High stats applicant disappointed by interview invitations. What did I do wrong?

[Dr.K124]

I agree with you, but I'm not so sure "most people" would agree with us. At least one prominent DO admissions administrator who posts here a lot takes the position that it's the "US Snooze and Worst Report," only taken seriously by ill-informed pre-meds and medical school deans.

You are, of course, 1,000% correct. The difference between #1 and #5 is meaningless, as is the difference between #11 and #21. As for the difference between #6 and #66, I do think that means something to a lot of people, although, let's face it, there is nothing wrong with #150, and any school on the list can get most people where it is that they are going. It is, however, undeniable that #15 will provide more opportunities to its students than #115.

The irony is, everyone I know who goes to or works at an unranked school thinks the ranking is meaningless, but nobody associated with top ranked schools feels the same way. It's not just stupid pre-meds and know-nothing deans who place value in the list. It's PDs, students, doctors, deans, members of the general public, everyone who buys the list, etc., etc., etc.

See, there is a flaw in that logic. Most people don't care about USNEWS or any other rankings. They internally have their own bias and rankings for universities. For instance, USNEWS puts UChicago ahead of Stanford (ridiculous in my opinion, but let's move on). But if you say Stanford or any Ivy League university, you will receive much more name recognition and perceived "prestige" than if you say UChicago. USNEWS can release whatever rankings it wants, but it can't really change public opinion about which schools are top top.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[PigsHaveWings]

If you look at the residency program director rankings of medical schools (especially the research list), it is not that far away from the USNWR rankings.

In general, I agree, these lists are to help us understand which tiers the medical schools are in. I agree with the obvious statement that there is no difference between college ranked # 5 and # 10, however, these lists are to help differentiate between college ranked # 20 and # 50.

I have attached the pdf document comparing the residency program director rankings of medical schools as compared to the USNWR rankings, it is not that much off from each other.

 

[jhmmd]

As an aside way back in the day (like in 2009) the MSAR used to rank med schools, if I am not mistaken.
As another aside my dog ended up peeing on that particular MSAR

 

[KnightDoc]

See, there is a flaw in that logic. Most people don't care about USNEWS or any other rankings. They internally have their own bias and rankings for universities. For instance, USNEWS puts UChicago ahead of Stanford (ridiculous in my opinion, but let's move on). But if you say Stanford or any Ivy League university, you will receive much more name recognition and perceived "prestige" than if you say UChicago. USNEWS can release whatever rankings it wants, but it can't really change public opinion about which schools are top top.

??? Are you talking about UG? If so, they are both ranked #6. I think we can all agree that small differences in rankings are irrelevant, and there is some fluctuation from year to year.

With respect to name recognition, I'm not so sure, depending on where in the country you are. There is definitely an Ivy-East Coast bias in the East. Stanford is, of course, a huge deal on the West Coast and among D1 sports fans. But, in the mid west? Don't be so sure. They are both great schools, and you are, of course, right about public perception.

Many people in the general public would say that Harvard is the best school in the country. A lot of people who know about such things would agree that Princeton delivers the best UG education in the country. Does that make the rankings crap because public perception doesn't map precisely to USNWR methodology? Does it really matter which is #1 and which is #2?

 

[jhmmd]

??? Are you talking about UG? If so, they are both ranked #6. I think we can all agree that small differences in rankings are irrelevant, and there is some fluctuation from year to year.

With respect to name recognition, I'm not so sure, depending on where in the country you are. There is definitely an Ivy-East Coast bias in the East. Stanford is, of course, a huge deal on the West Coast and among D1 sports fans. But, in the mid west? Don't be so sure. They are both great schools, and you are, of course, right about public perception.

Many people in the general public would say that Harvard is the best school in the country. Does it really matter which is #1 and which is #2? A lot of people who know about such things would agree that Princeton delivers the best UG education in the country. Does that make the rankings crap because public perception doesn't map precisely to USNWR methodology?

If you read the methodology carefully, the rankings are primarily based on public perception of prestige.

 

[Dr.K124]

??? Are you talking about UG? If so, they are both ranked #6. I think we can all agree that small differences in rankings are irrelevant, and there is some fluctuation from year to year.

With respect to name recognition, I'm not so sure, depending on where in the country you are. There is definitely an Ivy-East Coast bias in the East. Stanford is, of course, a huge deal on the West Coast and among D1 sports fans. But, in the mid west? Don't be so sure. They are both great schools, and you are, of course, right about public perception.

