Undergraduate schools-Which are most commonly found at top Law Schools?

<p>
[quote]
you talkin' to me...I didn't say anything about it one way or another, I just gave people some facts. Each person can decide the truth as they see it, once facts are also introduced.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Just giving you another datapoint for your 1970 list.</p>

<p>I'm not sure Williams position has changed. If I recall, it was the #1 LAC in the first USNEWS ranking published back in the early 1980s.</p>

<p>Haverford's acceptance rates worsened for a while for a specific reason. A mistimed, ill-conceived expansion just as the baby boom ended hurt the college financially. In 1970, its per student endowment was larger than Swarthmore's. An extended period of operating deficits set Haverford back a couple of rungs.</p>

<p>I would say that Pomona's increased recogniztion is more of a "Stanford" thing. Huge endowment positioning the school to ride the wave of regional growth. Same formula Duke and Emory.</p>

<p>I have other data, just didn't dump them all. </p>

<p>"I'm not sure Williams position has changed. "</p>

<p>Don't know about 1980, but my 1970 data certainly suggests it. For example,average SATS:
Amherst 1336, Oberlin 1315, Williams 1304.</p>

<p>On a CC sub-forum, a parent who attended Amherst "back in the day" was recently recalling the insulting chants they threw at Williams students at football games pertaining to Williams' comparatively-inferior SATs. And bemoaning the prospect that the tables may have turned these days, or at least evened out.</p>

<p>As for the others, they have clearly also changed. Obviously there are reasons that they have changed, in each case. that does not negate the prospect that they have changed. Others have also changed. For example, Bryn Mawr has changed as much as any of them. In each case there are undoubtedly reasons/explanations.</p>

<p>


</p>

<p>Well, if you're talking about Columbia engineers, may go into law. They say that about 1/3 go into business/wall street type jobs after undergrad, 1/3 law/med school, and 1/3 engineering. 1/6 of your engineers going to law school (assuming that half of the 1/3 is premed and the other half is prelaw) isn't that bad if you ask me.</p>

<p>Here are undergraduate institution representation charts for USC law and Georgetown (the G-town profile is a little older):</p>

<p><a href="http://law.usc.edu/admissions/assets/docs/2006profile.pdf%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://law.usc.edu/admissions/assets/docs/2006profile.pdf&lt;/a>
<a href="http://www.law.georgetown.edu/admissions/jd_profile.html%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.law.georgetown.edu/admissions/jd_profile.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>It is absurd to calculate Penn's student body applying to law school using all 4 undergraduate schools...</p>

<p>How many nursing and engineering students are trying to go to law school?
Perhaps a handful of Whartonites, but certainly not as many are predisposed to law school as those in the liberal arts College at Penn.</p>

<p>It should be out of 6400 kids, not 9800...</p>

<p>
[quote]
In that list, UChicago is ranked #14 overall, for top 5 MBA, med, and law schools. But here shows that, UChicago is ranked ~#20 in top law, ~#13 in top MBA. And people all said that, due to UChicago's grade deflation, premed, prelaw and top grad school placement is affected badly. But I don't see that from the data, people......

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Well, I don't know about the Wharton data. But I do have access to HBS data, and the data shows that only 89 former undergraduates from the University of Chicago have * ever * later gotten their MBA's from HBS as far back as the data stretches (which goes back to the 1910's). </p>

<p>As points of reference, again, according to the database, Harvard College has (unsurprisingly) the most, with a whopping 3228. YPMS are all around 1000-1500. Northwestern has 334, and even Carleton College has 82 despite having an undergrad student body that is less than half the size of Chicago's. The evidence seems to strongly indicate that Chicago is, relative for a top school, quite highly underrepresented at HBS.</p>

<p>Gee, maybe they prefer one of the two top schools right in Chicago--you know NU and Chicago???? Why go half way across the country when two of the Top 10 are in your own city? Do you have stats for UC grads at NU and UC?</p>

<p>Great point, Barrons. I can bet lot of UChicago grad got into Kellogg, and lot of Northwestern grad got into Chicago GSB - may be more than those from HYPS and UPenn. And who can say that Chicago GSB and Kellogg are not top MBA? I thought they are top 5 or at least both in M7. Right? people...</p>

