Would you take Tufts, Emory, Wash U over UVA?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^^ I don't think you will ever get it. Yes, it is basic probability and statistics. Your data points, the number of graduates enrolled in YLS, and the total number of undergraduates from each undergraduate school, are valid and important. They mean as such as what the metrics are -- the number of graduates enrolled in YLS, and the size of graduates from those colleges.

What you failed to understand is that you divided those two numbers to invent a third metrics and used it to compare "the likelihood of end up at YLS" from each school. That's wrong. Washington U's graduates are NOT 2.5 X as likely to end up at Yale Law as a UVA graduate.

Most sports metrics are derived the same way. Points per game, batting average, 3 point shooting percentage, passing completion percentage. They are then used to compare. Batting average is likelihood of getting a hit per at bat, etc.

No, they are not. 3 point shooting percentage is calculated by # of 3 point shots made divided by 3 point shots attempted.

Likelihood of attending Yale should be calculated by # enrolled/ # applied.

The point was a third metric is created and it is created all the time. I don't think anyone would disagree that it would be great to know admission rate by school, but that isn't available. Beyond that, what would really be ideal to know is, if you could control for all other factors, what the admission rate is by school. By that I mean if the applicants from all schools in the study had identical stats and applications, what would their admission rate be. That would give a better indication of the impact of the school on admissions. It is likely that only Yale Law admissions knows this.

Reports do exactly what the PP did all the time. If you look at Poets and Quants, a site about business schools, they'll talk about "feeder schools" to top Wall Street firms by counting the number of graduates there. Now it could be that graduates of a certain school don't want to work for Goldman Sachs or other firms and don't apply, but we don't really have any information on that. Given that Goldman is prestigious and pays a lot, it isn't a stretch to think a lot of business oriented graduates would like to work there. So the metric has merit in the view of many people and they use it all the time.

Lastly, there are many likelihoods. There is the likelihood a UVA graduate enrolls at Yale Law. There is the likelihood of an applicant from UVA (or another school) being accepted by Yale Law. There is the likelihood of a graduate of a given school being accepted by Yale Law with a specific set of stats (that would allow more precise comparisons). We just need to have progressively more information to know those likelihoods, and it often isn't available.

PP made valid points and provided valuable inputs. I was simply pointing out a math error she made.

You are fine creating as many metrics as you want. But when you use it as a metric of likelihood (probability in statistics), that metric must make mathematical sense.

'Feeder schools' is another fine metric. Ivies are feeder schools to YLS. Washington U (7) and UVA (6) are not, if your cut-off is 10. However, telling people that "Washington U's graduates are 2.5 X likely to end up in Yale Law" is plain wrong.

None of the likelihoods (probability) can use PP's calculation because the formula is wrong mathematically. When you calculate batting average, you divide the number by total hits attempted. When you calculate the likelihood of making a three point shot, you divide the number by the three point shots attempted. When you try to calculate any sort of likelihoods of ending up at YLS, your population must not include students who have absolutely nothing to do with YLS -- graduates never applied to Yale.

There is nothing wrong with the calculation. It just says something different than you are trying to attribute to it. They were just saying Ivy graduates (regardless of what they want to do, etc.) are more likely to end up enrolled at Yale Law. If you say this is invalid for Washington U due, you are also saying it means nothing when you look at Yale and Harvard, which have 25X as many grads enrolled at Yale Law on a per capita basis. It seems to me there is probably something in that.

There is nothing right with that calculation of likelihood. She divided the # of enrolled by the total # of undergraduates whether they applied to Yale or not, and used it as a measure of your likelihood of ending up at Yale.

You don't need to "adjust" for the total number of undergraduate graduates to come to the conclusion that Ivies are feeder schools to Yale Law, and UVA and Washington are not, just by looking at the number of enrolled per school. How many times likely does an Ivy graduate end up at Yale as a UVA or Washington graduate? We simply don't have data to calculate that.

Poets and Quants reports top feeder schools to Wall Street. Do they have a metric that divides their numbers by the total undergraduate population? No.

So if Amherst (with about 2,000 undergraduate students) has the same number of Rhodes Scholars, Yale Law acceptances, or Nobel Prize winners among its graduates as Michigan (30,000 undergraduate students), it wouldn't be more productive by any measure? Really?

Yes. The people of Switzerland are poor because the country only has a GDP of $680B vs $19 trillion in the U.S.

And China has a GDP of $12 Trillion vs. $680B for Switzerland, so a Chinese person is nearly 18 times wealthier than a Swiss person.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^^ I don't think you will ever get it. Yes, it is basic probability and statistics. Your data points, the number of graduates enrolled in YLS, and the total number of undergraduates from each undergraduate school, are valid and important. They mean as such as what the metrics are -- the number of graduates enrolled in YLS, and the size of graduates from those colleges.

What you failed to understand is that you divided those two numbers to invent a third metrics and used it to compare "the likelihood of end up at YLS" from each school. That's wrong. Washington U's graduates are NOT 2.5 X as likely to end up at Yale Law as a UVA graduate.

Most sports metrics are derived the same way. Points per game, batting average, 3 point shooting percentage, passing completion percentage. They are then used to compare. Batting average is likelihood of getting a hit per at bat, etc.

No, they are not. 3 point shooting percentage is calculated by # of 3 point shots made divided by 3 point shots attempted.

Likelihood of attending Yale should be calculated by # enrolled/ # applied.

The point was a third metric is created and it is created all the time. I don't think anyone would disagree that it would be great to know admission rate by school, but that isn't available. Beyond that, what would really be ideal to know is, if you could control for all other factors, what the admission rate is by school. By that I mean if the applicants from all schools in the study had identical stats and applications, what would their admission rate be. That would give a better indication of the impact of the school on admissions. It is likely that only Yale Law admissions knows this.

Reports do exactly what the PP did all the time. If you look at Poets and Quants, a site about business schools, they'll talk about "feeder schools" to top Wall Street firms by counting the number of graduates there. Now it could be that graduates of a certain school don't want to work for Goldman Sachs or other firms and don't apply, but we don't really have any information on that. Given that Goldman is prestigious and pays a lot, it isn't a stretch to think a lot of business oriented graduates would like to work there. So the metric has merit in the view of many people and they use it all the time.

