will largely be a mystery.</p>
<p>However, we can look at the actual numbers of those enrolled. And we do have the WSJ Feeder Ranking.</p>