<p>Hey I did apply to COE 
how did you know?</p>
<p>Update: Penn’s apps are up 17% this year, which should result in a 13.3% admit rate. Catching up, as I had predicted.</p>
<p>Update: Brown’s apps are up 20% this year, which should result in a 9% admit rate. Staying ahead of Penn, as predicted.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>lol, I don’t understand why it’s such a big deal to keep tabs. Both Penn and Brown are great, there’s no need to always one-up other schools muerteapablo.</p>
<p>I think there’s a case for selectivity parity between a 9% and 13% acceptance rate, especially when places like MIT and Swarthmore, which are as selective as Brown (and in MIT’s case, more so) are also posting rates around 13%.</p>
<p>Remember, acceptance rate is only a minor part of measuring selectivity. Average SAT and class rank are arguably much more important, and in both of those metrics, Penn is easily on par with any school but HYPMS.</p>
<p>Still, major kudos to Brown for maintaining such stellar results for a second year.</p>
<p>Very informative thread indeed guys! Muerte, i love you man. In spite of your Pen bias you are always reasonable with your arguments</p>
<p>
Muerte is indeed reasonable most of the time, which makes him outstandingly reasonable by CC standards. Heck, he even defended Brown over in the Columbia forum, and he really didn’t have to do that.
BUT, there’s a historical fact that Penn folk, including Muerte, have been skimping for many years now:
Both Penn and Brown internals disclose that Brown wins the balance against Penn, and has done so since the late 1970s.
Yup, every year, without exception. And I have that fact quite recently from “One Who Knows.”
In fact, the only time in the last 30 years that Brown did not win the balance against each of Columbia, Dartmouth, Penn, and Cornell was a three-year stretch beginning four years ago, when it either tied or narrowly lost to Columbia.
But Brown is now beating Columbia again, as it did for 25 years or so.
My source? “One who knows.”
And yes, they do crunch the numbers, sometimes belatedly, depending on workload, but they crunch 'em.</p>
<p>^^And no, I did not resort to the NBER “Revealed Preferences” ranking, because I didn’t want to wave the red flag at a certain Penn ■■■■■, who hates the NBER finding of Brown number 7 and Penn number 12.
I agree that NBER is (1) old and (2) sketchy.
But we don’t need NBER. No college placement officer of decades experience (horse’s mouth here) was surprised by that NBER report. Every placement officer has known Brown’s sneakily fourth-in-the-Ivy selectivity position.
Has to do with the pool Brown gets. Has to do with Brown’s overlaps.
For that matter, it has to do with the pool Penn gets, if you catch my drift, but, in the interest of political correctness, I wouldn’t touch that controversy with a bargepole.</p>
<p>Great …wher can I find a post for MSE CIS proram at University of Penn…cause I hve been searching for that actively.</p>
<p>tnedifnocegelloc - </p>
<p>You’re probably the most interesting poster on this site, simply in terms of style and content. But what’s the point of all this sourceless information? And how close ARE the preference numbers you claim to have access to? Be exacting.</p>
<p>Also, very interesting to see that Columbia was beating Brown for a little while, as I suspected it might (and honestly, I expected Penn to be also, but you claim this is not the case).</p>
<p>Regardless of all of that, please explain the differences in the Brown and Penn applicant pools.</p>
<p>tnedifnocegelloc is interesting, but almost always making claims which are either baseless or inaccurate.</p>