Lastly, there are many likelihoods. There is the likelihood a UVA graduate enrolls at Yale Law. There is the likelihood of an applicant from UVA (or another school) being accepted by Yale Law. There is the likelihood of a graduate of a given school being accepted by Yale Law with a specific set of stats (that would allow more precise comparisons). We just need to have progressively more information to know those likelihoods, and it often isn't available.

PP made valid points and provided valuable inputs. I was simply pointing out a math error she made.

You are fine creating as many metrics as you want. But when you use it as a metric of likelihood (probability in statistics), that metric must make mathematical sense.

'Feeder schools' is another fine metric. Ivies are feeder schools to YLS. Washington U (7) and UVA (6) are not, if your cut-off is 10. However, telling people that "Washington U's graduates are 2.5 X likely to end up in Yale Law" is plain wrong.

None of the likelihoods (probability) can use PP's calculation because the formula is wrong mathematically. When you calculate batting average, you divide the number by total hits attempted. When you calculate the likelihood of making a three point shot, you divide the number by the three point shots attempted. When you try to calculate any sort of likelihoods of ending up at YLS, your population must not include students who have absolutely nothing to do with YLS -- graduates never applied to Yale.

There is nothing wrong with the calculation. It just says something different than you are trying to attribute to it. They were just saying Ivy graduates (regardless of what they want to do, etc.) are more likely to end up enrolled at Yale Law. If you say this is invalid for Washington U due, you are also saying it means nothing when you look at Yale and Harvard, which have 25X as many grads enrolled at Yale Law on a per capita basis. It seems to me there is probably something in that.

There is nothing right with that calculation of likelihood. She divided the # of enrolled by the total # of undergraduates whether they applied to Yale or not, and used it as a measure of your likelihood of ending up at Yale.

You don't need to "adjust" for the total number of undergraduate graduates to come to the conclusion that Ivies are feeder schools to Yale Law, and UVA and Washington are not, just by looking at the number of enrolled per school. How many times likely does an Ivy graduate end up at Yale as a UVA or Washington graduate? We simply don't have data to calculate that.

Poets and Quants reports top feeder schools to Wall Street. Do they have a metric that divides their numbers by the total undergraduate population? No.

So if Amherst (with about 2,000 undergraduate students) has the same number of Rhodes Scholars, Yale Law acceptances, or Nobel Prize winners among its graduates as Michigan (30,000 undergraduate students), it wouldn't be more productive by any measure? Really?

PP was not talking about 'productivity'. She was asserting a comparison of likelihood of getting in Yale Law, which was straight up bad math.

And yes to Rhodes Scholars, or Nobel Prize winners. Theoretically every student has a possibility of becoming a Rhodes Scholar or Nobel Prize winner. It's appropriate to use the total population in this context. However, not every student has a possibility of going to Yale Law, only those applied. It could very well be the case that the same number of students from each school applies to Yale Law. So without knowing the interest level for Yale Law from each school, I am not sure you can say one is more productive. It also depends on your definition of 'productivity'.

[Anonymous]

[/b]

Anonymous wrote:The problem is Charlottesville attracts white supremacists. That is a negative for UVA.

[b]

https://thehill.com/blogs/in-the-know/in-the-know/347056-tina-fey-weighs-in-on-charlottesville-on-snl

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^^ I don't think you will ever get it. Yes, it is basic probability and statistics. Your data points, the number of graduates enrolled in YLS, and the total number of undergraduates from each undergraduate school, are valid and important. They mean as such as what the metrics are -- the number of graduates enrolled in YLS, and the size of graduates from those colleges.

What you failed to understand is that you divided those two numbers to invent a third metrics and used it to compare "the likelihood of end up at YLS" from each school. That's wrong. Washington U's graduates are NOT 2.5 X as likely to end up at Yale Law as a UVA graduate.

Most sports metrics are derived the same way. Points per game, batting average, 3 point shooting percentage, passing completion percentage. They are then used to compare. Batting average is likelihood of getting a hit per at bat, etc.

No, they are not. 3 point shooting percentage is calculated by # of 3 point shots made divided by 3 point shots attempted.

Likelihood of attending Yale should be calculated by # enrolled/ # applied.

The point was a third metric is created and it is created all the time. I don't think anyone would disagree that it would be great to know admission rate by school, but that isn't available. Beyond that, what would really be ideal to know is, if you could control for all other factors, what the admission rate is by school. By that I mean if the applicants from all schools in the study had identical stats and applications, what would their admission rate be. That would give a better indication of the impact of the school on admissions. It is likely that only Yale Law admissions knows this.

Reports do exactly what the PP did all the time. If you look at Poets and Quants, a site about business schools, they'll talk about "feeder schools" to top Wall Street firms by counting the number of graduates there. Now it could be that graduates of a certain school don't want to work for Goldman Sachs or other firms and don't apply, but we don't really have any information on that. Given that Goldman is prestigious and pays a lot, it isn't a stretch to think a lot of business oriented graduates would like to work there. So the metric has merit in the view of many people and they use it all the time.

Lastly, there are many likelihoods. There is the likelihood a UVA graduate enrolls at Yale Law. There is the likelihood of an applicant from UVA (or another school) being accepted by Yale Law. There is the likelihood of a graduate of a given school being accepted by Yale Law with a specific set of stats (that would allow more precise comparisons). We just need to have progressively more information to know those likelihoods, and it often isn't available.

PP made valid points and provided valuable inputs. I was simply pointing out a math error she made.

You are fine creating as many metrics as you want. But when you use it as a metric of likelihood (probability in statistics), that metric must make mathematical sense.

'Feeder schools' is another fine metric. Ivies are feeder schools to YLS. Washington U (7) and UVA (6) are not, if your cut-off is 10. However, telling people that "Washington U's graduates are 2.5 X likely to end up in Yale Law" is plain wrong.

None of the likelihoods (probability) can use PP's calculation because the formula is wrong mathematically. When you calculate batting average, you divide the number by total hits attempted. When you calculate the likelihood of making a three point shot, you divide the number by the three point shots attempted. When you try to calculate any sort of likelihoods of ending up at YLS, your population must not include students who have absolutely nothing to do with YLS -- graduates never applied to Yale.

There is nothing wrong with the calculation. It just says something different than you are trying to attribute to it. They were just saying Ivy graduates (regardless of what they want to do, etc.) are more likely to end up enrolled at Yale Law. If you say this is invalid for Washington U due, you are also saying it means nothing when you look at Yale and Harvard, which have 25X as many grads enrolled at Yale Law on a per capita basis. It seems to me there is probably something in that.

