<p>Xiggi,
Any information on other more competitive schools, public Ivies, LAC’s and state flagships?</p>
<p>Xiggi - some of these numbers seem off based on the articles above (check Penn, Princeton, MIT).</p>
<p>^^Corrected Tables 
**Ivy+2 Admits Applic Rate**
Brown 2,692 30,946 8.70%
Columb 2,419 34,929 6.93%
Cornell 6,534 36,392 17.95%
Dartmo 2,178 22,385 9.73%
Harvar 2,158 34,950 6.17%
MIT 1,715 17,909 9.58%
Penn 3,880 31,659 12.26%
Princet 2,282 27,189 8.39%
Stanfor 2,427 34,348 7.07%
Yale 2,006 27,282 7.35%</p>
<p>**
Select Admits Applic Rate**
Chicago 3,446 21,773 15.83%
Duke 3,739 29,689 12.59%
JHU 3,550 19,388 18.31%
NorthWe 5,575 30,975 18.00%
NotDam 3,995 16,543 24.15%
Tufts 3,735 17,130 21.80%
WUSTL 4,440 28,826 15.40%</p>
<p>**LACs Admits Applic Rate**
Barnard 1,284 5,154 24.91%
Bates 1,396 5,195 26.87%
Bowdoin 1,022 6,554 15.59%
Buckne 2,161 7,937 27.23%
Carlet 1,474 4,977 29.62%
CMC 619 4,481 13.81%
Colby 1,505 5,175 29.08%
Dickins 2,531 6,061 41.76%
Grinne 1,315 2,966 44.34%
Swart 977 6,547 14.92%</p>
<p>**Public Admits Applic Rate**
UCLA 15,551 61,513 25.28%
UNC 6,965 23,726 29.36%
UVA 7,750 24,010 32.28%
</p>
<p>Thanks!
Anyone know where to go for more colleges? For OOS numbers of all the publics?</p>
<p>xiggi,</p>
<p>Is there some reason for leaving Vanderbilt off your table? As per your own post #2, and the VU web site, admit rate at this point is 15.45%.</p>
<p>Or did you confuse WUSt.L and Vanderbilt?</p>
<p>What about Emory and Rice?</p>
<p>What we meant to say was, thanks, Ziggy, and those of us who want the information about other colleges will seek it out and post it here.</p>
<p>"Columbia adds another dimension as they “try” to present the numbers for the College and the Engineering school separately. "</p>
<p>That’s exactly what they should do, if they have different applicant pools applying to different colleges there. If you are applying to their engineering college, and you are trying to assess your admissions odds vs. other engineering schools you are applying to, say cooper Union for example, why would you want to loook at numbers with Columbia College, which you are not applying to, mixed in??? That gives a highly distorted view of the actual admissions profile and stats of the people you are actually competing with, and who are actually attending the engineering college.</p>
<p>It used to be that every university that maintained separate colleges with separate admissions pools, where admissions was done by college, reported the admissions stats individually by college. It is IMO only because US News decided to only process data consolidated over all a university’s colleges that reporting by individual college stopped at many schools. That is a disservice to applicants who will be applying to only particular colleges of those universities, because it gives them less accurate information about their admissions odds, and most applicable cohort, than if the data was reported separately by college. As it should be, and used to be by all of them.</p>
<p>However, if you insist that all data for all of a university’s disparate colleges should be consolidated, despite the fact that admissions is done separately by college and they have separate admissions pools, and you can only apply to a college there, not some aggregate of all the disparate colleges at that university, then I might ask where is Columbia’s College of General Studies??</p>
<p>Columbia is pretty transparent by releasing both overall and individual school numbers. </p>
<p>The School of General Studies is a separate Admissions Office so their data is separate until it comes time for the Common Data Set when all students are enrolled. They are the most selective non-traditional college in the country. </p>
<p>Columbia’s % in the Top 10% did not change from this year to last year or the year before.</p>
<p>For the Class of 2012 (reported in US News rankings 2009-2010), 97% were in the Top 10%. </p>
<p>For the Class of 2013 (reported in US News rankings 2010-2011, the current rankings), 97%. </p>
<p>For the Class of 2014 (will be reported in US News rankings 2011-2012), 97%.</p>
<p>[
](image)</p>
<p>Is this a typo?</p>
