Top private research universities - Who wins competition for students in each state?

College Search & Selection
21

<p>Connecticut</p>

<p>Institution Name INDEX CT
Harvard University 8.2
California Institute of Technology 3.3
Yale University 20.4
Georgetown University 19.1
Emory University 4.9
University of Chicago 5.6
Northwestern University 5.8
University of Notre Dame 7.5
Johns Hopkins University 12.2
Massachusetts Institute of Technology 6.7
Washington University in St Louis 9.2
Dartmouth College 23.4
Princeton University 8.1
Columbia University in the City of New York 13
Cornell University 12.4
Duke University 6.5
Carnegie Mellon University 9.7
University of Pennsylvania 8
Brown University 14.9
Vanderbilt University 4.7
Rice University 4.5
Stanford University 4.1</p>

22

<p>average “magnetism” for out-of-state students, excluding the index for the school’s own home state
(among these 22 schools and their home states)</p>

<p>I have not thought it through completely, but could Cornell’s numbers be thrown off by the proportion of SUNY colleges within Cornell?</p>

<p>Institution Name average
Georgetown University 11.21
Vanderbilt University 10.98
Washington University in St Louis 10.63
Princeton University 10.55
Massachusetts Institute of Technology 9.91
Emory University 9.79
Duke University 9.69
Brown University 9.48
Dartmouth College 9.45
Johns Hopkins University 9.44
University of Notre Dame 9.06
Yale University 9.04
Harvard University 8.70
University of Chicago 8.65
Columbia University in the City of New York 8.44
Northwestern University 8.08
Carnegie Mellon University 7.96
Cornell University 7.65
University of Pennsylvania 7.56
California Institute of Technology 7.42
Rice University 5.78
Stanford University 4.85</p>

23

<p>

No, that’s actually what creates the problem. For the Harvard/Stanford comparison, Harvard’s number has a proportionately much smaller “total student population” to divide by because that number only includes students who attend private schools (which is less common in CA). Basically, it assumes that the pool of students that might attend a private research university only consists of those who actually attend a private research university. But, in fact, many Californians who attend public universities might, if they were Massachusetts residents, attend private universities because the public university system is so much weaker in MA. It would be more accurate to use the entire population of university students from a given state than to use only the population that attends private research universities. Basically, the interesting question is, “what proportion of Californians attending college go to Harvard,” or “what proportion of MA residents attending college go to Stanford.” This would measure each school’s actual drawing power. Private research universities don’t only compete against private research universities, so to assume they do so is misleading.</p>

24

<p>svalbardlutefisk-</p>

<p>Question #1: Have you ever eaten lutefisk and, if so, what was it like?</p>

<p>And about my private research university animal magnetism index…
Don’t forget that it is designed the measure the head-to-head drawing power of private research universities against each other. Including state school populations in the denominator would introduce a source of error.</p>

<p>Let’s say that you created an exact duplicate of California and put it on the East Coast. East California had a Stanford just like the Stanford out West. The only differences were (1) that West California had Stanford while East California had Harvard and (2) that West California had the University of California system while East California had the DeVry Institute System.</p>

<p>Now let’s say that Stanford attracted 500 students from East California and Harvard attracted 500 students from West California. Both East and West California have the same number of total freshmen seeking a college so you divide by the same number, as you propose, and come to the conclusion that Stanford and Harvard are equal in “animal magnetism”. This would be a false conclusion.</p>

<p>You need to account for the extraordinary drawing power of the UC system compared with DeVry Institute. It was more difficult for Harvard to get its 500. To do this, you divide by some number that reflects how many West California freshman are willing to forego the UC system and forego LACs. The appropriate number would be the number who actually DID forego the UC System and LACs. This is what I did,</p>