There is nothing right with that calculation of likelihood. She divided the # of enrolled by the total # of undergraduates whether they applied to Yale or not, and used it as a measure of your likelihood of ending up at Yale.

You don't need to "adjust" for the total number of undergraduate graduates to come to the conclusion that Ivies are feeder schools to Yale Law, and UVA and Washington are not, just by looking at the number of enrolled per school. How many times likely does an Ivy graduate end up at Yale as a UVA or Washington graduate? We simply don't have data to calculate that.

Poets and Quants reports top feeder schools to Wall Street. Do they have a metric that divides their numbers by the total undergraduate population? No.

So if Amherst (with about 2,000 undergraduate students) has the same number of Rhodes Scholars, Yale Law acceptances, or Nobel Prize winners among its graduates as Michigan (30,000 undergraduate students), it wouldn't be more productive by any measure? Really?

PP was not talking about 'productivity'. She was asserting a comparison of likelihood of getting in Yale Law, which was straight up bad math.

And yes to Rhodes Scholars, or Nobel Prize winners. Theoretically every student has a possibility of becoming a Rhodes Scholar or Nobel Prize winner. It's appropriate to use the total population in this context. However, not every student has a possibility of going to Yale Law, only those applied. It could very well be the case that the same number of students from each school applies to Yale Law. So without knowing the interest level for Yale Law from each school, I am not sure you can say one is more productive. It also depends on your definition of 'productivity'.

Moron

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^^ I don't think you will ever get it. Yes, it is basic probability and statistics. Your data points, the number of graduates enrolled in YLS, and the total number of undergraduates from each undergraduate school, are valid and important. They mean as such as what the metrics are -- the number of graduates enrolled in YLS, and the size of graduates from those colleges.

What you failed to understand is that you divided those two numbers to invent a third metrics and used it to compare "the likelihood of end up at YLS" from each school. That's wrong. Washington U's graduates are NOT 2.5 X as likely to end up at Yale Law as a UVA graduate.

Most sports metrics are derived the same way. Points per game, batting average, 3 point shooting percentage, passing completion percentage. They are then used to compare. Batting average is likelihood of getting a hit per at bat, etc.

No, they are not. 3 point shooting percentage is calculated by # of 3 point shots made divided by 3 point shots attempted.

Likelihood of attending Yale should be calculated by # enrolled/ # applied.

The point was a third metric is created and it is created all the time. I don't think anyone would disagree that it would be great to know admission rate by school, but that isn't available. Beyond that, what would really be ideal to know is, if you could control for all other factors, what the admission rate is by school. By that I mean if the applicants from all schools in the study had identical stats and applications, what would their admission rate be. That would give a better indication of the impact of the school on admissions. It is likely that only Yale Law admissions knows this.

Reports do exactly what the PP did all the time. If you look at Poets and Quants, a site about business schools, they'll talk about "feeder schools" to top Wall Street firms by counting the number of graduates there. Now it could be that graduates of a certain school don't want to work for Goldman Sachs or other firms and don't apply, but we don't really have any information on that. Given that Goldman is prestigious and pays a lot, it isn't a stretch to think a lot of business oriented graduates would like to work there. So the metric has merit in the view of many people and they use it all the time.

Lastly, there are many likelihoods. There is the likelihood a UVA graduate enrolls at Yale Law. There is the likelihood of an applicant from UVA (or another school) being accepted by Yale Law. There is the likelihood of a graduate of a given school being accepted by Yale Law with a specific set of stats (that would allow more precise comparisons). We just need to have progressively more information to know those likelihoods, and it often isn't available.

PP made valid points and provided valuable inputs. I was simply pointing out a math error she made.

You are fine creating as many metrics as you want. But when you use it as a metric of likelihood (probability in statistics), that metric must make mathematical sense.

'Feeder schools' is another fine metric. Ivies are feeder schools to YLS. Washington U (7) and UVA (6) are not, if your cut-off is 10. However, telling people that "Washington U's graduates are 2.5 X likely to end up in Yale Law" is plain wrong.

None of the likelihoods (probability) can use PP's calculation because the formula is wrong mathematically. When you calculate batting average, you divide the number by total hits attempted. When you calculate the likelihood of making a three point shot, you divide the number by the three point shots attempted. When you try to calculate any sort of likelihoods of ending up at YLS, your population must not include students who have absolutely nothing to do with YLS -- graduates never applied to Yale.

There is nothing wrong with the calculation. It just says something different than you are trying to attribute to it. They were just saying Ivy graduates (regardless of what they want to do, etc.) are more likely to end up enrolled at Yale Law. If you say this is invalid for Washington U due, you are also saying it means nothing when you look at Yale and Harvard, which have 25X as many grads enrolled at Yale Law on a per capita basis. It seems to me there is probably something in that.

There is nothing right with that calculation of likelihood. She divided the # of enrolled by the total # of undergraduates whether they applied to Yale or not, and used it as a measure of your likelihood of ending up at Yale.

You don't need to "adjust" for the total number of undergraduate graduates to come to the conclusion that Ivies are feeder schools to Yale Law, and UVA and Washington are not, just by looking at the number of enrolled per school. How many times likely does an Ivy graduate end up at Yale as a UVA or Washington graduate? We simply don't have data to calculate that.

Poets and Quants reports top feeder schools to Wall Street. Do they have a metric that divides their numbers by the total undergraduate population? No.

So if Amherst (with about 2,000 undergraduate students) has the same number of Rhodes Scholars, Yale Law acceptances, or Nobel Prize winners among its graduates as Michigan (30,000 undergraduate students), it wouldn't be more productive by any measure? Really?

PP was not talking about 'productivity'. She was asserting a comparison of likelihood of getting in Yale Law, which was straight up bad math.

And yes to Rhodes Scholars, or Nobel Prize winners. Theoretically every student has a possibility of becoming a Rhodes Scholar or Nobel Prize winner. It's appropriate to use the total population in this context. However, not every student has a possibility of going to Yale Law, only those applied. It could very well be the case that the same number of students from each school applies to Yale Law. So without knowing the interest level for Yale Law from each school, I am not sure you can say one is more productive. It also depends on your definition of 'productivity'.

