<p>okay, so I took up the challenge, I looked at all the students in the Harvard PhD program in economics and you’re not going to believe what I found. First of all, there is one graduate student in economics at Harvard who graduated from Penn (yes, Penn, that unworthy school filled with lackluster students). Here’s the link <a href=“http://www.people.fas.harvard.edu/~dlugosz/cv.pdf[/url]”>http://www.people.fas.harvard.edu/~dlugosz/cv.pdf</a> but how did she possibly get in?</p>
<p>And, there were no economic graduate students at Harvard who graduated from U Chicago, while there were 2 students who went to Case Western. OMG, does that mean that Case Western is better than Chicago (and Princeton, Amherst, Cornell, Cambridge, Dartmouth and Oxford, all of whom had one graduate student)? Also, shockingly enough, there were 12 graduate students who did their undergraduate work at Harvard.</p>
<p>And tk21769, I was very disappointed because the Pont had no graduate students at Harvard–what’s wrong with it?</p>
<p>Eventul PhD per 1000 undergrduate degree awarded:</p>
<p>Almost all top schools ■■■■■■■ by me are on the list: HYPSMCC were on the list. Penn is not there. Penn generated more PhDs because of its huge size. </p>
<p>It is like finding a treasure to find 1 Penn student t Harvard PhD program. “I got it! There is 1 Penn student with PhD program from Harvard econ. this year!”</p>
<p>Please keep in mind that there are 3 Harvard college students getting PhDs from Harvard this year. There are 2 Stanford, 2 Swathmore, 1 Princeton, Yale, Dartmouth students graduating with PhD from Harvard.</p>
<p>There is “1” Penn grad with PHD in econ from top 6 econ programs this year. But the number is still below other schools ■■■■■■■ by me.</p>
<p>Why Can’t Caltech Majors Figure Out Simple Math Concepts?</p>
<p>Hey, here’s a lightbulb moment for you - what matters is what % of those applied who got in to their program of choice, not what the % makeup of a target program is. If no Penn grads were interested in applying, it doesn’t reflect badly that they don’t make up any of the people in the program. LOL.</p>
<p>^You still have yet to show where you get your numbers from. Also, as I have said before, Penn students (especially ones who would study econ in grad school) are more likely to jump into business, law, and medicine. It’s no small feat getting into top law schools like Harvard, nor is it something to be scoffed at when Penn places many students into med school (especially considering when national admit rates are bellow 40%). Going to PhD programs speaks to the interests of Penn students, not their abilities.</p>
<p>The point is Penn students, for whatever reason, are not earning PhDs in econ, period. It’s not that they can’t get into top schools when they do earn PhDs, it’s that this is not a common path for Penn graduates at any institution.</p>
<p>So what? What does that possibly matter that Penn students aren’t getting PhD’s in economics? This is a fact without any meaning whatsoever. Caltech students aren’t getting MFA degrees either. Now what?</p>
<p>… wait … what is Y7 trying to prove… i don’t get it… that Penn is not a top 10 school? Thats a stretch because he/she is using placement data to prove that point.</p>
<p>(1) Its huge size in economics and Wharton
(2) Penn’s quality of students is supposedly better than most of the schools which generated 1 PhD at the top 6 Econ Programs</p>
<p>No matter what, Penn’s placement into top PhD program is not as good as Columbia or Dartmouth. Stanford or MIT is 9 times better than Penn in producing top PhDs in economics</p>
<p>I actually think this could be valuable information, if expanded a bit.</p>
<p>There is data posted elsewhere on undergrad origins of future PhDs in various fields, but not lists of the undergrad origins of students entering, or leaving, just the top programs. This is important because, from what I’ve read, in many academic subjects only grads of the top 15 or so programs have a very good chance of getting a job teaching at a college anyone has heard of.</p>
<p>If someone had data to do something like #33, but for more schools like top 10, and covering substantially more years, maybe 10, I think this might be interesting information to have. It sort of modifies those Phd lists people trot around, in a way that may be material.</p>
<p>Not just for Economics, but for Physics, English, etc,.</p>
<p>There has to be more years, and more schools though, otherwise the numbers are too small to be of substantial significance. In the above sample, difference of just 2 -3 individuals is within the noise. And excluding other top programs may cause conclusions to be misleading, so you need to draw a wide enough net.</p>
<p>As well as realizing that there are often specific research groups/thesis readers for which school affiliation is unimportant, and also realizing that academic positions is not every PhD’s goal.</p>
<p>The only meaningful information is what % of people from X who wanted to do / become / apply to Y got into Y. Not what % of Y’s students are made up of people from X.</p>
<p>If 200 Harvard students apply to Program Y and 50 get in …
And 10 Penn students apply to Program Y and all 10 get in …</p>
<p>The people who aren’t very bright conclude that “Harvard does better in placing students into Program Y because 50 of the 60 Y are from Harvard.” That’s the dumb way of thinking about things. The smart way is realizing that only 25% of the Harvard people got into their program of choice whereas 100% of Penn people got into their program of choice. The fact that there may have been 190 other Penn people who went and did different things is irrelevant. They didn’t want to be in Y, so who cares?</p>
<p>But I was reading a blog by this UC Riverside Philosophy professor, and he said basically nobody from his undergrad program had ever gotten into a top x philosophy program from there. He indicated that undergrad origin made a big difference in admissions to top philosophy PHD programs. for various reasons.</p>
<p>I just thought that would be a good perspective to add to accompany these PhD lists that keep getting trotted out.</p>
<p>PhD Productivity ranking based on Washington Monthly 2009 College Ranking:</p>
<p>1 California Institute of Technology
2 Massachusetts Inst. of Technology
3 Yale University (CT)
4 Rice University (TX)
5 Princeton University (NJ)
6 Brown University (RI)
7 Stanford University (CA)
8 University of Chicago
9 Cornell University (NY)
10 Harvard University (MA)</p>
<p>11 University of Rochester (NY)
12 Duke University (NC)
13 Dartmouth College (NH)
14 College of William and Mary (VA)*
15 Brandeis University (MA)
16 University of California, Berkeley*
17 Johns Hopkins University (MD)
18 Northwestern University (IL)
20 Columbia University (NY)</p>
<p>21 Case Western Reserve Univ. (OH)
22 Carnegie Mellon University ¶
23 Vanderbilt University (TN)
24 University of Notre Dame (IN)</p>
<p>25 University of Pennsylvania</p>
<p>26 University of Virginia*
27 Rensselaer Polytechnic Inst. (NY)
28 University of Michigan, Ann Arbor*
30 Georgetown University (DC)</p>
<p>Penn is 25th! </p>
<p>The schools I am accused of ■■■■■■■■ HYPMSCCCDBC are well above Penn.</p>
<p>Again, Penn is at the bottom of Ivy, no where near CalTech, MIT, Stanford, Chicago or Duke.</p>
<p>Pizzagirl, I am soory to deliver the bad news to you.</p>