Admission statistics for Class of 2015

<p>Only enrollment specialists and people “on the other side” should pay attention to the yield. Well, perhaps you can add a few bragging alumni to the mix. Why is the yield a poor comparative metric? </p>

<p>Should we compare the high yields of U of Nebraska and BYU to … Harvard’s? Aren’t they high? But then, what is there to be learned from comparing BYU’s yield to Tulane’s? We may as well study how different fun and debauchery are in Utah and NOLA! There are simply too many elements in a yield to try to analyze it, at least as an applicant. Depending on the school, the admitted pool could be composed of people who have PLENTY of choices or PLENTY of people who have few better choice. Selectivity or popularity contest? Doesn’t matter! </p>

<p>By the way, USNews will probably (or has) give in to the temptation of using the yield in one way or the other.</p>

<p>Columbia accepts large numbers of NY natives and all faculty
kids. Those two subgroups are quite large.</p>

<p>What’s nice about going to a school with a high # of ED students, high yield, and many remaining candidates taken off the wait list is that incoming freshmen are excited and happy to be there, and not sullen because they have had to “settle.” Just sayin…</p>

<p>often it has been argued that the ratio of Yield to admit rate is a better measure of the school’s “desirability”. What this does is to “normalize” the Yield rate by adjusting it with the admit rate. Hence, school’s like BYU with high yield rates are adjusted by their high admit rates to be able to more reasonably compare to other schools.</p>

<p>you might find this interesting:</p>

<p>[Mathacle’s</a> Blog: Yield to Admit-Rate Ratio (YAR) for Class of 2012](<a href=“http://mathacle.blogspot.com/2010/03/yield-to-admit-rate-yar-index-for-class.html]Mathacle’s”>Mathacle's Blog: Yield to Admit (YAR) Ratio for Class of 2012)</p>

<p>and</p>

<p><a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/college-search-selection/924541-new-ranking-system-desirability-ratio.html[/url]”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/college-search-selection/924541-new-ranking-system-desirability-ratio.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p>xiggi…among the ivies, Cornell really looks like it doesn’t belong in the ivies …18 % vs 8-9%, really seems like an outlier to me…also Notre Dame’s 24% really kicks it out of the selective crew.</p>

<p>Isn’t Cornell much larger than the other ivies? Which could explain the higher acceptance rates, when you have many more slots available.</p>

<p>“Go Blue Jays”
"Cornell really looks like it doesn’t belong in the ivies …18 % vs 8-9%, really seems like an outlier to me…also Notre Dame’s 24% really kicks it out of the selective crew. "</p>

<p>Ah, Blue Jays. So the Ivies are not about academic excellence, nor even about an athletic league, but are a collection of schools whose pathetic purpose is the gamesmanship of an admissions process? </p>

<p>Perhaps you are correct.</p>

<p>Of Cornell’s seven undergraduate colleges, three are state-assisted, while the other four are privately endowed.</p>

<p>The three state-assisted colleges of Cornell, the ILR School, the College of Agriculture and Life Science, and the College of Human Ecology, were created by an Act of State Legislature and receive partial funding from New York State. The state-assisted colleges are partnership colleges of SUNY, the State University of New York, and charge reduced tuition for New York State residents. Although tuition is reduced, the rates are more than those charged by SUNY colleges.</p>

<p>Whether you’re enrolled in a state-assisted or an endowed college, you are a Cornell undergraduate with access to all the courses, activities, facilities and services available throughout all seven of the undergraduate schools.</p>

<p>This shows the breakdown of selectivity at Cornell. This was for the Class of 2011 … not this year</p>

<p>Overall Cornell Admit Applied %
Agriculture & Life Sciences 975 4,329 22.52
Architecture, Art & Planning 163 956 17.05
Arts & Sciences 2,634 14,662 17.96
Engineering 1,853 5,999 30.89
Hotel Administration 200 968 20.66
Human Ecology 434 1,229 35.31
Industrial & Labor Relations 244 876 27.85
No College Designated 0 1,364 0.00
TOTAL 6,503 30,383 21.40</p>

<p>totally agree with you…</p>

<p>USC admitted 2,600 freshman from 35,000applicants. Can’t find my sons letter from Harvey Mudd but will post it when I find it</p>

<p>USC admitted 2,600 out of 35,000 can’t find my sons Harvey Mudd folder but will post that when I find it, or when he gets home</p>

<p>

</p>

<ol>
<li><p>Perhaps USC hopes to ENROLL 2,600 freshmen, but to get there they admitted a lot more.
USC 37,107 Applicants 8,449 Admitted - 22.8 percent Admit Rate</p></li>
<li><p>Harvey Mudd 3,144 Applicants 614 Admitted - 19.5 percent AR.</p></li>
</ol>