You have to apply for a Rhodes Scholarship. Harvard has produced 364 Rhodes Scholars. Berry College has produced 1 Rhodes Scholar. We should not conclude that this is any evidence that a Harvard GRADUATE is more likely to end up a Rhodes Scholar than a Berry College graduate because we do not know the level of interest of Berry College students or the number of APPLICANTS from either.

[Anonymous]

I would say the list price premium if law is intended graduate field is not warranted for Washington U, Tufts, or Emory over UVA and W&M. Schools like Harvard, Yale, Princeton, and Stanford are really difficult to decline, and it would also probably be tough for Columbia, Duke, etc., but not Vanderbilt, Northwestern, Notre Dame, Cornell etc. Probably no more than a dozen or so schools tops (you can exclude MIT and Caltech if not going engineering and science).

There hasn't been much real data offered in this thread, but I note that the top two publics in representation on a per capita basis at super elite Yale Law are . . . W&M and UVA. The top undergraduate schools represented at the great UVA Law school (ranked #8) are . . . UVA and W&M. Sometimes it isn't too bad to be a Virginian.

Use your EA, ED1, and ED2 sequence wisely and it should work out well for you. Someone had a good suggested order that I can't recall, but it made great sense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I would say the list price premium if law is intended graduate field is not warranted for Washington U, Tufts, or Emory over UVA and W&M. Schools like Harvard, Yale, Princeton, and Stanford are really difficult to decline, and it would also probably be tough for Columbia, Duke, etc., but not Vanderbilt, Northwestern, Notre Dame, Cornell etc. Probably no more than a dozen or so schools tops (you can exclude MIT and Caltech if not going engineering and science).

There hasn't been much real data offered in this thread, but I note that the top two publics in representation on a per capita basis at super elite Yale Law are . . . W&M and UVA. The top undergraduate schools represented at the great UVA Law school (ranked #8) are . . . UVA and W&M. Sometimes it isn't too bad to be a Virginian.

Use your EA, ED1, and ED2 sequence wisely and it should work out well for you. Someone had a good suggested order that I can't recall, but it made great sense.

+1. You make a lot of sense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would say the list price premium if law is intended graduate field is not warranted for Washington U, Tufts, or Emory over UVA and W&M. Schools like Harvard, Yale, Princeton, and Stanford are really difficult to decline, and it would also probably be tough for Columbia, Duke, etc., but not Vanderbilt, Northwestern, Notre Dame, Cornell etc. Probably no more than a dozen or so schools tops (you can exclude MIT and Caltech if not going engineering and science).

There hasn't been much real data offered in this thread, but I note that the top two publics in representation on a per capita basis at super elite Yale Law are . . . W&M and UVA. The top undergraduate schools represented at the great UVA Law school (ranked #8) are . . . UVA and W&M. Sometimes it isn't too bad to be a Virginian.

Use your EA, ED1, and ED2 sequence wisely and it should work out well for you. Someone had a good suggested order that I can't recall, but it made great sense.

+1. You make a lot of sense.

OP here. Sequence was ED Emory, Tufts, or Wash U (haven't decided). Think he only realistically has a shot at Emory so leaning ED there pending visit. Tufts and Wash U are very hard from DC area privates. Mob scene for these three schools at the Independent Schools Fair a few weeks bad (that was held at Georgetown Prep). If ED 1 fails, ED 2 Wake or William and Mary (probably W&M because of cost). At same EA Michigan, Chicago, and UVA (while doing ED 1).

See the problem? If ED succeeds at Emory, we would not know EA UVA and are obligated (First World problems). ED comes out a week before Christmas and UVA ED is end of January. Hence the question: is it worth it if we are committed to Emory full pay. No chance of financial aid and was told yesterday by a consultant Emory gives 2% merit. This kid won't get it. Sister might though.

Speaking of Sister, you mention schools that hard to deny for law school. What are your thoughts on Dartmouth? They are third in terms of the class of 2021 at UVA Law behind UVA and William and Mary undergrads?

You seem wise to appreciate your advise on these points.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would say the list price premium if law is intended graduate field is not warranted for Washington U, Tufts, or Emory over UVA and W&M. Schools like Harvard, Yale, Princeton, and Stanford are really difficult to decline, and it would also probably be tough for Columbia, Duke, etc., but not Vanderbilt, Northwestern, Notre Dame, Cornell etc. Probably no more than a dozen or so schools tops (you can exclude MIT and Caltech if not going engineering and science).

There hasn't been much real data offered in this thread, but I note that the top two publics in representation on a per capita basis at super elite Yale Law are . . . W&M and UVA. The top undergraduate schools represented at the great UVA Law school (ranked #8) are . . . UVA and W&M. Sometimes it isn't too bad to be a Virginian.

Use your EA, ED1, and ED2 sequence wisely and it should work out well for you. Someone had a good suggested order that I can't recall, but it made great sense.

+1. You make a lot of sense.

OP here. Sequence was ED Emory, Tufts, or Wash U (haven't decided). Think he only realistically has a shot at Emory so leaning ED there pending visit. Tufts and Wash U are very hard from DC area privates. Mob scene for these three schools at the Independent Schools Fair a few weeks bad (that was held at Georgetown Prep). If ED 1 fails, ED 2 Wake or William and Mary (probably W&M because of cost). At same EA Michigan, Chicago, and UVA (while doing ED 1).

See the problem? If ED succeeds at Emory, we would not know EA UVA and are obligated (First World problems). ED comes out a week before Christmas and UVA ED is end of January. Hence the question: is it worth it if we are committed to Emory full pay. No chance of financial aid and was told yesterday by a consultant Emory gives 2% merit. This kid won't get it. Sister might though.

Speaking of Sister, you mention schools that hard to deny for law school. What are your thoughts on Dartmouth? They are third in terms of the class of 2021 at UVA Law behind UVA and William and Mary undergrads?

You seem wise to appreciate your advise on these points.

I see your problem. I'm afraid I don't have any real wisdom. I can only give you my point of view. Starting from the position of having monetary constraints, Virginia residency, and realistic admissions chances at UVA and W&M, I'd look at schools in three categories: 1) Gotta make it happen somehow if fortunate enough to be admitted 2) Want to make it happen if admitted 3) Not really justified from ROI or opportunity perspective based on current financial situation. Category 1 is Harvard, Stanford, MIT, Yale, Princeton, and Caltech. Category 2 is probably something like Columbia, Duke, Penn, Dartmouth, Brown, Williams, Amherst, and Chicago. Category 3 would include schools like JHU, Georgetown, Vanderbilt, Wash U, Notre Dame, Northwestern, USC, Cornell, Emory, NYU, and Wesleyan. Different people will see this differently and there might be some exceptions based on kid's intended direction (e.g. USC Film School, Georgetown School of Foreign Service).

