<p>I live in LA...I dunno...from what I've heard from friends, this year, Xaviar is sharing with Tulane...I think it's just a rumor, though. Also, Xaviar isn't that good of a school anyway. Just about anyone can get in...as long as you are an African American. I doubt that the graduate school admissions rate for Xaviar is that high.</p>
<p>In WSJ feeder school survey, Wellesley is ranked #15 and Penn #16.</p>
<p>Columbiahopeful has given too many biased statements.</p>
<p>One issue I found is in the schools they selected. Notably Stanford, and NYU, which are considered to have top law and business programs, were not included on the list for evaluation. Berkeley - which has a very strong law program - and Northwestern - whose Kellog business school is usually considered better than Tuck, a factored schoool - were also neglected. Although the Journal’s stats may give a decent rough outline of admissions prospects to professional grad programs, its neglect of many top programs throws more precise judegments into doubt. The one relevant original observation they made was about Pomona. From what I’ve heard it hits above its weight in grad school applications, significantly outdoing peer instituions like Middlebury and Bowdoin.</p>
<p>tsakashvili - It’s hard to say what effect having only 5 schools in each field would do to the result. It’s natural to assume grad schools would look favorably upon students who went to undergrad at the same university (Harvard Law demonstrates this). However, going to undergrad at an university may hurt an applicant’s chances at grad schools at the same university (UChicago - consider how few UChicago undergrads Booth takes - and NYU - again considering how few NYU undergrads Stern and NYU Law takes - arguably demonstrate this).</p>
<p>Reed College comes in at 50 and St. Johns doesn’t even make the list. New College of Florida should be higher ranked. The reason I say that these schools should be on the list is that they produce more PhD students than professional degree students.</p>
<p>
[quote=marshallmeyer12]
The reason I say that these schools should be on the list is that they produce more PhD students than professional degree students.<a href=“1”>/quote</a> Don’t resurrect very old threads (this is from 2005!), especially lengthy threads. These things have been beaten to death, and it’s very rare that any new information is added to the discussion. </p>
<p>(2) What is your source for that claim? I doubt there’s any college in the country that produces more PhDs than professional degrees, except possibly Caltech and Mudd. </p>
<p>According to SJC, 9%, 10%, and 20% of its alumni are in health, law, and business respectively, so the three major professional fields make up 40% of its alumni base. The NSF CASPAR database reports that in the last 10 years SJC has produced an average of 11 PhDs per year, only about 9% of the class. </p>
<p>Consulting CASPAR again, Reed has produced an average of 55 PhDs each year in the last 10 years, about 17% of the student body. In comparison, medicine and law make up 9% of Reed alumni, and business comprises 31%, again yielding a 40% figure for the three major professional fields.</p>