<p>
</p>
<p>Hmmm...Bacchanalia, what do you think about the following? Duke is in no way, shape, or form "better", "more", or "greater" than UChicago, Cornell, Northwestern, Georgetown, Johns Hopkins, WashU, Berkeley (undergrad) etc. in any way. </p>
<p>How come you keep putting Duke and Stanford/Columbia in the same sentence but not the ones I just mentioned? ;)</p>
<p>
[quote]
Are you really doubting the institution's integrity? Grow up kid. ALL Duke students use their premed and prelaw advising. That's what they are there for. Duke is not "hiding numbers". The ones you see in the USNews are the real numbers. It's not the school's fault if people get confused about the difference between statistics for "Enrolled Students" and "Admitted Students".
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Yes, I am. It is not ethical to release misleading data to prospective students. If all their undergrads apply through med/law schools THROUGH THE PREMED AND LAW CENTERS, then Duke should just release their total med school/premed acceptance rates. Why don't they? Because the rates are not actually the same , and they want to make themselves look better than they actually are.</p>
<p>At many schools there is a difference between the premed acceptance rate for those applying through the school's center and those who don't apply through the school's center. Look at MIT for instance:</p>
<p>Preprofessional</a> Stats - MIT Careers Office</p>
<p>They have an 87% premed acceptance rate for those applying through their center and a 74% acceptance rate overall. I'm sure Duke isn't any different and its total rate is lower than the rate for those applying through the center; otherwise, Duke would just release the total rate, but it chooses to release a different statistic to make itself look better. </p>
<p>It is unethical to release misleading information to prospective students.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Grow up kid....It's not the school's fault if people get confused about the difference between statistics for "Enrolled Students" and "Admitted Students".
[/quote]
</p>
<p>It may not be Duke's fault, but Duke definitely does take advantage of the fact that people get confused about the difference between statistics for "enrolled students" and "admitted students." They could easily release statistics for enrolling students but they choose not to to make themselves look better than they actually are to prospective students.</p>
<p>I repeat, it is unethical to release misleading information to prospective students.</p>
<p>
<p>How come you keep putting Duke and Stanford/Columbia in the same sentence but not the ones I just mentioned?
Those are the schools that immediately jumped into my head. Yes, most of the schools you mentioned above are peers of Duke and Stanford as well. Berkeley though? Probably not at the undergrad level, even though one can still experience the same level of success with adequate hard work. There is not as much hand-holding and personal attention there, which is good for the self-motivated students but not so much for others.</p>
<p>You're both just arguing subjectively and Bach, that condescending tone you've quickly developed -- It's why people get an unfavorable impression of Duke. </p>
<p>That data isn't necessarily misleading. They also have the quantitative measurements that seem to highlight the general reasons for acceptance/denial. It's not as "unethical" as you're making it out to be.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Based on my work experience, MIT holds regional appeal(Northeast) and is not as universally known as HYP in most circles.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Well, I'm not sure how much work experience you have, since MIT has much more than regional appeal.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Just because you've been priviledged to learn about some of the great schools in this country, that doesn't mean everyone around you has.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>When you talk about "educated," you start getting into academic circles, where Caltech has a strong presence.</p>
<p>
[quote]
To most regular people though, it's not comparable to some of the top colleges in the country.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Honestly, you don't have the data to make such an unfounded generalization.</p>
<p>
[quote]
They're pretty good. There' no need to be so nitpicky over this stuff at the undergrad level.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Considering that MIT doesn't even offer most of the humanities and that those that it does are at best "okay," I don't think I'm wrong in saying that "MIT's humanities program is terrific" is just plain exaggerating.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Wait, how old are you again? 17? 18? I have been to many regions of the country and the world for work and family reasons and I can tell you that Harvard and Yale are seen as the two most prestigious colleges in the world almost unanimously.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Don't play the age card for a coverup of your own inability to support your specious claims. Look at worlwide rankings--you'll see that Stanford perennially outranks Yale (where these rankings seem more prestige-driven than anything).</p>
<p>
[quote]
<em>sigh</em> teenagers these days...Don't worry, I was kind of like that when I was your age. There's no substitute for time and experience my young friend. I wish you the best of luck in your studies and hope that you start respecting those who have a little more exposure to the real world than you.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Oh, now you're patronizing because you honestly cannot substantiate your nonsensical ideas, which are more likely than not driven by your apparent bitterness that Duke isn't considered to be on the level of HYPS?</p>