<p>WSJ feeder schools told us the truth. Only 3 top LACs, and 10 other national research universities are ahead of UChicago in terms of replacement of Top MBA, Med, and Law. Considering UChicago College is not a typical pre-professional undersgraduate college, that's not bad at all.</p>

<p>Even considering Kellogg and Chicago (two exceptional b-schools) residing in the Chicago area doesn't fully explain the relative dearth of UChicago grads who go onto HBS... 89 is woefully low and a very surprising stat.</p>

<p>Perhaps another factor to take into consideration is the make up of the student body at Chicago. Chicago sends many students into academia and PhD programs, so it may be simply there is a smaller pool of Chicago students aiming for b-schools.</p>

<p>Keep in mind: Chicago GSB is the second oldest business school in the nation - second to Wharton only. I guess that people didn't care about a harvard business degree that much back then.</p>

<p>Even now, if one wants a finance degree (MBA and or PHD level), Wharton, Chicago, and even Stern beat HBS. Am I wrong?</p>

<p>Maybe they realize that a Chicago PhD in Econ is more valuable than an MBA.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Keep in mind: Chicago GSB is the second oldest business school in the nation - second to Wharton only. I guess that people didn't care about a harvard business degree that much back then.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>That's technically correct, but both Wharton and Chicago developed their respective business programs to serve initially only in an undergraduate capacity (until the early 1900s). The first and oldest GRADUATE business school in the US is Tuck School of Business (Dartmouth) founded in 1900. Tuck was the first to offer a master's degree in business administration, which was titled the "Master of Commercial Science" back then. Harvard Business School was the first business school to offer a degree called the "MBA", in 1910.</p>

<p>But you are correct in stating that The Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania (founded in 1881) was the first business school within a broader university.</p>

<p>If somebody is to ask add a couple of business schools to M7 (say, M9, or M10), Tuck is on my list.</p>

<p>When I was applying to b-school only a few years back, this whole notion of M7 didn't exist. No one in my or my friends' IB analyst classes considered Tuck out of the range of Kellogg, UChicago, MIT, Columbia. If you look at acceptance rates, GMAT, avg starting salary, it still isn't. All the people I knew who went to UChicago were rejected at Tuck. A little over a decade ago, the acceptance rate at Columbia was ~ 50% and then the popularity of NYC really kicked in. On the other hand, UVA (Darden) really seems to have dropped in the last decade for some reason.</p>

<p>Also, while I'm sure it's difficult to compile your law school list, Colgate has 3 (one from each of the three law schools) and Colby had two from just UVA law alone; unless you were using a different class year.</p>

<p>And I am sure it did exist even before you applied MBA, Gellino. I am not a crazy fun of any kind of league in the field of higher education. Not an M7 business school league, not ivy league - a college sports league. It may make some sense, but very limited sense.</p>

<p>One could also say that all of one's friends who went to Tuck are rejected by UChicago/Columbia. But that wouldn't make much sense, either, at least statistically.</p>

<p>
[quote]
As points of reference, again, according to the database, Harvard College has (unsurprisingly) the most, with a whopping 3228. YPMS are all around 1000-1500. Northwestern has 334, and even Carleton College has 82 despite having an undergrad student body that is less than half the size of Chicago's. The evidence seems to strongly indicate that Chicago is, relative for a top school, quite highly underrepresented at HBS.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>The problem w/ the feeder data (that is available) is that they are often for a limited no. of school (doesn't take into account any geographic considerations) or for only 1-2 years (too small of a sample size since can fluctuate greatly from year to year) or don't take into account the size of the undergrad pop. of the feeder school (say Berkeley v. Williams).</p>

<p>It would be great if there was data which took into account the feeder schools for the top 25 law, business and med schools over a ten year or so period.</p>

<p>^^^ sakky wasn't quoting data from the WSJ feeder data. sakky was quoting figures from an HBS database.</p>

<p>I know - I wasn't referring to sakky's post, but just stating things in general.</p>

<p>then why did you quote sakky's post?</p>