<p>Kalorama, you’re well known for being one of those posters who splits hairs about tiers of schools that are all, by any objective standard, excellent.</p>
<p>OK, it did not HAVE to be econ profs. Call them Widget Profs. ;-)</p>
<p>But I do agree with many of the weaknesses of econ as a “science”. I always loved the intro to any econ theory–assume ________(always something not happening in the real world). But it does provide a good framework for thinking about economic issues and such. Just have to accept any forecast has a very short shelf life.</p>
<p>I’m sorry to say that you would generalize SMU that way. In case you aren’t aware SMU Cox business school is not an easy B as you say. I believe over half of the students admitted try to enter Cox business school. You have to have at least a 3.30 to get in and in order to stay in and the GPA also has to be a minimum of 3.30 for both the subset and cumulative. [BBA</a> Admission for Current SMU Students @ SMU Cox](<a href=“SMU Cox School of Business | Business Education | Lifelong Learning”>SMU Cox School of Business | Business Education | Lifelong Learning) Guess what a 3.7 at SMU is an A-! B+ is a 3.30. So you think that’s easy? It’s not. In fact when we toured the school, the tour guide had to leave Cox because he wasn’t able to maintain a 3.30 GPA. He was really upset but he still loved SMU. </p>
<p>It’s business school also ranked 30th according to business week with an average SAT score of 1398. [Southern</a> Methodist University: Cox School of Business - Undergraduate Profile - Businessweek](<a href=“Bloomberg - Are you a robot?”>Bloomberg - Are you a robot?). Again how many students have a 1400? College board says only 5-7% of the students have that score. </p>
<p>People attend SMU because of the class size and personal attention. My husband’s whole family attended UT at Austin and guess what not one of them will allow their children to attend UT as an undergraduate. Instead they want their students to attend a smaller school and be able to meet the teachers and learn. However, they will allow them to attend UT for graduate school because they have small classes just like SMU. UT has way too many students and they are constantly turning you away which doesn’t happen at SMU. SMU cares and wants you to succeed. </p>
<p>Yes, SMU may have a reputation of being a rich school but if that was entirely true, then why do 3/4ths of the students have some form of merit/financial aid? Also, I know of a Bill Gates scholar that attends SMU. There are quite a few smart kids there. </p>
<p>Please dont’ believe all the hype and feel free to ask if its true. I hope this clarifies some things about SMU.</p>
<p>UT’s BHP (Business Honors Program) statistics:</p>
<p>[BHP</a> Class Profiles | McCombs Business School](<a href=“http://www.mccombs.utexas.edu/BHP/Admissions/Class-Profiles]BHP”>http://www.mccombs.utexas.edu/BHP/Admissions/Class-Profiles)</p>
<p>Interesting that the chair of the “useless” economics program at WashU got his PhD from Harvard…</p>
<p>[John</a> Nachbar | Department of Economics](<a href=“http://economics.wustl.edu/nachbar]John”>http://economics.wustl.edu/nachbar)</p>
<p>There actually is virtual unanimity in most branches of the econ profession. It just is macro where no one can agree, and politics seems to play a big role.</p>
<p>A&M’s Mays Business Honors Program: Average SAT 1412</p>
<p>[Business</a> Honors Program | Mays Business School | Texas A&M University](<a href=“BBA Business Honors | Mays Business School’s vision is to advance the world’s prosperity.”>BBA Business Honors | Mays Business School’s vision is to advance the world’s prosperity.)</p>
<p>Quoting “I hope this clarifies some things about SMU.”</p>
<p>Nothing in that post contradicts what I wrote about SMU. The quoted SAT statistics about Cox, if they were possibly true, would only describe about 25 percent of the school. Fwiw, the 75th percentile at SMU does NOT reach 1400. </p>
<p>Fwiw, it is quite unfair to compare McCombs BHP to SMU’s Cox, as the selectivity of the program are miles apart. Comparing McCombs general business program might be a tad fairer, although McCombs fills it program with students ranked in the top 2-4 percent of high school students.</p>
<p>
Sally, is that supposed to indicate something about the strength of Wash U., of Harvard, or of Yale, where Nachbar studied as an undergrad?</p>
<p>Hi tk21769,</p>
<p>Thank you for the information. </p>
<p>Yes, I think that I have learned a number of things from this tread. I was hoping for a couple of responses, and I got a lot more to be sure.</p>
<p>I am still comfortable that WUSTL is a very good college. In looking at the comments and data, I think that it is likely that that the ranking is somewhat overstated by focusing admissions on the rankings criteria, and perhaps putting less weight on other factors like GPA, and subject test scores. However, I have not written it off completely, no. </p>
<p>Several posters commented that once you are down to colleges in the top 30, it really does not matter where they go. My experience is that while that is probably true for the majority of majors, it is not true for all of them, and that is an important distinction for students and parents to understand. In my daughter’s case, I think that where you get a CS degree, per se, does not matter. Employers are focused on what you know. So a top school is beneficial only to the extent that their graduates are actually better programmers. In contrast, for business/finance majors, top employers can be quite brand sensitive. </p>
<p>Which schools do I have confidence in? I do not think of it in terms of confidence. I think about which colleges provide the best chances for a favorable outcome. When I think about favorable outcomes, I think about actual learning, successfully graduating, job opportunities for meaningful work, personal growth, experiences, and happiness. Many of those are interrelated in the long run. </p>
<p>Thanks again for all of the input that everyone provided.</p>
<p>And I would like to repeat for those not reading this endless thread carefully, that I live in the Midwest near WUSTL and not on the East Coast as many presumed and labeled me as an “East Coast Provincialist” who only knows what is in his back yard. If any of the colleges we discussed is in my backyard, it is WUSTL, so I would appreciate removing that label. The accurate label that I saw in the thread was nervous parent who is going through this for the first time with their oldest child. I will admit to that one. You got me.</p>
<p>Much2learn</p>
<p>Sue, it wasn’t supposed to indicate anything, really. I actually DO think economics is a worthwhile degree and I would imagine most people here would find the credentials of the department chair at WashU unimpeachable.</p>
