<p>I’d trust a dated, imperfect study (and again, Williams fares better than lots of other schools, traditionally considered more prestigious among the Ivy league than Cornell, such as Dartmouth, Columbia and Brown, that don’t have the issue you highlight in terms of Cornell’s various colleges) over the completely unsupported, unverified, and frankly untrue statements made by some of the Cornell supporters here. I’ll say it again, the burden is on those of you who are asserting that Cornell has better placement on Wall Street, or anywhere else, than Williams, to come up with facts supporting it. So far, you have provided ZERO support for your claims. You also ignore one absolutely objective fact: Williams has a HUGE advantage vs. Cornell in terms of financial resources and expenditures on undergrad education. That does make a difference. </p>
<p>The quote from monydad that you’ve now highlighted a few times, for example, is useless, and actually demonstrates that he just doesn’t know much about Williams circa 2012 (his views seem more in line with the Williams of the early 1980’s, which was a very different place) – based on what is Williams’ student body more homogenous?? I am fairly certain, for example, that Williams has a higher percentage of Black and Latino undergrads than Cornell, as well as a higher percentage of Pell Grant recipients. And based on what are an “atypically high number” interested in Wall Street? Atypical compared to who? You are talking about the totally dated, totally anecdotal, totally unsupported opinions of one person as if they are in way, shape, or form meaningful, while outright dismissing the results of studies which, while admittedly flawed, are certainly more objective and more reliable than some random internet message board participant’s dated opinions. At least try to pretend to apply the same standards of analytical rigor to those who agree with you as you do to those who disagree, OK?</p>