Top Colleges Ranked by Difficulty of Admissions:

<p>I just meant that there were some clear discrepancies before (not just Duke but Upenn, Chicago, etc). I think the method is, for the most part, fairly good. My problem before was that the list didn’t take recent data into condsideration. How could it not make sense that it is more accurate now that recent data is being used? I can’t put any stock in a list that uses outdated data.</p>

<p>And yes, of course I am biased towards Duke: I am going there. I don’t think anyone would really question that it is harder to get into Duke/Upenn than Northwestern/WashU (i.e 15%/14% vs 23%/20% and very similar mid range test scores). Does this say anything about the quality of the school? Not really. I consider Northwestern a peer school to Duke. I also have had enough experience with the schools near the top to know that some of the assertions made on the first list could not be true.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>^Actually the purpose of the list was precisely to serve as a counterbalance to these types of statements. It relies on actual admission statistics, not what “everyone knows” or the “enough experience to know” arguments. For those with an immutable belief structure, it is often fruitless to attempt to cloud the issue with statistics, but hopefully for those less certain of their truths, this list may serve to open ones mind about a school or two, or give some context and comparisons to admissions challenges.</p>

<p>We do agree that this list says nothing about the quality of the schools though, and I am personally a big fan of Duke as well.</p>

<p>Ack. That part wasn’t typed very thoughtfully. What I meant was that I am intimately familiar with the acceptance rates/mid range test scores/number of applicants/us news rankings of most of the top schools on the list because I researched them extensively in my own college search. I was just stating that, based on the criteria you outilined for this list, there wasn’t any way that NU/WashU could have a higher ranking than Duke and others because their relative data is (slightly) lower.</p>

<p>That “problem” has been corrected though so it’s all good.</p>