This is pedantic, but a more correct generalization is that Profs at both schools know and are capable of teaching all the same basic undergraduate knowledge. But by definition, professors at elite research universities are researchers who are world leading experts in a very specialized area. So this is, by definition, not true. Each professor is an expert in a specific area and the areas of expertise of Tufts and Duke are different.
But if you want to do research, or take advanced graduate level courses, it’s useful to know what areas the professors focus on. This isn’t useful for most undergrads.
The Navigator website is a search engine for the actual government database, so the data is just as “true” as other reporting mechanisms, but apparently more up to date.
In 2015, the reported graduation rate of Duke’s basketball team was 67%.
This was the highest among Duke’s “peers” (Michigan State, Kentucky and Wisconsin), so I guess it must not be a “problem”. Michigan State’s basketball graduation rate was 62%, Kentucky’s graduation basketball graduation rate was 40% and Wisconsin’s basketball graduation rate was 33%. http://www.takepart.com/article/2015/04/03/when-it-comes-graduation-heres-real-ncaa-final-four-winner
With respect to basketball, Tufts is clearly neither a “peer” of Duke, nor on the “same tier” as Duke. Is that a good thing or a bad thing?
Based on the data you provided, Duke’s “academic support” spending is less than half of Tufts’. How are they producing high graduation rates without providing “academic support”?
With respect to professors salaries:
The salary gap between disciplines is not speculation on my part, it is well-known within academia. Here is a summary of one of a recent academic salary survey:
Law $143,000
Business $126,659
Engineering $126,653
History $88,596
English $86,508
Visual and Performing Arts $85,634
Before we can discuss the validity of your statement on salaries and “talent”, you need to demonstrate it’s relevancy by explaining how you derived an equivalent salary per position from a university-wide average across all positions.
To apply ED, you have to imagine yourself having gotten into both and you make the decision. You can solicit all kinds of opinions here, but really, these are two great schools with significant differences academically and socially. What is going to impact YOU the most? Where do you think that YOU would thrive best? Where are YOUR people? That really should be the paramount concern over rankings and data. No question that you can go onto a great future from either, and neither school is going to limit you in any way.
Your stats are pretty low. Even if you get into Duke, it may be hard to keep up. Tufts is not as competitive. I would do ED to Tufts or any other school that has CS and Biz majors. You don’t want to struggle 4+ years and graduate with a low GPA. GPA matters for employment in CS or Eng’g, so I heard.
Tufts really wants kids who wants Tufts, hence the Tufts Effect/Syndrome. Sounds like your heart is at Tufts. With your stats, you have a shot, but you’d have to apply ED.
In software engineering, I’d say a GPA of above a 3.0 from a reputed school (Tufts or Duke) or a 3.5 from a less reputed school clears the hiring bar. In engineering, the bar is 3.0/3.5/3.75 depending on the school you go to and the company you are applying to.
After successful experience, the GPA is less relevant (of course, it’s harder to get the first job with a low GPA, so it’s a chicken and egg problem).