<p>
[quote]
When did I mention overall athletic excellence? I don't believe I ever did. No need to be so insecure.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I did just indeed say, "Why just basketball?" Because it's obvious that in sports, Duke's basketball is its big claim to fame. Stanford has all around excellence in sports.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Beyond prestige and selectivity, I don't see a real tangible difference between the top colleges in the country. Stanford is in no way shape or form "better", "more" or "greater" than Columbia, Duke, Penn, etc. in any way. They are among the top colleges in the country and peers. Geez, I can't comprehend the level of elitism you display at such a young age.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Once you've been on CC a bit longer, you'll see that I'm constantly the type of person to say that the top universities are all roughly the same in education. You will have a great experience and a great education at any one of them. However, the resources and opportunities available at these universities do vary.</p>
<p>Tell me, does Duke have a top linguistics program? Does it have a computational semantics lab? Does it have a phonology lab? Does it have top computer science facilities?</p>
<p>No? Well, then, does it have the financial resources to get these easily?</p>
<p>No again? Fancy that. Stanford has most of those already. It didn't have a phonology lab, but after others and I had requested it, guess what? It will be ready soon. (If you don't know, a phonology lab is expensive; you need digital audio recorders, a sound-proof booth, an electroglottograph, dental cameras to do static palatography, computers with speech analysis software, Rothenberg masks, Fleisch pneumotachs, etc.)</p>
<p>This is just one example. I'm not saying that one can't have an excellent undergrad experience at Columbia, Duke, etc. because they certainly can. If I had gone there, I know I would have enjoyed small classes, professor attention, study abroad programs, interesting courses, research, etc. But at a school that has so many financial resources, I can enjoy the same things, some of them on a greater level. 75% or so of Stanford's courses have fewer than 15 students; professor attention is normal and actually mandatory (with faculty advisers); the Bing overseas study program is committed to getting all students to study abroad, with over 10 locations and growing (not to mention Stanford faculty and staff at these locations); some 1,500 courses are offered to undergrads, and undergrads have access to a great many grad courses (and in fact are required in some majors); cutting-edge research with top grad students, top professors, and top facilities is going on all the time, and undergrads can get involved.</p>
<p>I know not all students will be interested in these things. I know some students would prefer to go to a non-HYPS school, and would be perfectly content. However, there's a reason that they're HYPS(M)--not because of their selectivity, but because of what they have to offer: resources matched by so few other places (if any in the US).</p>
<p>
[quote]
Keep on humoring yourself that " Duke is not nearly on the level of Stanford and Harvard for research".
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Do you want to see the many rankings of research that put Duke far, far below Stanford and Harvard? H and S are two of the biggest research powerhouses in the world. Duke can't even touch that. (Here's just one of them: <a href="http://www.arwu.org/rank/2007/ARWU2007_Top100.htm%5B/url%5D">http://www.arwu.org/rank/2007/ARWU2007_Top100.htm</a>. Harvard #1, Stanford #2, Duke...#32. Ouch.)</p>
<p>Note, though, that I'm NOT talking about undergrad quality. I'm talking purely about research.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Just like those two schools, the research opportunities are nearly endless with the top Duke Hospital researchers/labs just nearby and the school's location in the Research Triangle for engineering research.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Yes, because everyone wants to do medical/engineering research, right?</p>
<p>
[quote]
It's not like I don't have more real-world knowledge and experience than a young college student or high schooler.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Apparently not. :rolleyes:</p>
<p>
[quote]
Wait what? The common stereotype of Duke is that it's elitist and there is a lot of self-segregation. Racist plantations? Sexist affairs? What century are you living in? If you're going to stereotype a place, at least use the right ones.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Students seem to be more often associating Duke with racism and sexism for the scandals that have occurred there. How often I've seen students associate Duke with the "tobacco plantation" feel, I don't know.</p>
<p>
[quote]
What's laughable is how outwardly elitist you are at such a young age. Why can't you just accept that all the top schools offer equally great educations for the most part? Do you have to tear other schools down to make yourself feel better?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>When did I ever say anything about educational quality? That's one thing that I see happen time and time again: discussion of reputation automatically leads to discussion of quality. That is not an appropriate shift. There are many schools who offer excellent educations but lack reputation. Notice, though, that I only said "reputation" and not "education."</p>