So your issue is one of your kids might get in Emory, which is below the line I drew, and one might get in Dartmouth, which I have above the line. Favoritism! And it appears your kids may be at private school, which tends to expose them to wealthy kids that are going off to full pay privates. In that scenario, the ED for full pay to Emory doesn't really make financial sense vs. in-state UVA or W&M if accepted there. If the kids really understand the expenses, which are extraordinary, and thought of it as coming out of their own pocket it might help. College costs have gone up significantly higher than the cost of living for over 40 years, and it has simply put a lot of families at the breaking point, or at a tough decision point in your case.

I hope someone else has some ideas.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would say the list price premium if law is intended graduate field is not warranted for Washington U, Tufts, or Emory over UVA and W&M. Schools like Harvard, Yale, Princeton, and Stanford are really difficult to decline, and it would also probably be tough for Columbia, Duke, etc., but not Vanderbilt, Northwestern, Notre Dame, Cornell etc. Probably no more than a dozen or so schools tops (you can exclude MIT and Caltech if not going engineering and science).

There hasn't been much real data offered in this thread, but I note that the top two publics in representation on a per capita basis at super elite Yale Law are . . . W&M and UVA. The top undergraduate schools represented at the great UVA Law school (ranked #8) are . . . UVA and W&M. Sometimes it isn't too bad to be a Virginian.

Use your EA, ED1, and ED2 sequence wisely and it should work out well for you. Someone had a good suggested order that I can't recall, but it made great sense.

+1. You make a lot of sense.

OP here. Sequence was ED Emory, Tufts, or Wash U (haven't decided). Think he only realistically has a shot at Emory so leaning ED there pending visit. Tufts and Wash U are very hard from DC area privates. Mob scene for these three schools at the Independent Schools Fair a few weeks bad (that was held at Georgetown Prep). If ED 1 fails, ED 2 Wake or William and Mary (probably W&M because of cost). At same EA Michigan, Chicago, and UVA (while doing ED 1).

See the problem? If ED succeeds at Emory, we would not know EA UVA and are obligated (First World problems). ED comes out a week before Christmas and UVA ED is end of January. Hence the question: is it worth it if we are committed to Emory full pay. No chance of financial aid and was told yesterday by a consultant Emory gives 2% merit. This kid won't get it. Sister might though.

Speaking of Sister, you mention schools that hard to deny for law school. What are your thoughts on Dartmouth? They are third in terms of the class of 2021 at UVA Law behind UVA and William and Mary undergrads?

You seem wise to appreciate your advise on these points.

I see your problem. I'm afraid I don't have any real wisdom. I can only give you my point of view. Starting from the position of having monetary constraints, Virginia residency, and realistic admissions chances at UVA and W&M, I'd look at schools in three categories: 1) Gotta make it happen somehow if fortunate enough to be admitted 2) Want to make it happen if admitted 3) Not really justified from ROI or opportunity perspective based on current financial situation. Category 1 is Harvard, Stanford, MIT, Yale, Princeton, and Caltech. Category 2 is probably something like Columbia, Duke, Penn, Dartmouth, Brown, Williams, Amherst, and Chicago. Category 3 would include schools like JHU, Georgetown, Vanderbilt, Wash U, Notre Dame, Northwestern, USC, Cornell, Emory, NYU, and Wesleyan. Different people will see this differently and there might be some exceptions based on kid's intended direction (e.g. USC Film School, Georgetown School of Foreign Service).

So your issue is one of your kids might get in Emory, which is below the line I drew, and one might get in Dartmouth, which I have above the line. Favoritism! And it appears your kids may be at private school, which tends to expose them to wealthy kids that are going off to full pay privates. In that scenario, the ED for full pay to Emory doesn't really make financial sense vs. in-state UVA or W&M if accepted there. If the kids really understand the expenses, which are extraordinary, and thought of it as coming out of their own pocket it might help. College costs have gone up significantly higher than the cost of living for over 40 years, and it has simply put a lot of families at the breaking point, or at a tough decision point in your case.

I hope someone else has some ideas.

Your tiers are a bit old. I know several students who get into Williams and Amherst but not Vandy and Emory. Maybe 10-15 years ago, but not today. The later schools are just as difficult if not more so.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would say the list price premium if law is intended graduate field is not warranted for Washington U, Tufts, or Emory over UVA and W&M. Schools like Harvard, Yale, Princeton, and Stanford are really difficult to decline, and it would also probably be tough for Columbia, Duke, etc., but not Vanderbilt, Northwestern, Notre Dame, Cornell etc. Probably no more than a dozen or so schools tops (you can exclude MIT and Caltech if not going engineering and science).

There hasn't been much real data offered in this thread, but I note that the top two publics in representation on a per capita basis at super elite Yale Law are . . . W&M and UVA. The top undergraduate schools represented at the great UVA Law school (ranked #8) are . . . UVA and W&M. Sometimes it isn't too bad to be a Virginian.

Use your EA, ED1, and ED2 sequence wisely and it should work out well for you. Someone had a good suggested order that I can't recall, but it made great sense.

+1. You make a lot of sense.

OP here. Sequence was ED Emory, Tufts, or Wash U (haven't decided). Think he only realistically has a shot at Emory so leaning ED there pending visit. Tufts and Wash U are very hard from DC area privates. Mob scene for these three schools at the Independent Schools Fair a few weeks bad (that was held at Georgetown Prep). If ED 1 fails, ED 2 Wake or William and Mary (probably W&M because of cost). At same EA Michigan, Chicago, and UVA (while doing ED 1).

See the problem? If ED succeeds at Emory, we would not know EA UVA and are obligated (First World problems). ED comes out a week before Christmas and UVA ED is end of January. Hence the question: is it worth it if we are committed to Emory full pay. No chance of financial aid and was told yesterday by a consultant Emory gives 2% merit. This kid won't get it. Sister might though.

Speaking of Sister, you mention schools that hard to deny for law school. What are your thoughts on Dartmouth? They are third in terms of the class of 2021 at UVA Law behind UVA and William and Mary undergrads?