<p>George Washington’s acceptance rate increased slightly, from 31.5% to 32%, according to the GW Hatchet.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>This statistic (about Harvard) strikes me as ridiculously inaccurate considering that the 25th percentile of Harvard’s SAT scores is traditionally around a 700 on each section.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>xiggi, you are correct here.</p>
<p>For instance, the class of 2014 at Columbia had a 9.44% acceptance rate after the 75 kids that were admitted from the waitlist are taken into account, yet Columbia continues to use the pre waitlist admit figure of 9.16% even today - notice the 9.2% that was used in the Columbia press release.</p>
<p>My guess is that Columbia is going to have to admit about 100-200 kids from the waitlist this year, pushing their acceptance rate in the 7.2-7.5% range, yet you will never see that reported by Columbia.</p>
<p>I’ll add this one! thanks, xiggi!</p>
<p>Duke</p>
<p>[3,739</a> offered spots in Class of 2015 | The Chronicle](<a href=“http://www.dukechronicle.com/article/3739-offered-spots-class-2015]3,739”>http://www.dukechronicle.com/article/3739-offered-spots-class-2015)</p>
<p>The University offered 3,094 applicants the chance to join Duke’s Class of 2015 yesterday. Combined with the 645 high school students already admitted under Duke’s binding early decision program in December, a total of 3,739 seniors have been admitted this year. The acceptance rate for regular decision applicants was 10.8 percent.</p>
<p>IIRC, last year Duke did the same thing, they admitted hundereds from their waitlist but did not adjust their reported statistics.</p>
<p>I want to note that despite other reasons to doubt Columbia’s transparency, their division of the school is not one of them. Columbia does, in fact, report its overall acceptance rate and I think that as a school that requires students to apply to specific schools/colleges within the university, separate admissions rates should be noted. In fact, I would argue that UPenn is much less transparent because it does not show admissions for its components (and it is clear the Wharton deflates higher acceptance rates at Arts and Sciences).</p>
<p>Also, I do not understand how Columbia Fu Engineering is more selective than MIT. I think this is a great example of how selectivity does not equate quality and that we should step back and begin to downplay selectivity in our assessment of college excellence.</p>
<p>Just got an e-mail from Rice. </p>
<p>"We have just completed another record-breaking year in the Rice admission office! The Admission Committee has now reviewed and rendered decisions on 13,804 applicants - up 12% over last year. Once the coaches for spring sports complete their recruitment, we anticipate our final number to climb slightly. As you can imagine, the selection process was difficult, but as thoughtful as possible in light of the high quality of the applicant pool. We admitted 19% of those who applied in order to fill 950 first-year spaces. The SAT middle 50% score range of those offered admission was 1410-1540; the middle 50% ACT range was 31-34. "</p>
<p>What impact does this have on the other, too lowly to be mentioned, schools that we mere mortals applied to? Does anyone have those stats, so that we can feel good about our admissions?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>the answer is very simple:</p>
<p>Fu is not more selective than MIT</p>
<p>Class of 2015 Acceptance Rates
9.9% - Columbia Fu Engineering
9.6% - MIT</p>
<p>also, the quality of the applicant pool level is much higher at MIT for engineers than Columbia - the top top potential engineering students will all apply to MIT but not necessarily to Columbia</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The Columbia number of 9.9% is not comparable to MIT 9.6% number and similarly any college with an ED and SCEA are not comparable to a college with EA or no early program.</p>
<p>The reason is that the yield of ED is 99% and so the colleges don’t have to take more student in Regular Decision. Without an ED the number would have been close to 14% for Columbia. </p>
<p>Similarly the Columbia College 6.4% is not comparable to Harvard 6.2% because without ED Columbia college number would be around 10%.</p>