Many people in the general public would say that Harvard is the best school in the country. A lot of people who know about such things would agree that Princeton delivers the best UG education in the country. Does that make the rankings crap because public perception doesn't map precisely to USNWR methodology? Does it really matter which is #1 and which is #2?

My entire role in this discussion has been solely around undergraduate institutions. Yes, a survey was done a while back that showed the plurality of people believe Harvard is the best school in the country. I wholeheartedly disagree that many people believe Princeton delivers the best undergraduate education in the country.

Even in the midwest, not a lot of people know or care about UChicago. Northwestern is actually a much bigger hit, and even it is unheard of by most. Keep in mind the average person is not a college student who spends time researching this stuff.

No, it doesn't matter which university is #1 and #2. My comment was in direct response to "The irony is, everyone I know who goes to or works at an unranked school thinks the ranking is meaningless, but nobody associated with top ranked schools feels the same way. It's not just stupid pre-meds and know-nothing deans who place value in the list. It's PDs, students, doctors, deans, members of the general public, everyone who buys the list, etc., etc., etc." to point out that most people's belief of best universities does not follow USNEWS, and often times doesn't even remotely follow USNEWS aside from the Ivy League and Stanford+MIT.

 

[KnightDoc]

If you read the methodology carefully, the rankings are primarily based on public perception of prestige.

Really?

https://www.usnews.com/education/best-colleges/articles/how-us-news-calculated-the-rankings

It looks to me like it's 20% peer perception, and 0% public perception. Exactly how do you define "primarily"?

 

[Dr.K124]

If you read the methodology carefully, the rankings are primarily based on public perception of prestige.

This is a false statement. Public perception of prestige != peer rating they use.

 

[jhmmd]

This is a false statement. Public perception of prestige != peer rating they use.

Whatever

 

[KnightDoc]

My entire role in this discussion has been solely around undergraduate institutions. Yes, a survey was done a while back that showed the plurality of people believe Harvard is the best school in the country. I wholeheartedly disagree that many people believe Princeton delivers the best undergraduate education in the country.

Even in the midwest, not a lot of people know or care about UChicago. Northwestern is actually a much bigger hit, and even it is unheard of by most. Keep in mind the average person is not a college student who spends time researching this stuff.

No, it doesn't matter which university is #1 and #2. My comment was in direct response to "The irony is, everyone I know who goes to or works at an unranked school thinks the ranking is meaningless, but nobody associated with top ranked schools feels the same way. It's not just stupid pre-meds and know-nothing deans who place value in the list. It's PDs, students, doctors, deans, members of the general public, everyone who buys the list, etc., etc., etc." to point out that most people's belief of best universities does not follow USNEWS, and often times doesn't even remotely follow USNEWS aside from the Ivy League and Stanford+MIT.

I don't disagree with anything you are saying, other than that people who know what they are talking about in higher education don't have a problem with Princeton being higher ranked than Harvard. I was talking about med schools in the quote you excerpted above, not UG. For what it's worth, pretty much any random person on the street, in addition to PDs, etc. will agree that Harvard med is better than LECOM, not just starry eyed pre-meds and deans. That's all I was trying to say.

 

[jhmmd]

This article calls for better methodology, @KnightDoc

 

[Dr.K124]

I don't disagree with anything you are saying, other than that people who know what they are talking about in higher education don't have a problem with Princeton being higher ranked than Harvard. I was talking about med schools in the quote you excerpted above, not UG. For what it's worth, pretty much any random person on the street, in addition to PDs, etc. will agree that Harvard med is better than LECOM, not just starry eyed pre-meds and deans. That's all I was trying to say.

I think we are just talking over each other at this point. It seems like we're in agreement about 95% of this.

 

[KnightDoc]

This is a false statement. Public perception of prestige != peer rating they use.

Depends on how you define "public"! If it is limited to "top academics – presidents, provosts and deans of admissions," you are correct. Otherwise, not so much.

Expert Opinion (20%)
Academic reputation matters because it factors things that cannot easily be captured elsewhere. For example, an institution known for having innovative approaches to teaching may perform especially well on this indicator, whereas a school struggling to keep its accreditation will likely perform poorly.
Each year, top academics – presidents, provosts and deans of admissions – rate the academic quality of peer institutions with which they are familiar on a scale of 1 (marginal) to 5 (distinguished). We take a two-year weighted average of the ratings. The 2021 Best Colleges ranking factors in scores from both 2020 and 2019.

