<p>I second xjis’s question. How is Duke’s yield so low (about 40%) compared to Dartmouth, Brown, Columbia, and even Cornell if it is supposed to be doing well in these cross-admit battles?</p>
<p>Also EAD, you cannot be serious in suggesting that Duke provides such a superior education to Cornell that it changes the dynamics of law school admissions, can you? The sad thing is that you are serious.</p>
<p>There will be one day when I retire in the future where I am going to go back and read every single one of these posts from the very beginning to whenever this thread is dead. I will ask myself and wonder, where are these ppl now? lol</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Disagree completely. Your basing your assumption that every single individual at said Cornell and Duke college would take the resources that exists at each respective university to the highest level possible.</p>
<p>Most students don’t go beyond the bare essentials and the vast majority don’t get to indulge in the maximum best of whatever resources that are available at XYZ colleges.</p>
<p>Given the difference in resources quality that exists between Duke and Cornell are really negligble, The VAST majority of students are paying a lot but aren’t utilizing the resources to the extent as they are suppose to. </p>
<p>My point is to argue that the “College educates and prepares you” is a meaningless assertion given the fact its up to your individual capabilities to launch you whereever you go. Many students don’t take advantage of the great resources that available anyways. So the differences are completely negligible.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Easily. Not everyone’s the same as you! Would you also say that journalism schools, theater schools, music schools are “trade schools”? How’s that different from the person who wants to be a chemical engineer? Oh wait, Duke likely has chemE so that’s all of a sudden not “trade school.” </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Pot meet kettle -you’re the one who defines the world of business as being hedge funds / i-banking / management consulting instead of understanding that it’s quite broad and (gasp) includes many of those areas that the Cornell specialty schools offer, like hotel mgt.</p>
<p>No matter how frustrated you are, please remember CC’s Terms of Service:
</p>
<p>Keep the personal attacks out or I will edit and delete posts.</p>
<p><a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/college-search-selection/429673-acceptance-rates-yield-rates-top-usnwr-nat-l-unis-lacs.html[/url]”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/college-search-selection/429673-acceptance-rates-yield-rates-top-usnwr-nat-l-unis-lacs.html</a></p>
<p>According to this thread UNC has a higher yield than Duke…unless you want to argue that UNC is a better undergrad school in general (go ahead but good luck) then it appears yield is no more useful than percent admitted, sat scores, etc</p>
<p>I think the Ivy League name is important for a lot of people. Financial aid seems to be a big factor too. Duke has said they are going to be more committed to providing better financial aid so in the next few years we will see if the numbers will change…that may be too far in the future for this thread though</p>
<p>^^ UF has a substantially higher yield than Duke (I think it’s at 66% or so).</p>
<p>I don’t really think yield rate matters. People choose not to go to colleges for many reasons - money, proximity to home, majors offered, etc.</p>
<p>**Duke is home to more strivers and future country-clubbers than probably any other school in the US. Has there ever been a significant new idea or movement out of Duke undergrads in the last 100 years? Not unless you count this:</p>
<p>Freshman Women at Duke University Battle ‘Effortless Perfection’**</p>
<p>Sorry, this didn’t originate with Duke. Article said U. of Richmond has been doing this for 20 yrs.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Perhaps you should read what others post, before writing same arguments all over again. We are revolving around a circle, never reaching a point, whenever I or others attempt to confront your views or sources. There have been numerous posts in this thread on exmplaining about the faults of that source to come to a legitimate conclusion, when comparing Cornell with Duke. The bottom line is that Cornell has much larger student body overall, with many majoring in fields like hotel management or architecture, thus it would have a lower percentage of grads going to, or applying to, top law schools in the first place.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I saw the stats somewhere on the site a while ago, but the median LSAT for Harvard graduates applying to law schools was 168 or 169. For Cornell, it was 164-ish, although I can’t exactly remember. I know for certain that Harvard grads are stronger than Cornell grads, at least from the get go. The tend to have higher LSAT scores than Cornell grads, and they also went to a much more reputabe school compared to Cornell; Harvard. I suspect that when a Harvard grad and Cornell grad have the same stats, then, the top law schools would give a slight, but not substantial, edge to the Harvard grad. Hence, I understand that Harvard grads would be more frequently represented at HYS law schools, compared to Cornell grads.</p>