<p>Its pretty complicated. I need some lutefisk.</p>

25

<p>Harvard’s win-loss record</p>

<p>Harvard University 8.2
Yale University 8.3</p>

<p>Harvard University 11.5
Georgetown University 10.9</p>

<p>Harvard University 7.0
Emory University 5.7</p>

<p>Harvard University 5.4
University of Chicago 6.9</p>

<p>Harvard University 5.4
Northwestern University 5.5</p>

<p>Harvard University 6.3
University of Notre Dame 3.8</p>

<p>Harvard University 8
Johns Hopkins University 6.2</p>

<p>Harvard University 21.1
Massachusetts Institute of Technology 13</p>

<p>Harvard University 5.1
Washington University in St Louis 5.1</p>

<p>Harvard University 3.1
Dartmouth College 13.2</p>

<p>Harvard University 6.2
Princeton University 6</p>

<p>Harvard University 10.5
Columbia University in the City of New York 8.9</p>

<p>Harvard University 10.5
Cornell University 8.8</p>

<p>Harvard University 15.2
Duke University 5.3</p>

<p>Harvard University 5.6
Carnegie Mellon University 6.2</p>

<p>Harvard University 5.6
University of Pennsylvania 4.7</p>

<p>Harvard University 5.8
Brown University 19</p>

<p>Harvard University 13.7
Vanderbilt University 4</p>

<p>Harvard University 8.4
Rice University 1.6</p>

<p>Harvard University 19.2
Stanford University 2.2</p>

26

<p>thanks for the contribution, but your system is undeniably flawed.</p>

27

<p>I have had lutefisk, and, if made right (ie, made by Norwegians), it’s good. The Swedes, however, are incapable of making good lutefisk. :slight_smile:
Perhaps you’re right about the numbers, but Stanford’s extremely poor showing in your comparisons as a whole still makes me think that something’s wrong with the calculation.
On another note, where did you find the raw numbers for this?</p>

<p>Edit: I think I may have determined the problem. Stanford, in attracting students from the Northeast, is forced to compete with a much greater density of local private research universities than Harvard has to when recruiting from the West. The only way to completely eliminate local factors is to take a ratio directly between the two schools. That is, take the number of MA students at Stanford divided by the number of MA students at Harvard and compare that number to the number of CA students at Harvard divided by CA students at Stanford. Obviously you must also correct for class size, probably by using percentage of the class from CA/MA, rather than raw numbers.</p>

28

<p>svalbardlutefisk-
On the other hand, Harvard is competing with that same concentration of Northeast Research Universities for California students. Perhaps it is a wash…</p>

29

<p>I might be totally confused on this, but aren’t you assuming that every student headed to a top private research university has been accepted at both _________ and ________ (which ever two colleges you’re comparing)?</p>

30

<p>Here’s where your system falls apart: “Distance from home is a factor in college decisions but is controlled if you compare home state with home
state on a one-to-one basis.”</p>

<p>No, it’s not. The size of Massachusetts end-to-end is not the same thing as the size of California end-to-end. Your program implicitly assumes that the San Francisco kid looking at UCLA considers it equally as “home” as the Springfield, MA kid looking at Harvard. For the SF kid, that’s a distance of 300miles. For the MA kid, he could choose from several states and still be less than 300 miles from home. I think this is a fatal flaw in your methodology, to be honest.</p>

31

<p>collegehelp, I suspect it isn’t a wash. Stanford (and Rice, Caltech, etc) is at a disadvantage recruiting in every single Northeastern state compared to Northeastern schools. The Northeastern schools are all on even footing with each other when recruiting in CA and Texas. Perhaps you could do the calculation I suggest for a few pairings of schools (particularly Stanford, Rice, and Caltech, paired with Northeastern schools, which are the pairings that I believe to be most likely to be affected). The formula I suggest necessarily removes all external factors (since it only compares the two schools). I suspect the results will be similar when comparing Northeastern schools to each other, but you may see very different results when comparing schools from other geographic regions to those in the Northeast.</p>

