<p>which is the nations second best conference academically?</p>
<p>The two leagues are both noted for academic excellence, but in different ways, so take your pick. </p>
<p>All UAA schools are ranked as “National Universities” by USN&WR, while all NESCACs (except Tufts) are ranked as LACs. Both leagues include a pretty broad range of schools in these categories: UAA schools range from #8 to #41 under Universities (Tufts would fall in the middle of this group at #28), and NESCAC schools range from #1 to #42 under LACs. </p>
<p>If you considered each league from top to bottom, you probably wouldn’t find major differences in things like SATs or GPAs. The NESCACs probably tend to have lower acceptance rates and higher yields: for example, several NESCACs have acceptance rates below 20%, which does not appear to be a level currently reached by any UAA school. But being more selective does not necessarily mean better academically.</p>
<p>UAA’s SAT range / 1600 = 1310-1460; mean 1380; median 1383
NESCAC’s range / 1600 = 1290-1420; mean 1370; median 1375</p>
<p>Wow - very close.</p>
<p>If you mean the overall academic quality of the schools in each conference, then it’s very difficult to compare, and a compelling argument can be made for either group.</p>
<p>If you mean the academic quality of the athletes in each conference, then that’s a completely different story.</p>
<p>The two are equal in many respects. Some of the UAA is even lac-like in numbers of students with U of Rochester having about 1,000 in each class. Actually Wash U has an acceptance rate below 20%, based on this 2007 info:</p>
<p>[Best</a> Colleges - Education - US News and World Report](<a href=“http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/college/lowest-acceptance-rate]Best”>http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/college/lowest-acceptance-rate)</p>
<p>NESCAC colleges have a relationship with each other based on similarity of history, geography and mission. It’s not at all unusual for them to pool pre-frosh recruitment, career networking and even alumni functions. And, varsity sports play a significant role on each campus. Would the average student at Emory, or WUSTL even realize they have an athletic conference, much less share one with schools 1,000 miles away?</p>
<p>I’m pretty sure that most students at those schools do realize that they’re in an athletic conference. After all, it’s kind of difficult to ignore those national championship banners hanging all over the campus at WUSTL. </p>
<p>You are correct though in that the UAA schools don’t share the historical connection that the NESCAC schools have, but that really shouldn’t be a factor when comparing the academic quality of the member institutions. It IS a comparison of apples and oranges, but not for that reason.</p>
<p>national champion=NCAA. Doesn’t necessarily give a clue how it got there.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Could be. I looked up WUSTL at [url=<a href=“College Search - BigFuture | College Board”>College Search - BigFuture | College Board]collegeboard[/url</a>], which says 22%. WUSTL apparently doesn’t release its Common Data Set, which is the standard way to report such data, so it may be hard to get a definitive number.</p>
<p>According to [url=<a href=“College Navigator - Search Results”>College Navigator - Washington University in St Louis]IPEDS[/url</a>], the acceptance rate for the class of 2012 at WUStL was 22% (24% males, 20% females).</p>
<p>Given WUStL’s vague figure of “approximately [url=<a href=“http://www.studlife.com/news/record-number-apply-to-schools-despite-economy-1.1723812]23,000[/url”>http://www.studlife.com/news/record-number-apply-to-schools-despite-economy-1.1723812]23,000[/url</a>] applicants” for 2013 and its typical yield of [url=<a href=“http://www.studlife.com/news/freshman-press-class-of-2012-stems-from-record-applicant-pool-1.612538]30%[/url”>http://www.studlife.com/news/freshman-press-class-of-2012-stems-from-record-applicant-pool-1.612538]30%[/url</a>], WUStL probably accepted around 4666 applicants with an acceptance rate of around 20%.</p>
<p>
Athletic participation and competition is generally a higher priority for the NESCACs. So they could be more motivated to drop their standards for talented athletes for that reason.</p>
<p>On the other hand, the NESCAC schools are generally much smaller than the UAA schools — yet they sponsor just as many (in fact, probably more) athletic teams. This means that athletes are a much higher percentage of the student body at NESCACs. And this in turn means that the NESCACs can’t drop their standards too far for athletes, because this would significantly affect their overall stats.</p>
<p>For example, at a small LAC like Bowdoin or Amherst, the football roster alone (~ 70 students) approaches 10% of the total male student enrollment. At Williams, some 34% of the student body (including both men and women) plays varsity sports, and another 6% are JV. These schools maintain high average SAT scores despite the fact that their classes contain a large number (on a percentage basis) of athletes. This implies that even the athletes must have pretty impressive scores.</p>
<p>In general, the UAA schools are sufficiently large that they could (if they wished) lower their academic standards to admit talented athletes, and it wouldn’t significantly change their overall SAT profiles. This is not to say that they necessarily do.</p>
<p>“which is the nations second best conference academically?”</p>
<p>Oh? Enlighten me: which one is the “first best?”</p>
<p>Considered as a league from top to bottom, the Ivy League would be the most selective athletic conference in terms of SATs etc. The top-ranked schools in the UAA and NESCAC would fall within the same general range as the Ivies, but the lower ranked schools would not. </p>
<p>Whether this necessarily makes Ivy schools “best academically” is another issue, but that’s probably what the OP meant.</p>