Reason why HYPS are the best grad-school feeders

College Search & Selection
1

<p>Out of all the prestigious schools out there, HYPS are indisputably the best schools in terms of getting you into top graduate schools. My reasons are as follows:</p>

<p>1.) The prestige of HYPS is higher than any other school in the world. An applicant from HYPS arguably gets much more instant "respect" from ad-com boards than schools like Vanderbilt, Berkeley, Duke, Cornell, UPenn, JHU, UChicago, Columbia, etc. The only exceptions are MIT and Caltech. </p>

<p>2.) With grade inflation, students from HYPS schools can get higher GPAs relative to students from other grade deflated schools like MIT and Caltech. These higher GPAs give them a leg up when it comes time to apply to med schools, law schools, etc. </p>

<p>So in summation, HYPS schools have the highest prestige and the least level of difficulty. It's the best of both worlds. It's kind of like the marriage between the most prestigious New England prep schools and the most grade inflated public schools. You can coast through college knowing you have a high chance of getting into Stanford Law School or Harvard Medical School. How sweet is that?</p>

<p>Admittedly, this is not fair to students going to schools like Berkeley or UChicago who have to put up with high difficulty and low prestige (relative to HYPS). But what can you do? Work hard in high school I guess.</p>

2

<p>actually, i am willing to bet that one of the reasons they do so well is that they are very good at picking candidates who are not about to coast through their four years.</p>

3

<p>How about they have huge endowments? Where talking billions of dollers.</p>

4

<p>I think you're wrong. I don't think the top schools are top grad feeders just because of their name. I think the students are more motivated to begin with, thus performing better in college, and getting into better grad programs. Students make the university. Not the other way around (usually). The endowments proves my point even further. The more motivated and tenacious (with a positive connotation), the more successful in life the student will be, and thus being able to give more back to the school.</p>

5

<p>I think GPA and inflation is a major factor. If not, then how come MIT has a 75% acceptance rate into Med schools vs. 90% for HYP?</p>

<p>Inflation and name kinda works together. If you're at a so-so school with grade deflation, people won't fappreciate your work as they should. If you're at HYPS and even though there's grade inflation, no one would dare to put you down for the inflation.</p>

<p>So the sad thing is, it probably takes less work to get a 3.8 at harvard, than a 3.4 at a school like Berkeley or W&M, with the rest equal. And even a 3.8 at a state school would be disadvantaged against the 3.8 at Harvard.</p>

6

<p>I think it has more to do with the students than where they go.</p>

7

<p>I know where you go matters alot, although it clearly isn't everything. Truth is you can go to an Ivy and work moderately and walk out with a 3.3 GPA. If you want to go into business for example, a 3.3 will likely land you a banking job somewhere and you'll likely test well. In a few years you'll be looking at top ten b-schools. Also, it doesnt end at HYPS, students at Duke, Brown, Dartmouth, Amherst, Williams, Penn, etc all do extrordinarily well at grad placement.</p>

8

<p>If it's indisputible, why are you posting? Are we not smart enough to figure it out? What about the best LAC argument? What about schools that take "average" students and have huge production on PhDs in specific fields, like St Johns?</p>

9

<p>Gutrade, I actually agree with you to some extent on your first two points. I would point out that engineers, including (and perhaps especially) MIT and Caltech engineers are very strong business-school candidates, because B-school admissions are far less numbers-oriented than med and law school. The undergraduate disciplines of the typical entering class of the top B-schools like HBS, Stanford, Wharton, Sloan, Kellogg, and others is usually around 25-35% engineering, an amazingly high figure when you realize that, according to the US Department of Labor, engineering degrees comprise only about 5% of all bachelor's degrees conferred per year (about 60,000 engineering bachelor's degrees are conferred out of 1.2 million total bachelor's degrees in the US every year).</p>

<p>
[quote]
You can coast through college knowing you have a high chance of getting into Stanford Law School or Harvard Medical School. How sweet is that?

[/quote]
</p>

<p>However, here, when you say 'coast', you've gone too far. It is true that it is probably easier for you to get into a top law school or med-school by going to HYPS. However, that's a far cry from saying that you can simply coast and still have a high chance.</p>

<p>Don't believe me? Then let's look at the numbers. </p>

<p>In 2004, 197 Yale prelaws applied to Yale Law, and 34 of them, or 17% got in. Those who did had average GPA's of 3.86 and LSAT's of 171.8, which are far above the average for not only the average Yale student, but also for the average Yale prelaw (who would tend to have better grades than the average Yale student). </p>

<p>Some of the admit rates of Yale prelaws, along with the average admitted GPA and LSAT's are as follows:</p>

<p>Harvard Law - 24%, 3.81/171.6
Stanford Law - 20%, 3.71/170.3
Columbia Law - 28%, 3.74/170.4
UChicago Law - 28%, 3.69/169.9</p>

<p>Also note the the average Yale prelaw who applied to law schools had an average GPA of 3.49 and an average LSAT of 164.6. These numbers clearly do not make you competitive for the above schools. </p>