You seem wise to appreciate your advise on these points.

I see your problem. I'm afraid I don't have any real wisdom. I can only give you my point of view. Starting from the position of having monetary constraints, Virginia residency, and realistic admissions chances at UVA and W&M, I'd look at schools in three categories: 1) Gotta make it happen somehow if fortunate enough to be admitted 2) Want to make it happen if admitted 3) Not really justified from ROI or opportunity perspective based on current financial situation. Category 1 is Harvard, Stanford, MIT, Yale, Princeton, and Caltech. Category 2 is probably something like Columbia, Duke, Penn, Dartmouth, Brown, Williams, Amherst, and Chicago. Category 3 would include schools like JHU, Georgetown, Vanderbilt, Wash U, Notre Dame, Northwestern, USC, Cornell, Emory, NYU, and Wesleyan. Different people will see this differently and there might be some exceptions based on kid's intended direction (e.g. USC Film School, Georgetown School of Foreign Service).

So your issue is one of your kids might get in Emory, which is below the line I drew, and one might get in Dartmouth, which I have above the line. Favoritism! And it appears your kids may be at private school, which tends to expose them to wealthy kids that are going off to full pay privates. In that scenario, the ED for full pay to Emory doesn't really make financial sense vs. in-state UVA or W&M if accepted there. If the kids really understand the expenses, which are extraordinary, and thought of it as coming out of their own pocket it might help. College costs have gone up significantly higher than the cost of living for over 40 years, and it has simply put a lot of families at the breaking point, or at a tough decision point in your case.

I hope someone else has some ideas.

I second and agree with the above analysis and the 3 categories - I would put Duke and Dartmouth in category 3 and cornell in 2 for engineering-oriented person, and duke+jhu in category 2 for pre-med, but otherwise, the split is right on in terms of slicing the optimal solution set on either side of UVA/W&M

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would say the list price premium if law is intended graduate field is not warranted for Washington U, Tufts, or Emory over UVA and W&M. Schools like Harvard, Yale, Princeton, and Stanford are really difficult to decline, and it would also probably be tough for Columbia, Duke, etc., but not Vanderbilt, Northwestern, Notre Dame, Cornell etc. Probably no more than a dozen or so schools tops (you can exclude MIT and Caltech if not going engineering and science).

There hasn't been much real data offered in this thread, but I note that the top two publics in representation on a per capita basis at super elite Yale Law are . . . W&M and UVA. The top undergraduate schools represented at the great UVA Law school (ranked #8) are . . . UVA and W&M. Sometimes it isn't too bad to be a Virginian.

Use your EA, ED1, and ED2 sequence wisely and it should work out well for you. Someone had a good suggested order that I can't recall, but it made great sense.

+1. You make a lot of sense.

OP here. Sequence was ED Emory, Tufts, or Wash U (haven't decided). Think he only realistically has a shot at Emory so leaning ED there pending visit. Tufts and Wash U are very hard from DC area privates. Mob scene for these three schools at the Independent Schools Fair a few weeks bad (that was held at Georgetown Prep). If ED 1 fails, ED 2 Wake or William and Mary (probably W&M because of cost). At same EA Michigan, Chicago, and UVA (while doing ED 1).

See the problem? If ED succeeds at Emory, we would not know EA UVA and are obligated (First World problems). ED comes out a week before Christmas and UVA ED is end of January. Hence the question: is it worth it if we are committed to Emory full pay. No chance of financial aid and was told yesterday by a consultant Emory gives 2% merit. This kid won't get it. Sister might though.

Speaking of Sister, you mention schools that hard to deny for law school. What are your thoughts on Dartmouth? They are third in terms of the class of 2021 at UVA Law behind UVA and William and Mary undergrads?

You seem wise to appreciate your advise on these points.

I see your problem. I'm afraid I don't have any real wisdom. I can only give you my point of view. Starting from the position of having monetary constraints, Virginia residency, and realistic admissions chances at UVA and W&M, I'd look at schools in three categories: 1) Gotta make it happen somehow if fortunate enough to be admitted 2) Want to make it happen if admitted 3) Not really justified from ROI or opportunity perspective based on current financial situation. Category 1 is Harvard, Stanford, MIT, Yale, Princeton, and Caltech. Category 2 is probably something like Columbia, Duke, Penn, Dartmouth, Brown, Williams, Amherst, and Chicago. Category 3 would include schools like JHU, Georgetown, Vanderbilt, Wash U, Notre Dame, Northwestern, USC, Cornell, Emory, NYU, and Wesleyan. Different people will see this differently and there might be some exceptions based on kid's intended direction (e.g. USC Film School, Georgetown School of Foreign Service).

So your issue is one of your kids might get in Emory, which is below the line I drew, and one might get in Dartmouth, which I have above the line. Favoritism! And it appears your kids may be at private school, which tends to expose them to wealthy kids that are going off to full pay privates. In that scenario, the ED for full pay to Emory doesn't really make financial sense vs. in-state UVA or W&M if accepted there. If the kids really understand the expenses, which are extraordinary, and thought of it as coming out of their own pocket it might help. College costs have gone up significantly higher than the cost of living for over 40 years, and it has simply put a lot of families at the breaking point, or at a tough decision point in your case.

I hope someone else has some ideas.

I second and agree with the above analysis and the 3 categories - I would put Duke and Dartmouth in category 3 and cornell in 2 for engineering-oriented person, and duke+jhu in category 2 for pre-med, but otherwise, the split is right on in terms of slicing the optimal solution set on either side of UVA/W&M

Thanks I am OP again (Old Poster by the length of this thread ha ha). So I have Category 1 as you have it as well as Category 2 i.e. the original category poster. To this last poster, I would say I have all ivies in at least Category 2 along with may be a select few others like Duke and may be Hopkins. Georgetown does really really well in NYC and DC for whatever reasons (Ghost of Patrick Ewing and the 1985 National Championship) so they are probably tier 2 for our purposes but bottom of it. May be 3 given they are ranked below Wash U and Emory in US News.