 

[Dr.K124]

Depends on how you define "public"! If it is limited to "top academics – presidents, provosts and deans of admissions," you are correct. Otherwise, not so much.

Expert Opinion (20%)
Academic reputation matters because it factors things that cannot easily be captured elsewhere. For example, an institution known for having innovative approaches to teaching may perform especially well on this indicator, whereas a school struggling to keep its accreditation will likely perform poorly.
Each year, top academics – presidents, provosts and deans of admissions – rate the academic quality of peer institutions with which they are familiar on a scale of 1 (marginal) to 5 (distinguished). We take a two-year weighted average of the ratings. The 2021 Best Colleges ranking factors in scores from both 2020 and 2019.

There is plenty of information online talking about how schools are able to game this rating without actually changing anything about their school. How Northeastern University Gamed the College Rankings is an example.

 

[KnightDoc]

This article calls for better methodology, @KnightDoc

Don't disagree. I'm just linking to what it is. It is not "primarily based on public perception of prestige."

I'm not trying to pimp for USNWR. I'm just pointing out it's not the result of an uninformed public popularity contest. It has a ton of questionable metics, no one has come up with anything better, and it is widely followed. What else is there to say? Harvard thinks it's great. Kutztown thinks it's worthless. And Northeastern, among others, gamed it. I get it.

 

[jhmmd]

Don't disagree. I'm just linking to what it is. It is not "primarily based on public perception of prestige."

I'm not trying to pimp for USNWR. I'm just pointing out it's not the result of an uninformed public popularity contest. It has a ton of questionable metics, no one has come up with anything better, and it is widely followed. What else is there to say? Harvard thinks it's great. Kutztown thinks it's worthless. And Northeastern, among others, gamed it. I get it.

Really?

https://www.usnews.com/education/best-colleges/articles/how-us-news-calculated-the-rankings

It looks to me like it's 20% peer perception, and 0% public perception. Exactly how do you define "primarily"?

Well, peer perception of prestige has to (by the very definition of the word prestige) be based on public perception of prestige, eh?

 

[Dr.K124]

We're getting off-track here.

Hell, I don't even remember how we got to a discussion of USNEWS.

 

[KnightDoc]

Well, peer perception of prestige has to (by the very definition of the word prestige) be based on public perception of prestige, eh?

Sure, the same way med school reputation in published PD surveys comes from mom instead of PDs!

They are literally telling you who they are polling -- presidents, provosts and deans of admissions. None of them has ever consulted any uninformed member of the public that I know before responding to such a survey. They live in their own Ivory Tower and have their own, relatively informed opinions. That what US News is polling for its 20%. It's not the "primary" basis of the rankings, and it's not, by its definition, public.

 

[jhmmd]

We're getting off-track here.

Hell, I don't even remember how we got to a discussion of USNEWS.

Which ones you consider are elite for UG? T20 by USNWR?

I feel like this is related. A lot of pre-meds wonder if going to a T20/T50/tier 1/tier 2/CC vs. a university/etc. is important for getting into med school. Well, the short answer is--it IS important. Go to a four year school and excel. It doesn't have to be a T20 or a top tier school.

 

[jhmmd]

Sure, the same way public perception of med schools means PDs, and not my mom.

They are literally telling you who they are polling -- presidents, provosts and deans of admissions. None of them has ever consulted any uninformed member of the public that I know before responding to such a survey. They live in their own Ivory Tower and have their own, relatively informed opinions. That what US News is polling for its 20%. It's not the "primary" basis of the rankings, and it's not, by its definition, public.

Without getting into a discussion based on circular reasoning, let's just agree to disagree.

 

[Dr.K124]

I feel like this is related. A lot of pre-meds wonder if going to a T20/T50/tier 1/tier 2/CC vs. a university/etc. is important for getting into med school. Well, the short answer is--it IS important. Go to a four year school and excel. It doesn't have to be a T20 or a top tier school.

To elaborate on this, most medical schools don't care where you went to undergrad. But ADCOMS from top private medical schools ranked undergrad prestige as "Most important" in surveys.

However, by far the most important thing is excelling. In a university that curves science classes (I know Brown doesn't), it's more important to be at the top of the top and get a good GPA than to be at a top ranked school.

 

[jhmmd]

at the top of the top

 

[KnightDoc]

I feel like this is related. A lot of pre-meds wonder if going to a T20/T50/tier 1/tier 2/CC vs. a university/etc. is important for getting into med school. Well, the short answer is--it IS important. Go to a four year school and excel. It doesn't have to be a T20 or a top tier school.