<p>Edit: Another way to make this more fair would be to use data from all 50 states. As of now, you are using a disproportionate number of Northeastern states (since that’s where elite colleges are). This benefits northeastern schools compared to those in other areas (in fact even Midwestern schools have an advantage compared to Western schools, as you use 4 from the Midwest: WashU, Chicago, Northwestern, and Notre Dame, and only two from the West: Stanford and Caltech). Stanford and Caltech may do worse than the Northeastern schools in Connecticut, Massachusetts, and New Hampshire, but I bet they do far better in Oregon, Arizona, and Nevada.</p>

32

<p>mj93-
It would be nice to know the exact number of cross-admits at the two schools you are comparing and the percent who chose each school. That data is not readily available. </p>

<p>No, I am not assuming that they are cross-admits. My method is based on the idea that these 22 top private research universities all have national appeal. They are like huge magnets that draw students from far away. The force of the magnetism weakens with distance. But, if you compare the force of their pull state-to-state they are equidistant. They are similar enough to possibly fall on every student’s radar screen. </p>

<p>It is less precise than cross-admits, but it is still meaningful.</p>

<p>pizzagirl-
If you compare students state-to-state you control for the distance factors you mentioned. Harvard’s ability to draw Californians exceeds Stanford’s abilility to draw students from Massachusetts.</p>

33

<p>pizzagirl-
If you compare students state-to-state you control for the distance factors you mentioned. Harvard’s ability to draw Californians exceeds Stanford’s abilility to draw students from Massachusetts. >></p>

<p>But you’re counting Harvard’s ability to draw Rhode Islanders or Vermonters equally as “out of state” as California. When in fact, if your whole premise is that students choose between local schools and out of state “magnet” schools (and you’re trying to quantify the “magnetism,”) Harvard might be as “local” to the Rhode Island native as USC is to the San Francisco native. Yet your algo says that Harvard has more magnetism because it reached a state outside of Massachusetts. IOW, your assumptions implicitly favor schools in small states, both population-wise and geography-wise.</p>

<p>Imagine that Cambridge, Massachusetts was its own island-state for a moment. The “magnetism” of Harvard would be unbeatable, because by definition it would HAVE to pull from other states to fill its quotas. But that has nothing to do with the quality of Harvard per se, and everything to do with the fact that its own “state” is small.
And by the same token, your algo disfavors schools from large states such as California. You *couldn’t have Stanford “win” over Harvard on this measure unless Stanford took hardly anyone from California. But just on average, Stanford is always going to have a greater % from Cali than Harvard is from Mass, because Cali is a greater % of the total US population.</p>

34

<p>No, I am not assuming that they are cross-admits. My method is based on the idea that these 22 top private research universities all have national appeal. They are like huge magnets that draw students from far away. The force of the magnetism weakens with distance. But, if you compare the force of their pull state-to-state they are equidistant. They are similar enough to possibly fall on every student’s radar screen. >></p>

<p>But in your algo, Harvard gets a win in the magnetism category every time it attracts a kid from Rhode Island, which is a hop skip and a jump away, whereas Stanford doesn’t get a win every time it admits a kid from San Diego, which is MUCH farther away from Stanford.</p>

35

<p>If you compare students state-to-state you control for the distance factors you mentioned. Harvard’s ability to draw Californians exceeds Stanford’s abilility to draw students from Massachusetts.>></p>

<p>If Harvard and Stanford each went out and drew 1,000 random names from a United States directory to fill their freshman class, 10% (100) of each class would be from California, 2% of each class (20) would be from Massachusetts. (Numbers rounded, but you get the idea.)
Yet you would conclude that Harvard was more magnetic because its ability to draw 100 Californians is stronger compared to Stanford’s ability to draw only 20 Massachusetts-ians.</p>

<p>I have no dog in either Harvard or Stanford, just pointing out what I see as fatal flaws to your system.</p>