<p>But, the bottom line is that admissions at top law schools are pretty predictable. Unlike med school or even undergrad admissions, Law school admissions is heavily stat-based, and almost everyone with 3.7+ gpa and 170+ gpa, even from second tier colleges, will get accpeted to at least one of the top 14 law schools in the nation. Also, law schools don’t even care about what you major in. They accept people from engineering CS, Econ, art history, etc. And, I find it ludicrous that you have been arguing, all the time, that Duke has superior law school placement into top law schools compared to a school of similar prestige, Cornell.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Oh please. Harvard is so over-rated as an undergraduate institution. Most of my friends who went to Harvard freely admit this.</p>
<p>Duke mainly competes against, like you said, other ivies and top universities, as opposed to UNC who are competing against different categories of school.</p>
<p>and if Duke is truly winning agianst those top universities by such huge percentage, i don’t see where Duke is losing all its admits to have an overall yield of 43% at the end of the day.</p>
<p>Duke is claming they win 40-60% of cross-admits against Columbia, UPenn and Brown.</p>
<p>and all of those schools, even after supposedly sharing its admits with Duke in half, still has yield around or higher than 60% where as Duke somehow went down to 43% overall even after those battles. i don’t see how this makes sense.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I’m actually surprised Michigan’s isn’t a lot higher. I think it’s quite high for in-state students, but only around 30% or so for OOS (it costs a lot).</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I think this is a good point, however, as another poster pointed out, UNC is going to be a lot cheaper for in-state students, and as we can see, it has a higher yield. This probably has quite an impact since Duke has an unofficial quota to take 15% of its incoming class from the Carolinas. I’ve also heard that probably the highest concentration of people who don’t like Duke (besides this thread…just kidding ^_^) is in Carolina, because many see it as a private, elitist institution less connected to the common people than UNC. I really have only heard that from second-hand accounts though, so I could be wrong.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>That’s not surprising for OOS public schools… I think Berkeley’s is roughly the same, as well as UCLA’s, etc.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Don’t trust self-reported cross-admit data?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Personally, I think that if I was from the Carolinas, I would have been a Tar Heel instead of a Blue Dookie.</p>
<p>But instead I am from New York and I went to the best public school in the state.</p>
<p>goblue10nis/ ok. so Duke split its admits in half with 4 ivies, wins more than 3/4 of admits against Cornell, JHU, and Northwestern, but then, now here comes this one fearful school…(boom!) UNC comes into the picture, and it suddenly takes away all of Duke admits and drops Duke’s yield down to 43% overall at the end.</p>
<p>wow, that’s quite a picture.</p>
<p>“I think the Ivy League name is important for a lot of people. Financial aid seems to be a big factor too. Duke has said they are going to be more committed to providing better financial aid so in the next few years we will see if the numbers will change…that may be too far in the future for this thread though”</p>
<p>This is a flawed argument, if you are using the Ivy name to justify why Ivies usually have higher yields than Duke. First, you argue that Duke wins many cross admit battles over Ivy League schools. Now you are saying that Ivies have a high yield because of , well their Ivy League Status. According to your theory, wouldn’t being Ivy make Dartmouth, Brown, Columbia, etc. more appealing than Duke (note: this is according to your theory! I am not saying Ivies are better than Duke) to a cross-admit in the first place, hence precluding any possibility that Duke may win cross-admit battles with Ivy League schools?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I came up with the idea. And I still kind of like the narrative. If you trust the quoted common-admit data, it certainly could help to explain the yield rate.</p>