<p>
[quote]
Well, Duke's been ranked above Stanford on your precious USNews rankings before and it probably won't be the last time.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I don't care much for US News rankings, though it's obvious you think Duke should be ranked in the top 5.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I guess MIT is not a top 5 school since you insist on stratifying the top 10 schools so much.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Who said that ranking was right? MIT should be in the top 5, IMO.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Yes, most of the schools you mentioned above are peers of Duke and Stanford as well. Berkeley though? Probably not at the undergrad level, even though one can still experience the same level of success with adequate hard work.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>What, so Berkeley doesn't offer the same education that Duke can? It isn't in the same 'tier' all of the sudden? How hypocritical. Seems like Sam Lee was right.</p>
<p>
<p>At many schools there is a difference between the premed acceptance rate for those applying through the school's center and those who don't apply through the school's center. Look at MIT for instance:</p>
<p>Preprofessional Stats - MIT Careers Office</p>
<p>They have an 87% premed acceptance rate for those applying through their center and a 74% acceptance rate overall. I'm sure Duke isn't any different and its total rate is lower than the rate for those applying through the center; otherwise, Duke would just release the total rate, but it chooses to release a different statistic to make itself look better. </p>
<p>It is unethical to release misleading information to prospective students.
Duke has an 85% overall acceptance rate for med school applicants who use the premed advisors.</p>
<p>There is no evidence to suggest that...</p>
<p>1.) There exist students at Duke that don't utilize premed advising.
2.) Students who don't use the premed advising at Duke are neccessarily worse off than those who do.</p>
<p>All Duke's center is saying that off those that utlized the readily available premed services/advising, 85% of them have experiences success in gaining admission to a med school. Take it for what its worth.</p>
<p>Bourne- why does Duke not release the same numbers every college does? Why won't they release their total med school or law school acceptance rates? Because they want to take advantage of the fact that prospective students must compare data from different schools. When they compare numbers from different schools, they are mistakenly led to thinking Duke is better for med/law school placement than schools of similar caliber when in actuality it is not. You don't find the fact that Duke games its numbers and takes advantage of its prospective students in order to gain an unfair advantage over other schools unethical?</p>
<p>Did not read this for a few days, now it is once again a flame war involving Duke</p>
<p>
[quote]
Duke has an 85% overall acceptance rate for med school applicants who use the premed advisors.</p>
<p>There is no evidence to suggest that...</p>
<p>1.) There exist students at Duke that don't utilize premed advising.
2.) Students who don't use the premed advising at Duke are neccessarily worse off than those who do.</p>
<p>All Duke's center is saying that off those that utlized the readily available premed services/advising, 85% of them have experiences success in gaining admission to a med school. Take it for what its worth.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Duke takes advantage of misinformed people such as yourself. Answer me this: why are they not releasing their total premed acceptance rate then? Why are they withholding that information?</p>
<p>
[quote]
Duke has an 85% overall acceptance rate for med school applicants who use the premed advisors.</p>
<p>There is no evidence to suggest that...</p>
<p>1.) There exist students at Duke that don't utilize premed advising.
2.) Students who don't use the premed advising at Duke are neccessarily worse off than those who do.</p>
<p>All Duke's center is saying that off those that utlized the readily available premed services/advising, 85% of them have experiences success in gaining admission to a med school. Take it for what its worth.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>By the way the statistic is not related to how many use premed advisors. It is related to how many APPLY THROUGH THEIR PREMED CENTER. Big difference there.</p>
<p>Straight from Duke's website:</p>
<p>
[quote]
At Duke, the admission rate to medical school for seniors and alumni who applied in 2003-04 through the Health Professions Advising Center was 86 percent
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Hehe, if they present the data showing the average GPA/MCATS of those accepted/denied, it would seem that w/e mascara they've applied to their overall stats would soon be washed away. Duke seems to be shirking responsibility for students who apply using abnormal means -- which one could say is perfectly reasonable. Normal means being their dumb centers. </p>
<p>Semantically, the word unethical implies that there are acceptable standards...</p>
<p>Anyways, should a school be held responsible for rogue students who choose to apply using different means?</p>
<p>This is a fun argument.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Semantically, the word unethical implies that there are acceptable standards...
