<p>And they give the avg. SAT for all schools lumped together -
CR 697, M 722, W 705. </p>
<p>BUT the secret is the breakdown of SAT by school. I'm guessing they are afraid to say 'cause it would make the some schools look relatively bad. It couldn't be TOO bad though 'cause College is almost 2 of 3 students - even if the others all had 800 M (and they don't) there' s a limit to how low College could be and still come up w. 722 avg. </p>
<p>At typ. eng school, M is 50 pts higher than CR. Let's say Penn eng. is 740M, 690 CR as a guess (MIT = 755/712)</p>
<p>At Wharton, we can guesstimate that M is 25 pts higher than CR (same as overall Pen avg, less than for Eng) and that M is same as Eng , so we get 715 CR 740 M.</p>
<p>We'll solve for the College (ignore nursing) :</p>
<p>CR 693 M 712 (vs 697 722 overall avg)</p>
<p>which would be in range with other lower Ivies (Brown, Dartmouth, Columbia ) that are in the 690 to 710 range.</p>
<p>So though I don't have the real numbers I'll bet I'm close.</p>
<p>Contrary to the myth, even if you make some fairly aggressive assumptions about the other schools (avg Wh & E. MSAT of 740) , since College is 2 out of 3 students, the numbers cant move that much.</p>
<p>"They want to stress that all the schools are equally selective "</p>
<p>This is clearly a lie. Authorities (admissions office, gov., etc.) will give you "spin" many times which if you think about it can't be true. See my post above - there's not an engineering school in the country where M is not 40 or 50 pts above CR. Once you take that as a given, it's mathematically impossible for all schools to be "equally selective". Common sense also tells you that all the schools from the #1 B-school Wharton to Nursing which is not a preferred career to Penn's #28 Eng. school cannot be "equally selective".</p>
<p>I believe you when you say that they say that - it sounds like a typical admissions office spin, but do you have a link or a source?</p>
<p>I agree w/you JohnnyK - you should never judge individuals based on group characteristics. But that doesn't mean its ok for the admissions office to spout propaganda that will not stand up . It's very easy, almost scary how people will repeat empty slogans that they are fed without thinking thru what they really mean, especially if they contain magic words like "equality" that people naturally want to believe.</p>
<p>Actually my first reaction was that that was really high. But on second thought, it's not THAT high. I know Princeton and Columbia had ~24% this year, Yale is traditionally lower ~18-19%. MIT is like 11% and Harvard ~21-22%. But Penn likes to use ED a bit more so that probably explains it. It seemed high to me because I was subconciously comparing it to last year's harvard, yale, princeton, columbia admit rate of =<10% regular. </p>
<p>With that said, I dont think "selectivity" determines the academic quality of a school at all for the most part. Just look @ Penn, before it started using ED to attract candidates that truly loved Penn, it was considered the easiest Ivy to get into. After it used ED, it jumped 10 spots on USWNR and definitely established itself nicely.</p>
<p>29% is not high for Penn - it's a tiny bit higher than last year (1%) because ED applications were down slightly and they know how many spots they want to fill (just under 1/2 the class from ED) - that's the real # they are looking at and the yield is just a side effect of the # of apps that they received. For whatever odd reason, a lot of school's ED apps were down this year, Penn a lot less than some (Yale down 20%). I think part of it is that people at the lower end of the applicant pool have now heard how supposedly impossible it is to get in so they set their sights lower (more realistically) on ED not wanted to waste their one shot on a school where they think they have no chance anyway. If you look at the accepted applicant stats (SAT's up) , even as the pool got slightly smaller the quality of the applicants went up, so the slight increase in yield doesn't mean that Penn is now less selective.</p>
<p>I'm not sure whether the increase in ED at Penn was the cause of the increase in USWNR rankings or a sort of virtuous cycle - as the school went up in rank for other reasons, Penn must have realized that they had a chance at "grabbing" people who they would otherwise lose in later rounds (Penn loses more than 50% of applicants in two way matchups with every other Ivy except Cornell). It's a great deal for both - applicants get certainty in December and not having to do 15 applications, Penn gets people who might have gotten into some other Ivy who they'd mostly lose. The ED admits boost up Penns USNWR stats (for one thing you get 100% yield for 1/2 the class, making up for losing a lot of admits in the 2nd round) and make the school more appealing for the RD round too. That's why when Harvard offered the sucker bet "lets get rid of ED" (knowing H wins most 2 ways with almost every other school) Penn said "hell no".</p>
<p>Yup so true. If any other Ivy (with the exception of Harvard, Yale, Princeton) got rid of early, only Harvard will see a net benefit (large surge in RD apps and a lot lot lower acceptance rate). Heard Harvard is planning on launching a $5billion+ endowment campaign as soon as they settle a new prez. God like they need more money... -_-;</p>
<p>Percy, when the Penn adcom did an info session at my school, someone asked her which school is easier to get into. She answered that the school that meets all your interests is the best one to apply to and tried to say that all the schools are equally selective. I doubt that anyone bought it, but the admissions office does not want a bunch of girls applying to engineering and boys applying to Nursing just to have them try to transfer to Wharton or CAS after frosh year. Also, Penn's engineering may be 28th, but it is tied with Harvard, and I would assume taht Harvard is more selective than Penn. Purdue, Penn State, and Illinois are ranked above Penn, Harvard, and Columbia in engineering, but I am pretty damn sure that the latter 3 are more selective.</p>
<p>Adidas, I think those numbers come out after RD acceptances.</p>
<p>haha truazn, you're wrong too. you're using graduate rankings :)</p>
<p>here's a summary of the undergrad engineering rankings. you got penn and harvard tied at #30, and columbia at #25. Now the difference between penn/harvard and columbia is one rating point (3.6 v 3.7). the way US News ranks programs is by simply sending out questionaires to deans and other administration of engineering schools and asking them to rate a school on a scale of 1-5. That means the difference between a 3.6 and a 3.7 is very neglible. Essentially, all three schools are "ranked" the same...</p>
<p>the only program that is really strong in Penn's engineering department is bioengineering which is 6th in the nation according to USNWR
Harvard's engineering program doesn't even rank in some of the majors im interested in</p>