<p>Also forgot to include Truman and Goldwater.</p>
<p>Truman:
Duke - 45
Chicago - 32</p>
<p>Goldwater (since 2005):
Duke - 20
Chicago - 26</p>
<p>Total (Rhodes, Marshall, Churchill, Mitchell, Gates, Truman, Goldwater):</p>
<p>Duke - 169
Chicago - 158</p>
<p>I rest my case ;)</p>
<p>@hidall1:</p>
<p>Keep in mind that UChicago undergrad has historically been much smaller compared to Duke’s (or other research university peers).</p>
<p>‘Much’ has to be a bit of an exaggeration. Duke is actually relatively small compared to Penn, Cornell, Columbia etc. Furthermore, several of Chicago’s Gates scholars were actually graduate students before they won their scholarships. I’m not sure whether the same is true of the Rhodes and Marshall scholars as well, but it is something to consider. Some of the Gates scholars I’ve included in the analysis actually attended Chicago after their time at Cambridge. </p>
<p>In fact, Chicago has been an elite school for substantially longer than Duke has! So Chicago students have been winning these prestigious awards for much longer. Either way they both perform remarkably well! Substantially better than some venerated Ivy League schools!</p>
<p>Also, while we’re at it, I might as well add the number of Udall and Luce scholars to my total ;)</p>
<p>Udall Scholars (since 1996):</p>
<p>Duke - 7 (+1 dissertation fellow)
Chicago - 4</p>
<p>Luce Scholars (since 2007):</p>
<p>Duke - 1
Chicago - 2</p>
<p>Updated Total (Rhodes, Marshall, Churchill, Mitchell, Gates, Udall, Goldwater, Truman):</p>
<p>Duke - 177
Chicago - 164</p>
<p>@hidall1:</p>
<p>Did you actually look at any numbers?</p>
<p>Please take a look at the link you posted yourself: <a href=“InPathWays - Discover latest hot new trending topic, insights, analysis”>InPathWays - Discover latest hot new trending topic, insights, analysis;
<p>I’d say 948 is indeed much smaller than 1615 on a percentage basis.</p>
<p>Duke undergrad is actually about the same size as Columbia’s (and most people know Cornell and UPenn have traditionally had the most undergraduates of the elite privates, so saying Duke is smaller than them doesn’t actually mean too much; everybody else is as well!)
Next time, don’t make assumptions when the data is easily available.</p>
<p>Duke and Chicago are both somewhat recognisable schools at the top of the second tier. (and the top tier is just the ultra elite). Just relax and enjoy it.</p>
<p>@PurpleTitan Columbia has 8,365 undergraduates. Duke has 6,495 undergraduates. Chicago has 5,134 undergraduates. </p>
<p>8,365 != 6,495</p>
<p>The difference in size between Duke and Columbia is substantially greater than the difference between Duke and Chicago.</p>
<p>The WSJ feeder schools ranking is 9 years old at this point. Scores were assigned on a per capita basis. </p>
<p>Indeed, and when you’re looking at per capita acheivement of student awards in the past, what matters more, the size of the student body now or the size of the student body in the past?</p>
<p>I can’t resist the dig, but . . . you really got in to Stanford?</p>
<p>Hmmm, I love this debate!</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I’ve done a quick and dirty “outcomes” analysis using the National Science Foundation’s list of top 50 per capita producers of science and engineering PhDs. See table 4 at: <a href=“http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/infbrief/nsf13323/”>http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/infbrief/nsf13323/</a></p>
<p>My spin is to normalize the results by adjusting for the percentage of entering students with SAT-M scores of 700 or above. I take the percentage in the last column of table 4 (e.g. “34.9” for Caltech) and multiply by the inverse of the percentage of SAT-M scores >=700 in section C9 of the Common Data Set. The intent is to identify schools that generate many S&E PhDs without necessarily being able to cherry-pick top students in admissions.</p>
<p>Results
Allegheny
NM Institute of Mining and Technology
Earlham
Hendrix
Reed
Caltech
Kalamazoo
Harvey Mudd
Whitman
Grinnell
Oberlin
Bryn Mawr
Occidental
Swarthmore
Carleton
Lawrence
Macalester
Haverford
Franklin and Marshall
Mount Holyoke
MIT
Rice
Williams
Case Western Reserve U.