<p>Or take the prelaw numbers for Stanford. According to the data, of the 241 Stanford prelaws who applied to Stanford Law in 2004, only 37, or about 15%, got admitted. And those that did had an average lSAT of 169.7 and an average GPA of 3.82. </p>

<p>Similarly, for other top law schools applied to by Stanford prelaws:</p>

<p>Yale Law - 16%, 3.86/171.2
Harvard Law - 26%, 3.81/171.8
Columbia Law - 29%, 3.7/171.1
UChicago Law - 32%, 3.69/171.1</p>

<p>And again, the average GPA and LSAT scores of Stanford prelaws who applied to law school (which are going tobe better than that of the average student at all of Stanford) is 3.5/164.1. </p>

<p>So I really don't know what you mean by "coast" and still have a high chance of getting into top schools. If you go to Yale and Stanford and coast, then unless you're a genius, you will end up with average grades and average LSAT scores for that school, or probably even below-average grades/scores. After all, 50% of the student body of any school is, by definition, below average. And as shown by the data, having average or below-average numbers do not make you competitive for the top law schools. The data indicates that those Yale and Stanford prelaws who get admitted to top graduate schools were above average Yale or Stanford students. </p>

<p><a href="http://www.yale.edu/career/students/gradprof/lawschool/media/statistics2004.pdf%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.yale.edu/career/students/gradprof/lawschool/media/statistics2004.pdf&lt;/a>
<a href="http://www.stanford.edu/dept/undergrad/uac/preprof/05prelawstats.pdf%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.stanford.edu/dept/undergrad/uac/preprof/05prelawstats.pdf&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>What I find most interest is that the data indicates that you're not even particularly guaranteed of getting admitted to even a no-name law school. For example, take California Western Law school, which is a 4th tier law school. 50% of Stanford prelaws who applied to California Western in 2004 actually get rejected (2 out of 4). At Golden Gate Law school, which is another 4th tier law school, 13 Stanford prelaws applied, and 10 got in, which obviously means that 3 didn't get in. I don't want to overly cast aspersions, but the fact is, those law schools are pretty obscure and low-level. Yet there are some Stanford prelaws who can't even get into THOSE schools.</p>

10

<p>Duke does very well in grad placement-5th or 6th in Wall Street Journal POLL.</p>

11

<p>well, big schools were definetely at a disadvantage. Especially, schools like Cornell, where u have an agriculture school, which has about 1/3 of the kids at Cornell in it. Therefore, you think that these kids will be applying to law school, business school, and medical schools with majors in plant science and like biometry, get real. Look at JHU, which came in what 24th place when their own medical school was used, which has a large portion of JHU kids. If you took their own med school out, I wonder how JHU would have stacked up since they only have like what, 4 kids at harvard law.</p>

12

<p>Sakky - your data are excellent, and indicates what the data have indicated for a long time - folks get into law school because they are smart and well-educated and prepared, not because they attended any particular school. (I am leaving out the canard related to family income - I do think you will find many individuals who are at top law schools because of their connections or ability to share the wealth around - often the same things that got them into top undergraduate colleges to begin with.)</p>

<p>The big story, however, is further buried in the institutional research. Even as the student body statistically has gotten better and better, the percentage of Yale grads going directly on to law or medical school upon graduation has dropped precipitously in the last 25 years, some 65% each between 1975-2001. Now it is true that some wait several years to apply - but that is true at all schools, so isn't a source of explanation. And many Yalies might find it less desirable than they used to. But the big story is that as HYPS have become more selective, and turning away (over time) tens of thousands of top students, those students are going elsewhere, doing very well - with class ranks that are higher, and more research opportunities and internships available for top students - and are taking the places at those law and medical schools that used to go to Yalies. </p>

<p>The question should always be whether the "value-added" at a school makes the SAME candidate more likely to be accepted into graduate or professional programs. I think the evidence suggests (as does your data) that, in the case of HYPS, it likely does not.</p>

<p>With med schools, there are other issues. The importance percentage is not how many get accepted to med school, but how many even get to apply. There are many students who enter JHU (for example) thinking they are pre-med. Half of them will end up in the bottom half of the class. They will not have access to significant research opportunities. Their applications will not be supported by the med school committee. Many of them will end up majoring in something else. It is likely (but admittedly unproven) that many of them would have been top students at their local state university, with more mentoring, research opportunities, and internships, and much better odds at med school admissions.</p>

13

<p>
[quote]
Therefore, you think that these kids will be applying to law school, business school, and medical schools with majors in plant science and like biometry, get real.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Well, actually, I think I have to disagree with you here. You say that these people won't be applying to law/business/med school with majors like that. Well, why not? Take med-school for example. I've heard of Harvard music majors getting into med-school. I think we can all agree that plant science and biometry have more to do with medicine than does music or many of the other majors out there. Or take law school. While you might say that plant science has nothing to do with law, well, honestly, neither does engineering or any other science, yet law school is a fairly popular choice of graduating engineers at MIT.</p>

