<p>The thing is, the “environment of the school” there, for this purpose, is largely dependent on college. There are 7 distinct colleges, with different student bodies and objectives. They differ from each other tremendously in “environment”, regarding the things you’re trying to measure here. Some of the colleges there produce a relatively high % future PhDs, I’m quite certain, and others are undoubtedly quite low. The “environments”, in this regard, share little commonality there.</p>
<p>Quite truthfully, the aggregate statistic has virtually no value to an applicant to a particular single one of its different colleges. They are that different.</p>
<p>I agree that it is difficult to truly compare apples to apples, where data is intermingled and schools offer different programs. Nevertheless, people should keep in mind what their goal is when statistics are produced or utilized. There may well be circumstances, depending on objectives, where adjustments are both warranted and feasible. These adjustments should be made in those cases, at least mentally, by those using the data. In order to get the most meaningful result.</p>
<p>The other point would be: the college of agriculture, Industrial & labor Relations, Hotel administration, are for the most part not tucked away in some other department at haverford, et. al., they are relatively distinct beasts onto themselves. The offereings of Haverford et. al. can be quite reasonably compared to Cornell’s College of Arts & Sciences, if only there was data on this by itself.</p>