@Beaudreau wow, just presented some factual info. Apparently UMich hold a special place in your heart, great. I don’t care about UMich, its just another flagship university to me in a very cold climate. Yes, I wasn’t an English major, but thanks for hijacking this thread into a UMich discussion. =D>
First, whether or not somebody drinks or goes to parties is absolutely not indicative of whether or not they will or won’t (or can or can’t) get a PhD. As long as they don’t drink so much as to be non-functional, then being a partier and earning a PhD are not mutually exclusive or even correlated. Some of the many PhD-holders I know are also some of the heaviest drinkers I know. Some of them area also some of the lightest drinkers I know. I’d be relatively surprised if the proportion of heavy and light drinkers among those with a PhD is essentially identical to the population at large. Shoot, I have a good friend from Caltech who chooses his conference hotels based on the ones that offer a good happy hour rather than just staying at the actual host hotel.
Second, there are likely multiple factors that explain the data, and if drinking actually did play any role, it is likely rather minor. The most important factor is likely a self-selective admissions process, i.e. an admissions process that tends to favor the sorts of individuals who will eventually consider a PhD. On top of that, these programs may well be gearing their curricula toward preparation for graduate study. I know Caltech does this; I wouldn’t be surprised if the others do as well.
My whole point here is that the data presented are not terribly useful for someone selecting a baccalaureate university. It’s generally too early to be committing to a PhD at that point in the first place, and even if it wasn’t, it’s not like a student would have a diminished chance of getting a PhD eventually by choosing a school that is not on this list.
This discussion has occurred frequently over the years that I’ve been on cc, typically from those who are LAC-supporters. And the obvious response, from Uni supporters is that, if you are gong to ‘normalize’ (I hate that new trendy word) to a per capita, it would be more fair to exclude the professional schools, such as nursing, education, and more importantly business, from the denominator. In other words, how does the Liberal Arts college at UMich or Cal (L&S) or UCLA or Boston College do at producing doctoral students vs. the liberal arts at Reed or Williams? (Business is the most popular majors, but rarely offered at LACs, by definition.)
I’m sure that ‘normalizing’ (ugh!) the Universities’ would not come close to top LACs, but I’d guess the numbers would be closer.
Since when is normalization a trendy word? It’s an important tool in any sort of statistical analysis.
Factual data presented but misidentified/ mislabeled.
If presenting normalized data, said normalization must be mentioned.
Lest ye mislead.
IMO.
It’s gotten popular in business, at least the financials that I have been reading over the past few years.
My bad, then.
I took Stat back in the dark ages, and we never used such a word, so when I see such a term in the same sentence as statistics, my mind immediately goes to: “Lies, Damn Lies, and Statistics”… 
I know that in the late 80’s, I went into a top 10 PhD program for my major. There was a mix of students from state flagships and a couple from elite universities, definitely more from flagships or mid-level schools than elites. We had a class of ~20. My classmates’ undergrad colleges that I can remember were:
U Mass (2 students)
Clemson
NC State
Tennessee
MIT
Toledo
Michigan State
Stanford
Purdue
Clarkson
Tulane
Texas
And several international, primarily from France, India, China, and Greece.
But I guess we don’t fit into your topic because we all had B.S., not B.A. degrees…
I get it, you’re trying to say that more students from certain universities go on for PhDs. While that may be true, more PhDs come from non-elite undergrad universities than from elites, simply because the population at non-elite universities is higher. Plus, as has been said numerous times, you don’t NEED an elite undergrad experience to get into grad school, even elite grad school…
Hey feel free to bash Ohio State instead.
Just not in football, this century anyway 
How do they do @bluebayou ?
Such lists are useful in guiding students who want to earn a PhD, highlighting schools with highly academic overall environments. They typically have lower rates of immediate BA/BS employment out of school.
I realize that is way the LAC-supporters would like to believe, as they are paying the big bucks, but I’m not so sure. If true, one could argue that being an academic undergraduate type at say, tOSU (or Michigan or Cal/UCLA.UVa, UNC, or, or…), would make one standout as the faculty would be lined up trying to get said person into their lab to conduct research.
The big public Unis have plenty of academic wannabes, among the preprofessional biz types. Heck, I’d wager big cyber money that UMich has more academic types roaming its halls that AWS combined. However, that nuance gets lost in the drum pounding for LACs.
Many of us are not, because of merit aid, need-based aid or are just attending a public LAC.
Indeed. And that is UNdesirable for a lot of people!
My LAC kid is finding that a lot of her peers from relatively unknown schools are struggling with the coursework in her PhD program. Just an anecdotal data point — getting into a program isn’t the same as coming out with a PhD.
They aren’t, though, unless you assume that a student’s chance at a PhD is completely or primarily a result of the undergraduate school they attend. That simple isn’t true in most (any?) fields. A better measure might be the percentage of students entering a PhD program who were also interested in entering a PhD program.
This is going to vary depending on the field, but at least STEM fields, I have to repeat this quote for emphasis. When I am looking for PhD students, I care a hell of a lot more about whether they have research experience than I do about what school they attended. Whether they got that experience at a big public or a small private or somewhere in between doesn’t so much matter.
Then there’s the circular aspect, where a small school develops a reputation for a feature, attracting students who like that feature, producing grads with the feature, furthering the reputation, helping to differentiate some schools from each other, helping some applicants find their particular flavor of school.
