<p>
</p>
<p>I can’t believe you kids are arguing about something that is base hearsay.</p>
<p>It could have been the Dean’s cunning way to make Duke look more attractive than Cornell. Who knows? But it really doesn’t even matter.</p>
<p>And goblue, who exactly are you referring to when you say “you guys?” Read more carefully - only one person has made the argument that you are criticizing.</p>
<p>“The numbers vary from year to year but stay in fairly defined ranges,” Guttentag wrote in an e-mail. </p>
<p>Yet by many measures, Duke ranks on par with the rest of the Ivy League-in particular, Brown, Columbia, Dartmouth and Penn. </p>
<p>During the last two years, Guttentag said data indicates that between 40 and 60 percent of students accepted to Duke and one of the second group of competing schools chose Duke. </p>
<p>Duke enrolls between 75 and 90 percent of cross-admitted students from the third group of top competitors, which includes Cornell, Northwestern and Georgetown." </p>
<p>Just for those readers who want the data in more context.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I know, what the hell am I thinking?</p>
<p>Seriously, though, I wonder how many jobs on Wall Street or on resorts in the Caribbean there will be in a few years time.</p>
<p>Agriculture might be the way to go.</p>
<p>yeah I’ll edit that its a little too confronting anyway</p>
<p>“I don’t know what this argument is about, but I thought that Brownman hit rock bottom when he tried to argue that Cornell was better because it was in a certain athletic conference.”</p>
<p>Look… I never argued that Cornell is better because it is in the Ivy League. But, a Duke fanboy stated that Cornell is the Safety Ivy. I argued that it does not matter whether or not Cornell is a safety Ivy because being in the Ivy League is a good thing in itself.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>It’s impossible to tell whether or not he is speaking to the variance in the third group across schools in any given year, or the variance for the entire group across many different years.</p>
<p>Either way, it doesn’t matter, as cross-admit data doesn’t tell you anything about the quality of the student body or nature of the undergraduate experience.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Okay. Well then I just went blind by the use of all the block capitals.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>ok. so original source is from an e-mail.</p>
<p>and second, if they were winning cross-admits against Brown, Dartmouth, UPenn, and Columbia by 60-40%, why is their yield so low compared to those schools? does it make any sense to you guys then that Duke has lower yield than all of those schools just mentioned, and even Cornell?</p>
<p>No it doesn’t make sense. But Dukies on CC will argue to the death to prove that Duke is better than School X, and they will apparently use obviously flawed statistics to do so.</p>
<p>One reason their yield is low may be due to UNC. I suspect a lot of kids just attend UNC for the cheap tuition and the great environment that Chapel Hill offers.</p>
<p>Just a wild guess.</p>
<p>“lol, this is so funny…you guys were arguing that NU and JHU were completely equal with duke before and stuff and now you’re saying to justify cornell getting a 50-50 with duke based on an interpretation of the text that is likely false that no kids would go to jhu or nu instead of duke”</p>
<p>I don’t believe the Duke statistics at all but Cornell going 50-50 with Duke cross-admits is very possible, according to the NYT cross-admit article.</p>
<p>
I understand your point, but you clearly fail to realize that while law school admissions is ultimately dependent on individual performance, is the college that PREPARES and EDUCATES the individual. Duke might have better pre-law advising and more undergraduate-focused social science classes than Cornell. Maybe Duke students were just plain smarter to being with on average. Whatever the reason for a discrepancy, the fact remains that a discrepancy exists in admissions to the top law schools between Duke and Cornell students based on the WSJ feeder survey. Clearly there are kids who can succeed in any environment and get into a T14 law school. These aren’t the type of kids we’re talking about in specific though.</p>
<p>While Cornell encourages its students to study primarily in the area of their immediate interests, Duke encourages its students to attain a true liberal arts education by having broad course requirements for all CAS kids. Perhaps this philosophy of learning is more conducive to getting kids better LSAT scores? Duke after all beats Cornell in nearly every important measure at the undergraduate level incuding class sizes, full-time professors, graduation rates, student-to-faculty ratios, etc. A better undergraduate learning environment can quite possibly translate to more success in graduate school admissions and even the real world.</p>
<p>Besides, by the way you’re analyzing law school admissions, it doesn’t matter whether you go to Cornell or Harvard because it is all about the individual. If this is so, then why does Harvard have like 10 times as many kids attending HYS law schools than Cornell?</p>
<p>Aside from some kids from the South who are set on Duke, it draws a selective applicant class (i.e. Chicago) and many of the kids go to HYP, etc. I don’t think financial aid is as good at duke as hyp or some of those other ivies in general. I wasn’t aware of huge discrepancies though, certainly not between Duke and Cornell, can you please support your statement with sources?</p>
<p>EAD, where do you get your information from? “Cornell encourages its students to study primarily in the area of their immediate interests.” Since when?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Could you refresh my memory, EAD, as to which specific undergrad departments at Duke are rated higher than their counterparts at Cornell? You know, like English, history, poli sci, econ … the basics.</p>
<p>somebody please explain this to me. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>(*note: original source is from an e-mail. HOW OFFICIAL IS THAT?!)</p>
<p>and second, if they were winning cross-admits against Brown, Dartmouth, UPenn, and Columbia by 60-40%, why is their yield so low compared to those schools? does it make any sense to you guys then that Duke has lower yield than all of those schools just mentioned, and even Cornell?</p>
<p>yea yea, kids choose to goto HYP if they are admitted there. But this is true for ALL OTHER COLLEGES I JUST mentioned. don’t you guys think most of Columbia, UPenn, Brown admits would choose to attend HYP if they were accepted at both? (oh, you don’t think they would do so as opposed to duke admits? why would that be? think carefully.)</p>
<p>seriously, if they were pulling such high yield against those schools (40%-60%) Duke’s current yield data must be wrong/</p>
<p>“Besides, by the way you’re analyzing law school admissions, it doesn’t matter whether you go to Cornell or Harvard because it is all about the individual. If this is so, then why does Harvard have like 10 times as many kids attending HYS law schools than Cornell?”</p>
<p>One could argue that Harvard has 10 times as many kids interesting in attending law schools than Cornell. Harvard might be better than Cornell in law school placement, but because not as many kids at Cornell are interested in going to law school, this number gets blown out of proportion.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>You are so grasping at straws. Why can’t they both be excellent, but different? What would happen if God came down from on high and decreed that Cornell > Duke? How would it change your life at all? Why are you so darn scared that another school might be equal to or better than your own? What’s the matter – not enough people recognized you in hs so therefore it’s critically important that everyone now know that you go to the Best University on the Planet Earth?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Since when does WSJ survey break down their lists for just law school?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Fair enough, but I would argue that it is the student, not the school who prepares somebody for graduate school. At both Cornell and Duke you are told to read and write a lot. It is up to the student to take advantage of that opportunity. And we have never actually proven that Duke provides students with better success in the law school application process.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>It’s closer to 2 to 1, from what my friends at Harvard Law tell me.</p>
<p>And, yes, the individual matters much more than the school.</p>