As a lawyer that went to a top 60ish undergrad and a top 60 law school (but have done well by finding my niche and am GC of a financial company (moderate size)), I can say schools do make a difference in law and probably investment banking. My two older kids are headed to Law School and the younger probably business. Perhaps I am jaded by my struggles but I think even with my very strong resume in my field, I have been rejected from employment opportunities because of my schooling; and I don't mean large firms first year out of law school. I mean 15+ years out. I basically, through experience, made my way to big firms and then in-house. Started int the government then three law firms. then in-house ever since.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would say the list price premium if law is intended graduate field is not warranted for Washington U, Tufts, or Emory over UVA and W&M. Schools like Harvard, Yale, Princeton, and Stanford are really difficult to decline, and it would also probably be tough for Columbia, Duke, etc., but not Vanderbilt, Northwestern, Notre Dame, Cornell etc. Probably no more than a dozen or so schools tops (you can exclude MIT and Caltech if not going engineering and science).

There hasn't been much real data offered in this thread, but I note that the top two publics in representation on a per capita basis at super elite Yale Law are . . . W&M and UVA. The top undergraduate schools represented at the great UVA Law school (ranked #8) are . . . UVA and W&M. Sometimes it isn't too bad to be a Virginian.

Use your EA, ED1, and ED2 sequence wisely and it should work out well for you. Someone had a good suggested order that I can't recall, but it made great sense.

+1. You make a lot of sense.

OP here. Sequence was ED Emory, Tufts, or Wash U (haven't decided). Think he only realistically has a shot at Emory so leaning ED there pending visit. Tufts and Wash U are very hard from DC area privates. Mob scene for these three schools at the Independent Schools Fair a few weeks bad (that was held at Georgetown Prep). If ED 1 fails, ED 2 Wake or William and Mary (probably W&M because of cost). At same EA Michigan, Chicago, and UVA (while doing ED 1).

See the problem? If ED succeeds at Emory, we would not know EA UVA and are obligated (First World problems). ED comes out a week before Christmas and UVA ED is end of January. Hence the question: is it worth it if we are committed to Emory full pay. No chance of financial aid and was told yesterday by a consultant Emory gives 2% merit. This kid won't get it. Sister might though.

Speaking of Sister, you mention schools that hard to deny for law school. What are your thoughts on Dartmouth? They are third in terms of the class of 2021 at UVA Law behind UVA and William and Mary undergrads?

You seem wise to appreciate your advise on these points.

I see your problem. I'm afraid I don't have any real wisdom. I can only give you my point of view. Starting from the position of having monetary constraints, Virginia residency, and realistic admissions chances at UVA and W&M, I'd look at schools in three categories: 1) Gotta make it happen somehow if fortunate enough to be admitted 2) Want to make it happen if admitted 3) Not really justified from ROI or opportunity perspective based on current financial situation. Category 1 is Harvard, Stanford, MIT, Yale, Princeton, and Caltech. Category 2 is probably something like Columbia, Duke, Penn, Dartmouth, Brown, Williams, Amherst, and Chicago. Category 3 would include schools like JHU, Georgetown, Vanderbilt, Wash U, Notre Dame, Northwestern, USC, Cornell, Emory, NYU, and Wesleyan. Different people will see this differently and there might be some exceptions based on kid's intended direction (e.g. USC Film School, Georgetown School of Foreign Service).

So your issue is one of your kids might get in Emory, which is below the line I drew, and one might get in Dartmouth, which I have above the line. Favoritism! And it appears your kids may be at private school, which tends to expose them to wealthy kids that are going off to full pay privates. In that scenario, the ED for full pay to Emory doesn't really make financial sense vs. in-state UVA or W&M if accepted there. If the kids really understand the expenses, which are extraordinary, and thought of it as coming out of their own pocket it might help. College costs have gone up significantly higher than the cost of living for over 40 years, and it has simply put a lot of families at the breaking point, or at a tough decision point in your case.

I hope someone else has some ideas.

Your tiers are a bit old. I know several students who get into Williams and Amherst but not Vandy and Emory. Maybe 10-15 years ago, but not today. The later schools are just as difficult if not more so.

It wasn't a tiering of admissions difficulty (although they certainly have some correlation). Williams and Amherst continue to have excellent placement in law, medicine, and areas of business, and also rate high for students going on to get PHDs. If you noticed that Yale Law School publication, Amherst had 18 at Yale Law and Williams 13, which is great for schools of that size.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would say the list price premium if law is intended graduate field is not warranted for Washington U, Tufts, or Emory over UVA and W&M. Schools like Harvard, Yale, Princeton, and Stanford are really difficult to decline, and it would also probably be tough for Columbia, Duke, etc., but not Vanderbilt, Northwestern, Notre Dame, Cornell etc. Probably no more than a dozen or so schools tops (you can exclude MIT and Caltech if not going engineering and science).

There hasn't been much real data offered in this thread, but I note that the top two publics in representation on a per capita basis at super elite Yale Law are . . . W&M and UVA. The top undergraduate schools represented at the great UVA Law school (ranked #8) are . . . UVA and W&M. Sometimes it isn't too bad to be a Virginian.

Use your EA, ED1, and ED2 sequence wisely and it should work out well for you. Someone had a good suggested order that I can't recall, but it made great sense.

+1. You make a lot of sense.

OP here. Sequence was ED Emory, Tufts, or Wash U (haven't decided). Think he only realistically has a shot at Emory so leaning ED there pending visit. Tufts and Wash U are very hard from DC area privates. Mob scene for these three schools at the Independent Schools Fair a few weeks bad (that was held at Georgetown Prep). If ED 1 fails, ED 2 Wake or William and Mary (probably W&M because of cost). At same EA Michigan, Chicago, and UVA (while doing ED 1).

See the problem? If ED succeeds at Emory, we would not know EA UVA and are obligated (First World problems). ED comes out a week before Christmas and UVA ED is end of January. Hence the question: is it worth it if we are committed to Emory full pay. No chance of financial aid and was told yesterday by a consultant Emory gives 2% merit. This kid won't get it. Sister might though.

Speaking of Sister, you mention schools that hard to deny for law school. What are your thoughts on Dartmouth? They are third in terms of the class of 2021 at UVA Law behind UVA and William and Mary undergrads?

You seem wise to appreciate your advise on these points.