<p>e the quality of WUSTL’s student body, the Lumosity survey has them at #6 overall. Obviously not definitive but along with SAT and class rank figures, it provides further evidence that WUSTL has a very high quality student body. </p>
<p>[The</a> 25 Colleges With The Smartest Students - Forbes](<a href=“http://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesmarshallcrotty/2013/04/07/the-25-colleges-with-the-smartest-students/]The”>The 25 Colleges With The Smartest Students)</p>
<p>Much2Learn, my comments about East Coast provincialism were not directed specifically at you. (Having said that, I know plenty of people in the midwest who suffer from ECP.:)</p>
<p>Much2learn,</p>
<p>“Several posters commented that once you are down to colleges in the top 30, it really does not matter where they go. My experience is that while that is probably true for the majority of majors, it is not true for all of them, and that is an important distinction for students and parents to understand.” </p>
<p>Given that philosophy, why not just apply to the USNWR top 20 and then have your daughter attend the school ranked the highest?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The OP cares about outcomes (“actual learning, successfully graduating, job opportunities for meaningful work, personal growth, experiences, and happiness”). We can measure graduation rates easily. It is harder to measure actual learning, personal growth, or happiness. We don’t seem to have very good data to support college-by-college comparison of job opportunities. </p>
<p>We do have abundant, searchable data about PhD production. Earning a PhD is an academic outcome that presumably is influenced by the quality of undergraduate preparation. There are many reasons why a top student in a strong program would not want to get one. However, the fact that a high percentage of a department’s alumni do so may be one indicator of a high level of “actual learning”.</p>
<p>The kinds of schools that perform well on this metric tend to share characteristics that are (in my opinion) conducive to learning. They have small classes and a reputation for academic rigor; they usually don’t have big sports and Greek scenes or “party school” reputations. LACs occupy a disproportionate share of the top N. If you believe that is due to scaling or self-selection effects (or the alleged class-crafting preferences barrons suggests), then remove LACs from the comparison to focus only on research universities. Technical institutes (MIT, Caltech) and several T20 private universities rise to the top. Public universities are much farther down the list, but among public universities, the ones near the top are exactly the ones you’d expect (Berkeley, Michigan, etc). I think you’ll find, too, that within a given school, the departments with the best reputations for academic strength often are among the departments with the highest PhD production. It’s probably not coincidence that Amherst is near the top in humanities (but not science & math) PhD production, or that Harvey Mudd is near the top in science & math (but not humanities) PhD production. </p>
<p>So if you distrust the US News rankings and want to look at objective indicators of positive academic outcomes in specific fields, PhD production seems to be one of the best measurements available. For the most part, overall PhD production rates track the US News rankings fairly well. Universities that over-perform on overall PhD production (relative to US News rank) include Rice (#4 for PhD production), Rochester, William & Mary, Case Western, and Clark. Universities that under-perform include Harvard (#18 for PhD production), Penn, NYU, USC (big time at #118), GW, and Georgetown. Is it coincidence that the biggest over-performer in the T25 is Rice; that Caltech, MIT and Chicago are 1-2-3 respectively; or that the biggest under-performer is USC?</p>
<p>WashU is #21 for overall PhD production rates among national universities (according to Washington Monthly’s 2013 college ranking). However, in mathematics, from 2006-2010 WashU alumni earned only 12 doctorates (compared to 12 for St. Olaf alumni, 13 for Williams, 15 for Pomona, 19 for Carleton … 25 for Yale, 28 for Stanford, 29 each for Wisconsin and Columbia, 35 for Princeton, 46 for Michigan, 53 for Chicago, 64 for MIT, 66 for Harvard, and 74 for Berkeley). WUSTL has a larger undergraduate population than any of those schools but Michigan and Berkeley.</p>
<p>So if have your pick of any college … and you’re looking for a wonky, intellectual atmosphere with strong quantitative orientation … maybe WUSTL is not one of your best choices among the top schools. If you want more of a pre-professional orientation, maybe it is. To assess from that perspective, you may want to ferret out more info about employment outcomes in IT, finance, engineering, or whatever fields matter to you. There are many threads on CC about recruiting patterns among top investment banks and business consulting firms.</p>
<p>I don’t have a reference handy but hasn’t it been demonstrated over and over again that the kind of student who is qualified for top universities generally does well wherever he/she goes to college? That’s why I almost always put fit at the top of important criteria to consider in choosing which school to attend.</p>
<p>^ For future earnings, yes it has been demonstrated. Not over and over again, but it has been demonstrated (by Stacy Dale and Alan Krueger). For other kinds of outcomes, a similar conclusion may not be supported. Choice of college does seem to matter in a few very prestige-conscious professions such as investment banking. It also seems to matter in at least some academic fields.</p>
<p>If you want a high-stakes Wall Street job as a quantitative analyst, I would say your choice of college does matter (probably even among the T20 universities.)</p>
<p>If you want a high-stakes Wall Street job as a quantitative analyst, I would say your choice of college does matter (probably even among the T30 universities.)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Very true. I am just sharing the idea that employers don’t measure performance of UT grads based on average SAT scores of 40,000 students who attend that university. They are quite aware that within the university there are colleges and within colleges there are Honors courses and Honors Programs etc. So earning a B as a student in the Business Honors Program at UT is different than earning a B in some other programs. It is these differences that enable employers to differentiate between students and enable top grads to get good jobs.</p>