When I was in my PhD program, I didn’t see any difference between those of us who went to elite schools and those of us who went to non-elite schools - and we ranged the gamut.
It’s also possible that the culture of talking about your struggle is different - when I was working with undergrads at an elite school, they were reluctant to admit to struggling with anything, because the culture there was to fake it until you make it and not to admit weakness. The culture at my (less elite, but still good) undergrad college was much more collaborative and people talked more freely about their challenges, so it’s also possible that the students from “relatively unknown schools” (which is not an indication of prestige or rigor) are more likely to be vocal about struggling with the coursework, especially when they believe they are in a safe space with their own classmates.
I’m not going to say that certain colleges don’t have features that maybe help develop a likelihood or propensity to go to grad school. Sure, students who are already the type to want PhDs or consider PhDs are more likely to be drawn to Swarthmore or Reed, probably; but schools like Swarthmore and Reed also provide experiences - small, discussion based classes; close relationships with professors; an atmosphere that values and promotes intellectual depth; more circumscribed social activities - that are more likely to promote interest in getting a PhD. Also, since Swarthmore and Reed attract more students who want a PhD already, that means that their peers who maybe haven’t figured out what to do yet or are more malleable may be more likely to be influenced to also want PhDs.
Some colleges also probably prepare students for their PhD better than other ones - through rigor in the coursework, through the kinds of research they offer, through the professors that they retain on staff to train and mentor their students. But part of that is also selection effect as well.
I think the takeaway is - what you do is more important than where you go to undergrad. But where you go can have at least an indirect effect on your desire to get a PhD, your competitiveness for PhD programs and your performance in the program once you get there. That effect, though, is not a simple one to explore.
hey von: love the kitty – Maine Coon?
Here’s a list that actually corresponds to the title of this thread- though it includes BS grads as well as BA’s. Also, it lists data for PhD recipients, not PhD students.
Foreign institutions na na 113,181 na
Unknown institutions na na 26,528
1 U. CA, Berkeley Public Research-very high 3,406
2 Cornell U., all campuses Private Research-very high 2,646
3 U. MI, Ann Arbor Public Research-very high 2,205
4 U. IL, Urbana-Champaign Public Research-very high 1,976
5 PA State U., main campus Public Research-very high 1,934
6 U. WI, Madison Public Research-very high 1,881
7 MA Institute of Technology Private Research-very high 1,880
8 U. CA, Los Angeles Public Research-very high 1,873
9 Harvard U. Private Research-very high 1,794
10 U. TX, Austin Public Research-very high 1,787
11 U. FL Public Research-very high 1,730
12 Brigham Young U., main campus Private Research-high 1,688
13 U. CA, San Diego Public Research-very high 1,546
14 U. CA, Davis Public Research-very high 1,542
15 Stanford U. Private Research-very high 1,359
16 TX A&M U., main campus Public Research-very high 1,299
17 U. VA, main campus Public Research-very high 1,260
18 Rutgers, State U. NJ, New Brunswick Public Research-very high 1,256
18 U. WA, Seattle Public Research-very high 1,256
20 U. MD, College Park Public Research-very high 1,216
21 Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State U. Public Research-very high 1,193
22 Brown U. Private Research-very high 1,188
23 OH State U., main campus Public Research-very high 1,178
24 U. MN, Twin Cities Public Research-very high 1,161
25 Princeton U. Private Research-very high 1,131
26 Duke U. Private Research-very high 1,103
27 Purdue U., main campus Public Research-very high 1,097
28 MI State U. Public Research-very high 1,092
28 U. AZ Public Research-very high 1,092 30 U. PA Private Research-very high 1,081
31 Yale U. Private Research-very high 1,020
32 U. NC, Chapel Hill Public Research-very high 991
33 U. CO, Boulder Public Research-very high 987
34 U. CA, Santa Barbara Public Research-very high 959
35 U. CA, Santa Cruz Public Research-very high 952
36 Northwestern U. Private Research-very high 949
37 U. of Chicago Private Research-very high 940
38 NC State U., Raleigh Public Research-very high 938
39 Boston U. Private Research-very high 913
40 GA Institute of Technology, main campus Public Research-very high 911
41 IA State U. Public Research-very high 863
42 Columbia U. in the City of New York Private Research-very high 829
43 Carnegie Mellon U. Private Research-very high 812
44 Johns Hopkins U. Private Research-very high 797
45 U. CA, Irvine Public Research-very high 787
46 IN U., Bloomington Public Research-very high 785
47 U. of Rochester Private Research-very high 771
48 AZ State U. Public Research-very high 744
49 CA Institute of Technology Private Research-very high 739
50 U. DE Public Research-very high 734
https://www.nsf.gov/statistics/infbrief/nsf13323/nsf13323.pdf
Table 2
wow, it’s amazing that those publics can still produce PhD’s…after all, other colleges (aka LACs) are known to “nature intellectual development”. 
@monydad - To be fair, the NSF data is for science and engineering PhDs. I doubt that the data are available, but it would be nice to see information for liberal arts PhDs, medical students, law students, and MBA students.
Interestingly, Cornell is a hybrid public/private university. Four of its colleges are land-grant and operated under contract with the State of New York and with reduced tuition for New York residents: Veterinary Medicine; Industrial and Labor Relations; Human Ecology; and Agricultural and Life Sciences.