In general, I totally agree with this, but there are plenty of success stories on SDN from people who, for one reason or another, started their journey at CCs. So, while good schools are better than less good schools, and 4 year is better than 2 year, the holistic review process really is designed to allow the cream to ultimately rise to the top, regardless of how the coffee cup is ranked.

 

[jhmmd]

In general, I totally agree with this, but there are plenty of success stories on SDN from people who, for one reason or another, started their journey at CCs. So, while good schools are better than less good schools, and 4 year is better than 2 year, the holistic review process really is designed to allow the cream to ultimately rise to the top, regardless of how coffee cup is ranked.

Yea CC is fine, esp. for the first two years, but like you are saying, at some point the "prestige" factor really does come into play. The truth is that there aren't a lot of pre-meds who come from purely a community college background. It can be done, but it's not the norm. You want to give yourself the best possible chances--go to a 4 year school. 'Nuff said.

 

[EdgeTrimmer]

We're getting off-track here.

Hell, I don't even remember how we got to a discussion of USNEWS.

My fault ☺️

 

[Dr.K124]

Yea CC is fine, esp. for the first two years, but like you are saying, at some point the "prestige" factor really does come into play. The truth is that there aren't a lot of pre-meds who come from purely a community college background. It can be done, but it's not the norm. You want to give yourself the best possible chances--go to a 4 year school. 'Nuff said.

If you want the best possible chance (with nothing else considered) go to a top university that grade inflates and doesn't grade their courses on a curve, which also has access to a myriad of clinical, nonclinical, and research opportunities.

 

[jhmmd]

If you want the best possible chance (with nothing else considered) go to a top university that grade inflates and doesn't grade their courses on a curve, which also has access to a myriad of clinical, nonclinical, and research opportunities.

Not sure how familiar you are with curving but usually the curve is on your side. It's like the Force. Let it be with you.
Also there is a lot of pressure in academia these days to not inflate grades, and professors must submit their grades to higher-ups to ensure that this is not happening

 

[Dr.K124]

Not sure how familiar you are with curving but usually the curve is on your side. It's like the Force. Let it be with you.

It's been a while since I was in school, but I recall hearing many horror stories of professors only allowing 10% of their class to get an A. That's what I'm talking about.

 

[jhmmd]

It's been a while since I was in school, but I recall hearing many horror stories of professors only allowing 10% of their class to get an A. That's what I'm talking about.

Yea well in general you want a professor who curves vs. a professor who "inflates grades" cuz the former is a mathematical (yet hypothetical) promise to pad your grade, while the latter is a mythical figure that may or may not truly exist

 

[EdgeTrimmer]

If you want the best possible chance (with nothing else considered) go to a top university that grade inflates and doesn't grade their courses on a curve, which also has access to a myriad of clinical, nonclinical, and research opportunities.

We considered these when my kid was deciding for UG. He ended up choosing a T20 with scholarship and good research opportunity over Penn and JHU (BME). However would have have taken Harvard or Stanford over taken T20 merit.

 

[Dr.K124]

We considered these when my kid was deciding for UG. He ended up choosing a T20 with scholarship and good research opportunity over Penn and JHU (BME). However would have have taken Harvard or Stanford over taken T20 merit.

Cost is a huge factor, hence why I said "with nothing else considered."

JHU is notorious for grade deflation, so that's probably a smart move. Unsure about Penn. I know that Brown inflates the most in the ivy league, followed by Harvard.

 

[KnightDoc]

To elaborate on this, most medical schools don't care where you went to undergrad. But ADCOMS from top private medical schools ranked undergrad prestige as "Most important" in surveys.

However, by far the most important thing is excelling. In a university that curves science classes (I know Brown doesn't), it's more important to be at the top of the top and get a good GPA than to be at a top ranked school.

I guess you don't realize this, but the SDN adcom who shared that with us didn't share that that particular survey is from 2013. A later survey from 2015, which is the one AAMC currently publishes, identifies UG selectivity as "lowest importance" for both public and private.

When I questioned him, that particular adcom dismissed the later survey as a surrender to political correctness not to be trusted, apparently because the world hasn't changed since the earlier survey was published. YMMV, but I'm relying more on the latest survey published by AAMC than the opinion of an old school adcom who might be in denial as the world is changing around him.