[/quote]
</p>
<p>According to bacchanellia, a Duke supporter (I am guessing a Duke alum) there are acceptable standards. When I presented him with the data and interpretation, he stated:</p>
<p>
[quote]
Are you really doubting the institution's integrity? Grow up kid
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Which definitely shows that at least some people hold educational institutions to the standards of a high degree of integrity and consequently expect them not to take advantage of prospective students.</p>
<p>You said it yourself, we're arguing semantics. If you really want to, we can get into moral relativism here but I think for all practical purposes, most of society holds educational institutions to high standards of integrity and by taking advantage of its prospective students, Duke has breached that standard of integrity that most hold educational institutions to.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Do you honestly want to debate Stanford vs. Duke Basketball?
ESPN - Counting down the most prestigious programs since 1984-85 - Men's College Basketball
Please save yourself the embarassment.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>What's the closest Duke ever came to an undefeated season? You're talking about prestige, and Stanford became a "laymen-recognized" school after Feb 2004 (although a lot of other crazy things were happening during this time, such as Earnhardt winning some cup (nextel?), John Daley winning his first major in a long time, and A-Rod getting traded to the Yankees)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Are you serious? What about THES world rankings, where Yale is #2 and Stanford is #19? The THES rankings are essentially "prestige" rankings (and are more well known and publicized than other world rankings).</p>
<p>Half my family lives in India and I have a good number of relatives in London/suburbs of London. In both cases, Harvard, Yale, and Oxbridge are the most prestigious universities in the world. Stanford and MIT come in a tier below, and Princeton is almost unknown. Whether or not this is deserved is up to another debate.</p>
<p>Edit:
Do you honestly think that rankings (worldwide or not) accurately reflect prestige? No of course not, then Penn and Caltech would be more prestigious than MIT here in the U.S. (I don't even think Penn is more prestigious than Columbia). The only real way to know about prestige (as useless as that is), is to travel the world, which is what others on this forum have done.</p>
<p>
[quote]
What about THES world rankings, where Yale is #2 and Stanford is #19? The THES rankings are essentially "prestige" rankings (and are more well known and publicized than other world rankings).
[/quote]
</p>
<p>And yet previously Stanford was in the top 5 or so, yet drops 15+ spots in one year? Stanford didn't change that much, and neither did the others. The THES rankings lose any credibility they had by being so inconsistent in their methodology.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Half my family lives in India and I have a good number of relatives in London/suburbs of London. In both cases, Harvard, Yale, and Oxbridge are the most prestigious universities in the world. Stanford and MIT come in a tier below, and Princeton is almost unknown. Whether or not this is deserved is up to another debate.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>In asking friends of mine in England, New Zealand, Australia, and a few other European countries, they all agreed: Harvard and Stanford were tops. Yale and Princeton didn't always get such recognition (nor did they all seem to have heard of them). Of course, this is all anecdotal.</p>
<p>^^ Basically, there is absolutely no way to determine which are the most prestigious schools worldwide, because it clearly varies. All one can really conclude is that Harvard is #1. PS and Y see different levels of recognition (although I think P receives the least among that group).</p>
<p>You don't have to travel around the world to find out. It is very easy. Just google "stanford university" or "harvard university" or "duke university" by "news". Check how many links relate to each school in the past hour, day etc, and you will find out. </p>
<p>Harvard/MIT are the best known internationally. You don't know how good Stanford is until you choose among HYPS. kyledavid80, I understand your feeling towards Stanford.</p>
<p>
[quote]
PS and Y see different levels of recognition (although I think P receives the least among that group).
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I agree with that--I don't think Stanford will always be more prestigious than Yale (though I do think that's more common than opposites), and that P is probably the one in last place among HYPS in international prestige.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Harvard/MIT are the best known internationally. You don't know how good Stanford is until you choose among HYPS. kyledavid80, I understand your feeling towards Stanford.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I disagree. The general consensus, on CC at least, is that Harvard, Stanford, MIT, and Berkeley are the US universities that carry the most international prestige--probably because they're the top 4 schools in top grad programs, which are what bring a university into the national and international light. (FWIW, I've known this long before I went to Stanford.)</p>