Rankings of Undergrad--> Grad school?

<p>Does anyone know where the ranking of undergrad schools that send the largest % of students to law, medical, and business schools is? I think it was on WSJ...</p>

<p>I think you might be referring to this:</p>

<p><a href="http://www.wsjclassroomedition.com/pdfs/wsj_college_092503.pdf%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.wsjclassroomedition.com/pdfs/wsj_college_092503.pdf&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>Thanks D&G, that's what I was looking for!</p>

<p>Does anyone know what the exact grad schools are that that survey accounted for?</p>

<p>That system is so flawed and biased that it’s silly. It leaves out many top schools. WSJ arbitrarily named "top" schools for its survey. I mean, no Stanford Law? Why in the world is Dartmouth on the list for business and Northwestern is not. Where is Penn Medicine…..</p>

<p>Methodology of WSJ Rankings:
"Traditionally, college rankings have focused on test scores and grade averages of kids coming in the door. But we wanted to find out what happens after they leave -- and try to get into prestigious grad schools.
We focused on 15 elite schools, five each from medicine, law and business, to serve as our benchmark for profiling where the students came from. Opinions vary, of course, but our list reflects a consensus of grad-school deans we interviewed, top recruiters and published grad-school rankings (including the Journal's own MBA rankings). So for medicine, our schools were Columbia; Harvard; Johns Hopkins; the University of California, San Francisco; and Yale, while our MBA programs were Chicago; Dartmouth's Tuck School; Harvard; MIT's Sloan School; and Penn's Wharton School. In law, we looked at Chicago; Columbia; Harvard; Michigan; and Yale.
Our team of reporters fanned out to these schools to find the alma maters for every student starting this fall, more than 5,100 in all. Nine of the schools gave us their own lists, but for the rest we relied mainly on "face book" directories schools give incoming students. Of course, when it comes to "feeding" grad schools, a college's rate is more important than the raw numbers. (Michigan, for example, sent about twice the number as Georgetown, but it's also more than three times the size.) So our feeder score factors in class size.
How did colleges react to our list? Some were quick to point out that it was only one year of data, and many said they didn't track their feeder rates closely. "I have no way of verifying this," a spokesman for Cornell said. Others said they didn't think this was an important way to judge schools because so many factors play into grad schools' decisions. Still, the colleges in our list did not dispute our findings and neither did the grad schools.
Not that they necessarily want it out there. "We keep a lid on this data," says Mohan Boodram, director of admissions and financial aid at Harvard Medical School. Otherwise, "high-school students will think they have to go to certain schools."</p>

<p>Instead of factoring class size, they should factor size of applicant pool. This is because school A may have many more prelaw/premed than school B even when they are of the same size. It would still leave a lot to be desired but at least that's a much better way to normalize the data. Looks like these WSJ people need to take some stats class. LOL!</p>

<p>As far as the list of top-5 programs in each field goes, it's meant to benefit the schools in the east coast. Yale instead of WashU for med school? Kellogg instead of Dartmouth for MBA? Columbia instead of Stanford law school? These WSJ poeple are likely alums of the schools in the northeast. They have incentive to promote their own. I just think this is low.</p>

<p>lol...michigan law over stanford and nyu...what a joke...</p>

<p>and I agree sam lee...without the number of applicants from each school...those numbers are completely useless</p>

<p>Columbia and Michigan Law are as good as any in the nation...definitely as good as NYU's Law school. But I agree with Sam too. Looking at the top 5 graduate programs isn't enough. I think the WSJ should look at the top 10-15 graduate programs, including Engineering graduate schools. As it stands, 11 of the 15 programs in the survey are East coast schools and 9 of them are Ivies. Clearly this survey favors East Coast/Ivy League institutions.</p>

<p>this is old anyway. probably 2003.</p>

<p>In this week's Time magazine the cover article is Who needs Harvard. the article mentions:</p>

<p>*For students aspiring to go to graduate school, the more personalized education offered at small schools can often provide the best preparation. Pomona College sent a higher percentage of its students to Harvard Law in 2005 than Brown or Duke. *</p>

<p><a href="http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1226150-3,00.html%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1226150-3,00.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>That's also because Harvard Law had room for that percentage of Pomona students, which would have been a considerable number of admits from a place like Brown or Duke.</p>

<br>


<br>

<p>Stanford wouldn't supply updated numbers for the survey. They used the top five for which consistent data were available.</p>

<p>Which only means the survey is flawed.</p>