I have consistently believed that the argument is of the chicken and egg variety. Top UGs are over represented in top med schools because they produce a disproportionate amount of top applicants, not because ordinary applicants become top applicants by virtue of attending top UGs. My evidence of this is the fact that, each and every year, literally hundreds of students from low ranked UGs find themselves enrolling at top med schools. They would never be able to overcome the bias inherent in the "most important" survey if it were true, since thousands of applicants from the top UGs are rejected by the top med schools each year while the hundreds from the low ranked schools are accepted.

 

[Dr.K124]

I guess you don't realize this, but the SDN adcom who shared that with us didn't share that that particular survey is from 2013. A later survey from 2015, which is the one AAMC currently publishes, identifies UG prestige as "lowest importance" for both public and private.

When I questioned him, that particular adcom dismissed the later survey as a surrender to political correctness not to be trusted, apparently because the world hasn't changed since the earlier survey was published. YMMV, but I'm relying more on the latest survey published by AAMC than the opinion of an old school adcom who might be in denial as the world is changing around him.

I would still assume that undergraduate prestige plays a factor for top medical schools. Certainly not as much as GPA or MCAT, but a significant factor.

 

[EdgeTrimmer]

Cost is a huge factor, hence why I said "with nothing else considered."

JHU is notorious for grade deflation, so that's probably a smart move. Unsure about Penn. I know that Brown inflates the most in the ivy league, followed by Harvard.

Cost was not a consideration for us but figured it's not worth spending that much for Penn and not seeing any -ve impact (based on IIs he is got so far) .

 

[EdgeTrimmer]

I would still assume that undergraduate prestige plays a factor for top medical schools. Certainly not as much as GPA or MCAT, but a significant factor.

What I have seen is HPYSM seems to make a difference but not so much others. There is a detailed analysis on this site and was discussed month or two ago.

 

[Dr.K124]

What I have seen is HPYSM seems to make a difference but not so much others. There is a detailed analysis on this site and was discussed month or two ago.

I think an institution like University of Chicago, Columbia, Dartmouth, etc would still make a difference.

 

[deleted1066189]

Honest question...what makes Harvard med school the "best med school"? Is it primarily because of research and networking opportunities, or are there other factors at play?

 

[jhmmd]

Honest question...what makes Harvard med school the "best med school"? Is it primarily because of research and networking opportunities, or are there other factors at play?

People just want to frame a Harvard diploma on their wall. That's all there is to it.

 

[Dr.K124]

People just want to frame a Harvard diploma on their wall. That's all there is to it.

There's also no internal ranking or grades, basically. Its curriculum is fantastic.

 

[EdgeTrimmer]

Honest question...what makes Harvard med school the "best med school"? Is it primarily because of research and networking opportunities, or are there other factors at play?

It is rated in top 10 both research and primary care. If you look at the list lot of T20 research schools are not T20 primary care. I tend to look at both. I personally think UCSF is the best medical school but may be CA bias

 

[jhmmd]

There's also no internal ranking or grades, basically. Its curriculum is fantastic.

Do they just like use smiley faces/unhappy faces/stickers, or am I off the mark?

 

[EdgeTrimmer]

another thing you hear constantly here is only 20% of applicants will have more than 1 acceptances so rankings only matter to few.

 

[jhmmd]

another thing you hear constantly here is only 20% of applicants will have more than 1 acceptances so rankings only matter to few.

Yea that and of course you want to choose the med school that is best for YOU (if you have the option). Personally, I'd want to visit/mingle with the students to find out what the student culture is like (cutthroat? gunners? laid back?) rather than just consult USNWR. The rankings list is beneficial in that it is like the invisible hand of the economy--it forces schools to compete w/each other, and this forces each school to allocate more resources toward improvement. So in summary, the rankings are helpful but when it comes to your final decision, make sure that that's YOUR call.

 

[KnightDoc]

Yea that and of course you want to choose the med school that is best for YOU (if you have the option). Personally, I'd want to visit/mingle with the students to find out what the student culture is like (cutthroat? gunners? laid back?) rather than just consult USNWR. The rankings list is beneficial in that it is like the invisible hand of the economy--it forces schools to compete w/each other, and this forces each school to allocate more resources toward improvement. So in summary, the rankings are helpful but when it comes to your final decision, make sure that that's YOUR call.

True, true, true. The conversation is stimulating, and it's certainly a decent way to pass some time and share some knowledge, but @EdgeTrimmer is absolutely right. This conversation will ultimately only be relevant to one out of every five applicants. Even then, based on what I have observed over the past two years, ranking isn't even the issue.