William and Mary
Brandeis
CO School of Mines
Vassar
Pomona
Princeton
Wellesley
Brown
Cornell
Amherst
Wesleyan
Johns Hopkins
Carnegie Mellon
Stanford
UC Berkeley
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute
Yale
Bowdoin
Dartmouth</p>
<p>Observations
The #1 school, 4 of the top 5, and 6 of the top 10 are “Colleges That Change Lives” members.
18 of the top 20 are small liberal arts colleges; the other 2 are technology institutes.
No Ivies are among the top 25.</p>
<p>Note that the following schools from the original NSF top 50 list are not included, because CDS section 9 data was not available when I ran these calculations:
U. of Chicago, Harvard, Hillsdale, Duke, Rochester, Cooper Union,Columbia</p>
<p>@hidall, what do the awards totals look like if you take school size into account… IE, awards per capita? (I’m admitting to being too lazy to check student body totals. Hehe)</p>
<p>Your kid will never get in to an Ivy if they are as unmotivated as you, @prezbucky. ;)</p>
<p>Set a good example!</p>
<p>LOL</p>
<p>I did check – the student populations at Duke and Chicago are about the same size.</p>
<p>In terms of student body achievement, Duke is very strong.</p>
<p>Long long ago, apparently there was talk of merging U Chicago and Northwestern… but U Chicago nixed the idea because they did not consider Northwestern to be a peer institution.</p>
<p>I wonder how NU stacks up against Chi and Duke. I know their test scores are equal to Duke’s and that NU has a great Econ dept, but that’s really it. Does NU belong in the same discussion with Chicago and Duke?</p>
<p>UChicago undergrad is close to Duke in size <em>now</em>, PrezBucky. UChicago has been expanding their undergrad population in recent years.</p>
<p>I didn’t realize columbia really had that many undergrads I thought it was smaller than duke!</p>
<p>I wish they’d re-join the Big Ten. I’m pretty sure they were a founding member back in the day.</p>
<p>Imagine the instant rivalry with Northwestern… it’d be neat. And a big revenue stream for the school. And might attract even more students for the fun atmosphere it would create.</p>
<p>Over time, aside from natural conference rivalries with the Wolverines, Illini, Badgers, etc… maybe Chicago could develop non-confetence rivalries with the Cardinal, Blue Devils, Commodores, Fighting Irish, etc.</p>
<p>@spuding102:</p>
<p>It all depends on what you count as Columbia undergrad.</p>
<p>Most everyone count Columbia College and the engineering school (though for many years, Columbia only reported the CC stats to USN to make their numbers look better). However, do you count General Studies? They’re also an undergraduate college of Columbia, though not open to high schoolers to apply to directly.</p>
<p>Then there’s Barnard. Technically, I believe they’re a part of Columbia (or maybe they’re only affiliated; who knows).</p>
<p>Barnard is a sweet deal for females, correct? It’s easier to get into (than Columbia) but Barnard students can take classes at Columbia. </p>
<p>I never claimed to have been admitted to Stanford. I did get into Chicago though. As an aside, I have to say that jibe was in very poor taste. We were being so cordial up until that point. </p>
<p>I’ll be sure to remind you to do a per-capita analysis the next time you refer to the number of Nobel laureates that Chicago has! I’m sure the folks over at Caltech will be absolutely thrilled by that suggestion.</p>
<p>Either way, I’m done with this ‘debate’. CC is inundated with Chicago students anyway and we all know that the truth sometimes takes a backseat to perception. Having said that, I must admit that it was fun while it lasted. Thank you for being a very worthy sparring partner. </p>
<p>Back to the original question. To me, elite means something less than 20% admission rates, high cost of attendance and no merit aid. Schools geared toward elitism in 3 different ways. Academically elite kids. Rich kids. And kids preferred by the administration as deserving. There will be some overlap among applicants, but most fit into one or more of these categories. If it were up to me, they would focus on only the 1st category.</p>