<p>This post claims that UPenn (15% admit rate) is as selective as Stanford(~7% admitrate) ?
and UPenn should be ranked above Stanford. </p>
<p>What do stanford people think ?</p>
<p>it’s kinda hard to compare two different things like that. wharton is specifically a business school and isnt the same as stanford’s overall undergraduate experience. </p>
<p>for someone who is 100% sure they want to go into business or finance, it makes perfect sense to go to wharton. for anyone else, i strongly disagree :)</p>
<p>UPenn no. Wharton perhaps.</p>
<p>Wharton has a far lower admit rate than UPenn’s Arts & Sciences et al.</p>
<p>And +1 what NJDS said.</p>
<p>Why does it matter anyway? They’re both very different institutions offering very different resources and lifestyles. Yet they’re both highly selective.</p>
<p>I don’t see the point of business undergrad. To get anywhere, you more or less need an MBA (yes, I know there are many exceptions). </p>
<p>So, find something you’re interested in for undergrad and worry about business school later</p>
<p>It boggles my mind when people try to say “Wharton is better than X university”. Wharton is just one program and should be treated as such. Wharton is able to make penn better than Stanford for people who want to undergrad business, but beyond Wharton what program does penn have over Stanford? Its really a matter of what you want to do at college. If you want undergrad business go to penn, if you want just about anything else go to Stanford.</p>
<p>“To get anywhere, you more or less need an MBA (yes, I know there are many exceptions).”</p>
<p>Lol</p>
<p>Maybe it is just me, but I am getting burnt out on these “school A versus school B” threads. Anyone can selectively present facts, manipulate facts, manipulate statistics, make claims, etc about any school and it really goes nowhere. </p>
<p>I just saw a CC thread on “best public school”. It was 30 pages long in three days. After reading through it I came to the conclusion it was a total waste of time.</p>
<p>Wharton actually is a little more than a program. While you might say the Woodrow Wilson school at Princeton is a program–students at Princeton apply to get in–Wharton students apply directly into Wharton. Its not as though you get into Penn, and then go from Penn into Wharton. You actually apply into Wharton, so I consider it more of a College under the UPenn umbrella.</p>
<p>Although I’d see Stanford as a more complete overall education.</p>
<p>^Whatever you call it, it is still just a b-school. It does not make any sense to compare an undergrad b-school to an entire university.</p>
<p>My friend chose Stanford over free Wharton M&T and free Yale</p>
<p>Fail gugupo, fail</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>As impressive as that sounds, would I be crazy to guess that Stanford was free as well?</p>
<p>^ That’s a fair assumptions as the others don’t offer merit awards and it was basically a financial aid offer which was similar all around.</p>
<p>I somewhat agree with the comments saying that Wharton should be treated as an individual institute because you apply to it specifically. As for numbers, Wharton ED rate is about 4-5% now, thats more competitive that Harvard. Furthermore, for the person who said you need MBA to get anywhere, read the published Wharton statistics for recent finished their undergraduate degree there. 68% of them got jobs as investment bankers with a signing bonus of $10000, yearly salary of $70000 and yearly bonus of $40000. Thats 120k in one year and its just the average, so, when it comes to business, nothing compares to Wharton.</p>
<p>To Jebar Polsky: Wharton is an excellent school. I only have positive things to say about the school, however your post is an example of what I mean by presenting selected facts and manipulated facts. When you post specific numbers it would be helpful to support the numbers with a link to a verifiable, published source.</p>
<p>You state Wharton’s ED admit rate, but not the overall admit rate. A school can choose to admit a relatively few ED and defer the balance into RD so ED rate by itself is meaningless. A school could have a 5% ED rate and a 50% RD rate.</p>
<p>You say 68% of Wharton undergraduates get jobs as investment bankers. On a survey of former students, they can put down any job title they want. A former student earning minimum wage as a bank teller can call himself an investment banker if he wants to. It’s not like the school is going to verify the position someone calls himself on a survey….I highly doubt that 68% of Wharton’s undergraduates with no previous work experience become “investment bankers” right out of school. Please provide a link and define investment banker.</p>
<p>Your earnings numbers are so obviously rounded off it leads one to suspect you possibly guessed at them rather than looked them up from a valid source. Please provide a link.</p>
<p>Once again. Wharton is an outstanding school. My point is a viewer should not take any CC post (including my posts) at face value.</p>
<p>Usually investment banking firms hire students straight out of undergraduates from Ivy Leagues. Even moreso for Wharton</p>
<p>i’m not a stanford personall, but have you seen the penn area? It is pretty dangerous. Plus, the research done at stanford is a little bit more than penn. You have to understand that if a private school accepts only 7% from applicant pool and let’s say (stanford) accepts 10%, that really doesn’t show that penn is better in anyway. In fact, private schools just have that priviledge. Even the lowest ranked private school (and I’m not saying the school is bad b/c you make what you can from your education) can have a 5% admission rate.</p>
<p>^LOL unsubstantiated comments much? I’m not trying to argue Penn is better than Stanford, or even at the same level, because I don’t believe it is (and I’m a Penn student), but I just want to clarify some things:
- The area around Penn is not that terrible. If you haven’t spent time as an undergrad, I don’t think it’s fair to assess it. People don’t even bother stepping foot more than 2 blocks off campus, and it’s really not that bad–some parts are even charming. Just because it isn’t a suburban heaven does not mean it’s the pit of the Earth. And who knows, maybe living there might actually be a good experience than being isolated in wealth for 4 years. So many students work in West Philly in a bunch of different tutoring programs, and while I don’t, I expect it’s a very rewarding, enlightening experience.
- Stanford is a research powerhouse and it’s grad programs are nearly universally at the top–but I just don’t see how people can make a comment like “research done at Stanford is a little more than Penn” (does that statement even make sense?). I wouldn’t doubt that Stanford has higher output, but people just make these blanket statements based on I don’t know what…their own unmerited perceptions…without support. It’s a bad, annoying habit.
- Acceptance rate can’t be used to define selectivity. Roughly the same number of people are accepted every year, it’s just that more people apply every year. Acceptance rates reflect class size and popularity (popularity deriving from number of applicants and yield). But a school can’t “choose” to have a lower acceptance rate unless it cuts its class size.</p>
<p>@cardfan, here’s a source for all data. Wharton staring salaries are ~$55,000 with a $40,000 signing bonus (annually) so a $95k salary directly after high school… not bad, not bad at all.</p>
<p><a href=“http://www.vpul.upenn.edu/careerservices/wharton/surveys/Wharton2007Report.pdf[/url]”>http://www.vpul.upenn.edu/careerservices/wharton/surveys/Wharton2007Report.pdf</a></p>
<p>
True that a school can’t choose, but the students can choose not to come. The yield to admit ratio (YAR) makes more sense to determine the selectivity. For class of 2012,
Stanford has YAR= Yield/Admit = 71%/9%=7.89, while Penn’s number is 63%/17% = 3.71. Its yield includes a big chunk of 100% EA admits. Its yield would have been much lower if there were no EA.</p>