<p>I think what you mean to say that is that people who major in certain fields are more likely to get into certain professional schools than are those who major in other fields. For example, biology is a well-trod premed major. PoliSci and English are well-trod pre-law majors. Econ and engineering are well-trod pre-business majors. </p>

<p>However, I think what is happening is even deeper than a simple sorting of people according to their major. The 'true' sorting happens as regards to people choosing majors depending on what they think they can realistically do. Let's face it. A lot of those Cornell agriculture kids would love to go to Yale Law or Harvard Medical School. Think of it this way. If we went around and offered all graduating agriculture seniors admission to Yale Law or Harvard Medical, I think we both know that many of them would take it. Some won't, because they really like what they're doing. But I think we both know that many of them would happily take it. </p>

<p>The point is, there's a big difference between not trying for something because you don't want it, and not trying for something because you don't think you can get iit. I want to go play for the Red Sox. But am I going to try to qualify to Spring tryouts? No. Why? Because I know I'm no good, so I know I'm not going to be picked and I know I'd just get laughed off the field if I tried. So I don't try out. But that doesn't mean that I don't want it, it just means that I don't think I can get it. Similarly, I would argue that a lot (not all, but a lot) of Cornell agriculture kids don't apply for bigtime law/medicine/business schools not because they don't want it, but because they don't think they can get it. </p>

<p>
[quote]
The question should always be whether the "value-added" at a school makes the SAME candidate more likely to be accepted into graduate or professional programs. I think the evidence suggests (as does your data) that, in the case of HYPS, it likely does not

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Actually, I think the true value add of places like HYPS (but far less so of MIT and Caltech) is not really in the admissions to grad/professional school, but rather in their 'safety factor'. The fact is, HYPS practically never flunk anybody out. And surely you've heard of the story of Lon Grammer, the guy who had a 2.1 GPA in community college but lied his way into getting into Yale as a transfer student, presenting phony transcripts and doctored letters of recommendation. He was finally caught and expelled, and his Yale grades weren't that good, but at least they were passing, and in fact, his Yale grades were actually slightly better than his community college grades. The fact is, if you can get into HYPS, then as long as you put in a bare minimum of effort, you are going to graduate. You won't graduate with good grades, and you certainly won't be able to coast your way into getting into a top graduate school (hence, this is where I profoundly disagree with Gutrade). But you will graduate. Hence, choosing HYPS is a safe choice in that you are maximizing your chances of getting out with a degree.</p>

<p>No such guarantee exists at other schools, particularly the public schools. Public schools have absolutely no problem with flunking out boatloads of students. You go to a public school, and there is far less assurance that you will end up with a degree. Plenty of students don't. Nor is it just the weak students who end up flunking out. Otherwise strong students who run into personal problems get swept up into it too. I've seen people suffering from serious boyfriend/girlfriend issues, suffering from personal immaturity, suffering from severe homesickness, suffering from a wide spate of personal problems. The school didn't give a damn - it just methodically proceeded to expel them.</p>

14

<p>
[quote]
With med schools, there are other issues. The importance percentage is not how many get accepted to med school, but how many even get to apply. There are many students who enter JHU (for example) thinking they are pre-med. Half of them will end up in the bottom half of the class. They will not have access to significant research opportunities. Their applications will not be supported by the med school committee. Many of them will end up majoring in something else. It is likely (but admittedly unproven) that many of them would have been top students at their local state university, with more mentoring, research opportunities, and internships, and much better odds at med school admissions.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Actually, I don't think that a strong dichotomy exists between law and med-school. Look, the fact is, if you get bad grades, then your chances of getting into either a top law or a top med-school are basically shot. Let's face it. If you get a 2.0 GPA, you're not going to get into Yale Law or Harvard Medical. So it's the same thing.</p>

15

<p>But you might not have had a 2.0, and you would have had better research opportunities, internships, and stronger mentoring, if you'd been at the state u.</p>

16

<p>listen, those kids in the ag school, a lot of them major in a science related topic that tend to be academically rigorous as compared to an english, government major in arts/sciences. Who is going to have the higher GPA?</p>

17

<p>Perhaps we should change the title of this thread to "law/medical school". There are hundreds of graduate programs. HYPS are not the best feeders to all. It is not even true for business school ... certainly not for engineering.</p>

18

<p>Law and med schools are professional schools, not graduate schools. You may resume your discussion.</p>

19

<p>"I think what you mean to say that is that people who major in certain fields are more likely to get into certain professional schools than are those who major in other fields. For example, biology is a well-trod premed major."</p>

<p>Well, you should know that the Williams' music department boasts quite proudly that its majors have a higher success rate of getting into med. school than the biology department.</p>

20

<p>"But you might not have had a 2.0, and you would have had better research opportunities, internships, and stronger mentoring, if you'd been at the state u."</p>

<p>That's where you are wrong. It is more likely that you'd have higher grades at HYPS than at a state u.</p>