I see your problem. I'm afraid I don't have any real wisdom. I can only give you my point of view. Starting from the position of having monetary constraints, Virginia residency, and realistic admissions chances at UVA and W&M, I'd look at schools in three categories: 1) Gotta make it happen somehow if fortunate enough to be admitted 2) Want to make it happen if admitted 3) Not really justified from ROI or opportunity perspective based on current financial situation. Category 1 is Harvard, Stanford, MIT, Yale, Princeton, and Caltech. Category 2 is probably something like Columbia, Duke, Penn, Dartmouth, Brown, Williams, Amherst, and Chicago. Category 3 would include schools like JHU, Georgetown, Vanderbilt, Wash U, Notre Dame, Northwestern, USC, Cornell, Emory, NYU, and Wesleyan. Different people will see this differently and there might be some exceptions based on kid's intended direction (e.g. USC Film School, Georgetown School of Foreign Service).

So your issue is one of your kids might get in Emory, which is below the line I drew, and one might get in Dartmouth, which I have above the line. Favoritism! And it appears your kids may be at private school, which tends to expose them to wealthy kids that are going off to full pay privates. In that scenario, the ED for full pay to Emory doesn't really make financial sense vs. in-state UVA or W&M if accepted there. If the kids really understand the expenses, which are extraordinary, and thought of it as coming out of their own pocket it might help. College costs have gone up significantly higher than the cost of living for over 40 years, and it has simply put a lot of families at the breaking point, or at a tough decision point in your case.

I hope someone else has some ideas.

Your tiers are a bit old. I know several students who get into Williams and Amherst but not Vandy and Emory. Maybe 10-15 years ago, but not today. The later schools are just as difficult if not more so.

It wasn't a tiering of admissions difficulty (although they certainly have some correlation). Williams and Amherst continue to have excellent placement in law, medicine, and areas of business, and also rate high for students going on to get PHDs. If you noticed that Yale Law School publication, Amherst had 18 at Yale Law and Williams 13, which is great for schools of that size.

Yale is not the only good law school. Emory has very good placement at Harvard, Duke, and UChicago. There are other factors like proximity that have to be adjusted for. Also, admissions difficulty is important, if one tries to ED to Williams and Amherst and doesn't get in, then Vandy or Emory RD is 98% of the time is not going to happen.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would say the list price premium if law is intended graduate field is not warranted for Washington U, Tufts, or Emory over UVA and W&M. Schools like Harvard, Yale, Princeton, and Stanford are really difficult to decline, and it would also probably be tough for Columbia, Duke, etc., but not Vanderbilt, Northwestern, Notre Dame, Cornell etc. Probably no more than a dozen or so schools tops (you can exclude MIT and Caltech if not going engineering and science).

There hasn't been much real data offered in this thread, but I note that the top two publics in representation on a per capita basis at super elite Yale Law are . . . W&M and UVA. The top undergraduate schools represented at the great UVA Law school (ranked #8) are . . . UVA and W&M. Sometimes it isn't too bad to be a Virginian.

Use your EA, ED1, and ED2 sequence wisely and it should work out well for you. Someone had a good suggested order that I can't recall, but it made great sense.

+1. You make a lot of sense.

OP here. Sequence was ED Emory, Tufts, or Wash U (haven't decided). Think he only realistically has a shot at Emory so leaning ED there pending visit. Tufts and Wash U are very hard from DC area privates. Mob scene for these three schools at the Independent Schools Fair a few weeks bad (that was held at Georgetown Prep). If ED 1 fails, ED 2 Wake or William and Mary (probably W&M because of cost). At same EA Michigan, Chicago, and UVA (while doing ED 1).

See the problem? If ED succeeds at Emory, we would not know EA UVA and are obligated (First World problems). ED comes out a week before Christmas and UVA ED is end of January. Hence the question: is it worth it if we are committed to Emory full pay. No chance of financial aid and was told yesterday by a consultant Emory gives 2% merit. This kid won't get it. Sister might though.

Speaking of Sister, you mention schools that hard to deny for law school. What are your thoughts on Dartmouth? They are third in terms of the class of 2021 at UVA Law behind UVA and William and Mary undergrads?

You seem wise to appreciate your advise on these points.

I see your problem. I'm afraid I don't have any real wisdom. I can only give you my point of view. Starting from the position of having monetary constraints, Virginia residency, and realistic admissions chances at UVA and W&M, I'd look at schools in three categories: 1) Gotta make it happen somehow if fortunate enough to be admitted 2) Want to make it happen if admitted 3) Not really justified from ROI or opportunity perspective based on current financial situation. Category 1 is Harvard, Stanford, MIT, Yale, Princeton, and Caltech. Category 2 is probably something like Columbia, Duke, Penn, Dartmouth, Brown, Williams, Amherst, and Chicago. Category 3 would include schools like JHU, Georgetown, Vanderbilt, Wash U, Notre Dame, Northwestern, USC, Cornell, Emory, NYU, and Wesleyan. Different people will see this differently and there might be some exceptions based on kid's intended direction (e.g. USC Film School, Georgetown School of Foreign Service).

So your issue is one of your kids might get in Emory, which is below the line I drew, and one might get in Dartmouth, which I have above the line. Favoritism! And it appears your kids may be at private school, which tends to expose them to wealthy kids that are going off to full pay privates. In that scenario, the ED for full pay to Emory doesn't really make financial sense vs. in-state UVA or W&M if accepted there. If the kids really understand the expenses, which are extraordinary, and thought of it as coming out of their own pocket it might help. College costs have gone up significantly higher than the cost of living for over 40 years, and it has simply put a lot of families at the breaking point, or at a tough decision point in your case.

I hope someone else has some ideas.

Your tiers are a bit old. I know several students who get into Williams and Amherst but not Vandy and Emory. Maybe 10-15 years ago, but not today. The later schools are just as difficult if not more so.

It wasn't a tiering of admissions difficulty (although they certainly have some correlation). Williams and Amherst continue to have excellent placement in law, medicine, and areas of business, and also rate high for students going on to get PHDs. If you noticed that Yale Law School publication, Amherst had 18 at Yale Law and Williams 13, which is great for schools of that size.

Yale is not the only good law school. Emory has very good placement at Harvard, Duke, and UChicago. There are other factors like proximity that have to be adjusted for. Also, admissions difficulty is important, if one tries to ED to Williams and Amherst and doesn't get in, then Vandy or Emory RD is 98% of the time is not going to happen.

To its credit, Emory does post law applications and admissions. 4 of 53 were admitted to Harvard, 4 of 37 at Chicago, and 14 of 54 at Duke in most recent year posted. Yale was 1 of 21. 1 matriculated at Yale, 4 Harvard, 2 Chicago, and 5 Duke.