Penn vs. UCSF isn't really a ranking question. Neither is UCLA Geffen vs. Harvard. So many successful T20 applicants find themselves yield protected out of lower ranked schools that the choice almost always seems to come down to top vs. top, mid vs. mid, low vs. low. When there are wide variances, it is IS public vs. private, and that really comes down to money vs. rank rather than rank vs. rank. JMHO, from what I've seen here since 2019.

 

[EdgeTrimmer]

Yea that and of course you want to choose the med school that is best for YOU (if you have the option). Personally, I'd want to visit/mingle with the students to find out what the student culture is like (cutthroat? gunners? laid back?) rather than just consult USNWR. The rankings list is beneficial in that it is like the invisible hand of the economy--it forces schools to compete w/each other, and this forces each school to allocate more resources toward improvement. So in summary, the rankings are helpful but when it comes to your final decision, make sure that that's YOUR call.

True. No one should select anything purely based on rankings let alone medical school. However summary dismissal of rankings by some adcoms or cheap comparison of some schools to some thing in some part of the country is appalling when same people call nervous and young premeds as neurotic.

 

[EdgeTrimmer]

I think an institution like University of Chicago, Columbia, Dartmouth, etc would still make a difference.

probably but much less compared to HPYSM. U Michigan provides counts based on UG schools.

 

[KnightDoc]

Cost was not a consideration for us but figured it's not worth spending that much for Penn and not seeing any -ve impact (based on IIs he is got so far) .

I'm not following your logic? Are you saying he's doing well so far? I think you said 70% T10 above. Does he go to a good UG? If so, how do you that @Dr.K124 isn't right, and that he isn't getting a boost even though he doesn't go to HYPSM? You're saying no negative impact not going to Penn, while he's doing well. That doesn't necessarily mean Penn doesn't provide a boost. It could mean he's still getting a boost wherever he ended up!

I personally don't believe it, because I believe someone who is good will do well anywhere, and there is no "boost." Just a lot of good people at top schools. But I could be wrong, and your point isn't refuting what @Dr.K124 is saying!!!! In fact, what you're really saying is that you would have ended up throwing away money sending him to Harvard or Stanford if you had the chance, since he didn't need them to do well!!!

 

[EdgeTrimmer]

I'm not following your logic? Are you saying he's doing well so far? I think you said 70% T10 above. Does he go to a good UG? If so, how do you that @Dr.K124 isn't right, and that he isn't getting a boost even though he doesn't go to HYPSM? You're saying no negative impact not going to Penn, while he's doing well. That doesn't necessarily mean Penn doesn't provide a boost. It could mean he's still getting a boost wherever he ended up!

I personally don't believe it, because I believe someone who is good will do well anywhere, and there is no "boost." Just a lot of good people at top schools. But I could be wrong, and your point isn't refuting what @Dr.K124 is saying!!!! In fact, what you're really saying is that you would have ended up throwing away money sending him to Harvard or Stanford if you had the chance, since he didn't need them to do well!!!

too many questions I did say earlier that he is doing very well. I still think Harvard and Stanford may have made a difference despite 70% T10 IIs. He goes to a T20 USNWR school but not ivy league. Schools like Michigan seems to show some preference but it's not our top choice . Again it's my hunch no proof.

 

[deleted1025488]

too many questions I did say earlier that he is doing very well. I still think Harvard and Stanford may have made a difference despite 70% T10 IIs. He goes to a T20 USNWR school but not ivy league. Schools like Michigan seems to show some preference but it's not our top choice . Again it's my hunch no proof.

I would think any student in the top 25% percentile at any of those high caliber UG's would have their foot in the door as much as you can "get your foot in the door." It's not like people are interviewing 3.9/520 Bob over 3.9/520 Billy because Bob went to Harvard and Billy went to Vanderbilt. Down to ECs and personal factors at that point I would think...

 

[KnightDoc]

too many questions I did say earlier that he is doing very well. I still think Harvard and Stanford may have made a difference despite 70% T10 IIs. He goes to a T20 USNWR school but not ivy league. Schools like Michigan seems to show some preference but it's not our top choice . Again it's my hunch no proof.

What difference? 71%?

I know you are stubborn and don't like to concede points, but you have to admit, with 70% T10 IIs (and counting) there really is nowhere else to go. You have to admit I am right here. The alternative would be saying one or two possible additional interviews (not acceptances) is worth $300K in some universe that you occupy all by yourself.

In this universe, your kid is my Exhibit A for excellence revealing itself and being rewarded accordingly, wherever it is found.