36

<p>Yale win-loss record (CT)</p>

<p>Yale University 8.3
Harvard University 8.2</p>

<p>Yale University 18
California Institute of Technology 3.3</p>

<p>no other CT schools for comparison
Yale University 20.4</p>

<p>Yale University 9.2
Georgetown University 19.1</p>

<p>Yale University 8.5
Emory University 4.9</p>

<p>Yale University 8.1
University of Chicago 5.6</p>

<p>Yale University 8.1
Northwestern University 5.8</p>

<p>Yale University 7
University of Notre Dame 7.5</p>

<p>Yale University 10
Johns Hopkins University 12.2</p>

<p>Yale University 8.3
Massachusetts Institute of Technology 6.7</p>

<p>Yale University 6.1
Washington University in St Louis 9.2</p>

<p>Yale University 5.9
Dartmouth College 23.4</p>

<p>Yale University 8.6
Princeton University 8.1</p>

<p>Yale University 10.3
Columbia University in the City of New York 13</p>

<p>Yale University 10.3
Cornell University 12.4 (Cornell’s statutory colleges are attractive to NYS students)</p>

<p>Yale University 15.3
Duke University 6.5</p>

<p>Yale University 7.2
Carnegie Mellon University 9.7</p>

<p>Yale University 7.2
University of Pennsylvania 8</p>

<p>Yale University 1.5
Brown University 14.9</p>

<p>Yale University 14
Vanderbilt University 4.7</p>

<p>Yale University 6.6
Rice University 4.5</p>

<p>Yale University 18
Stanford University 4.1</p>

37

<p>svalbardlutefisk-</p>

<p>I am not sure I completely follow your posts #27 and #31 but here are the numbers you asked for with regard to Harvard and Stanford:</p>

<p>total freshman class
harvard = 1686
stanford = 1646</p>

<p>number of students from MA
harvard = 219
stanford = 22</p>

<p>number of students from CA
harvard = 258
stanford = 679</p>

<p>percent of class from MA
harvard = 13%
stanford = 1.3%</p>

<p>percent of class from CA
harvard = 15%
stanford = 41%</p>

<p>1.3/13 = .1
15/41 = .37</p>

<p>So what does this mean?
I think Stanford is more of a regional school than a national school.
I think it agrees with my method.</p>

38

<p>collegehelp, thanks for providing those numbers. I think what it shows, is that although Harvard is significantly more national than Stanford (unsurprising) the discrepancy is not as extreme as your first post implied. These new numbers produce a 3.7:1 ratio instead of almost a 10:1 ratio. </p>

<p>And, out of curiosity, where do you find these numbers? (breakdown of students by state)</p>

39

<p>Princeton win-loss record (NJ)</p>

<p>Princeton University 6
Harvard University 6.2</p>

<p>Princeton University 16
California Institute of Technology 6.5</p>

<p>Princeton University 8.1
Yale University 8.6</p>

<p>Princeton University 32.5
Georgetown University 14.5</p>

<p>Princeton University 10
Emory University 5.1</p>

<p>Princeton University 3.2
University of Chicago 5.3</p>

<p>Princeton University 3.2
Northwestern University 5.9</p>

<p>Princeton University 15.1
University of Notre Dame 6.5</p>

<p>Princeton University 11.2
Johns Hopkins University 19.3</p>

<p>Princeton University 6
Massachusetts Institute of Technology 5.6</p>

<p>Princeton University 4
Washington University in St Louis 4.6</p>

<p>Princeton University 14.8
Dartmouth College 10.1</p>

<p>no other NJ school for comparison
Princeton University 19.1</p>

<p>Princeton University 10.1
Columbia University in the City of New York 18.2</p>

<p>Princeton University 10.1
Cornell University 14</p>

<p>Princeton University 10
Duke University 6.7</p>

<p>Princeton University 10.3
Carnegie Mellon University 15.3</p>

<p>Princeton University 10.3
University of Pennsylvania 13.1</p>

<p>Princeton University 1.6
Brown University 8.9</p>

<p>Princeton University 7.5
Vanderbilt University 4.4</p>

<p>Princeton University 8.4
Rice University 3.7</p>

<p>Princeton University 16
Stanford University 2.7</p>

40

<p>svalbardlutefisk-
The numbers come from the IPEDS Peer Analysis System on the web…the US Dept of Education</p>