<p>I was interested from statistical viewpoint…if you put together a bell curve with a calculated standard deviation from the mean, both Cornell and 'Dame would be likely be > 1 standard deviation from the mean, likely disproving the null hypothesis…therefore, on a purely statistical basis, those two schools don’t belong to their respective groups…important if your kid got into a bunch of ivies or selectives, and was deciding between them all…in the real world, I think Cornell IS perceived as a distant relative of the ivies, they even had some sort of administrative push to improve their numbers, and therefore a tacit acknowledgement of their deficiencies. sorry…just sayin…</p>

<p>and, perhaps this is a “pearl” for those hoping for a Columbia acceptance…try to get into Manhattan School of Music’s precollege ( Saturdays only, yes, but to get in, and stay in, your kid practices 2-3 hours a day)…the records of their grads’ acceptances are printed on their graduation flyers, they get amazing numbers in, and Columbia is just down the block too…Columbia doesn’t seem to care about Intel/Siemens, but they want kids who are musically inclined.</p>

<p>Re# 129, the most recent data, for the Cornell freshman class entering fall 2010, is as follows:</p>

<p>Ag 21.2%; Hum Ec 31.3%; ILR 20.1%; Architecture 14.6%; Arts 15.7%;
Engineering 21.7%; Hotel 26.0%; Aggregate 18.4%.</p>

<p>Does anyone have the stats for Tulane University or Kenyon College?</p>

<p>Updated list:</p>

<p><a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/12351230-post54.html[/url]”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/12351230-post54.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p>Comrade Blue Jay, think of me as your local wrecker and capitalist roader [but not shirker]. Exactly the kind of guy Uncle Joe’s NKVD kept Grim Reaping. So, the kind of guy who has a question or two as regards your magnificently argued for assertions.
You say: “I was interested from statistical viewpoint…if you put together a bell curve with a calculated standard deviation from the mean, both Cornell and 'Dame would be likely be > 1 standard deviation from the mean, likely disproving the null hypothesis…”</p>

<p>First, what is this mean you are proposing for your Null Hypothesis? For what population are you proposing to carry out this “test of hypothesis”? What sample have you drawn to carry out this test? You are carrying out a t-test? If so, have you checked that the conditions needed for its applicability hold for the case you have in mind? Is your test 1-sided? 2-sided? Do you really really believe that a significance level of roughly 0.32 [assuming a 2-sided test] makes for good statistics??? Assuming you stuck with that level of significance, do you think that a sample which produced a P-value which met that level could be said to “disprove” the Null? … you write of this stuff as if your " command" of the material came from the happy hour at the local college pub. </p>

<p>You say: “therefore, on a purely statistical basis, those two schools don’t belong to their respective groups…”</p>

<pre><code>What is true is that purely on the basis of your discussion of what might be a statistical basis you have no basis whatsoever for anything remotely close to your above conclusion. But, to give you something to mull over on your way to taking a second and richer draught from the cornucopia of Mal-Statistica, here are three simple, non-statistical, questions:
</code></pre>

<p>What groups do these groups belong to which you claim they do not belong to? Are you sure that the criterion for membership in these groups depends on what you think it depends on? Do you find yourself using the word “Inconceivable” in inconceivably inept ways?</p>

<p>You say: “important if your kid got into a bunch of ivies or selectives, and was deciding between them all…”
So you are saying that the admissions statistics are important for deciding between Ivies, Selectives, “them all”? That the quality of a university, or college, and the quality of the education it offers, is measured by the acceptance rate? If that is what you are saying, then you are spectacularly dim. Are you saying that the quality of a university or college, and the education it offers, is not measured by the acceptance rate—and yet acceptance rate is what should shape a "kid"s decision? If so you are even more spectacularly dim. To help clarify this for you, would you rather choose the physician popular amongst the crowd, or the physician best qualified to cure what ails you? </p>

<p>You say: “in the real world, I think Cornell IS perceived as a distant relative of the ivies”
Ah, by whom? You? You think that in the “real world” most people would not judge Cornell to be a University fully at home in a league that includes Dartmouth, Brown, University of Pennsylvania? Or is your beef that it has elements of a State University, through its landgrant component, and so is “culturally” different? And that such a cultural difference should mark it as “not belonging”? If so, do you think that Northwestern does not belong in the Big Ten, as–after all-- it is a private University in an association of State Universities? That Stanford does not belong in the Pac 10?
The brute fact is that Cornell is academically, in research and quality of faculty and students, as significant a university as any in the Ivy league. Perhaps you should attend it, and learn a little about statistics and how not to confuse being lost at sea for sound navigation.</p>

<p>You say: " they even had some sort of administrative push to improve their numbers, and therefore a tacit acknowledgement of their deficiencies. sorry…just sayin…"</p>

<pre><code>So you are saying that a push to improve their admission numbers is a tacit acknowledgement of their deficiencies as a University??? Now that is sorry alright…and, as you say Comrade, ‘just sayin’ .
</code></pre>

<p>Looking at the distribution of schools that have sub 20 percent admisson rates is pretty interesting. The 8 Ivy League schools, 11 highly selective schools, and 9 LACs. </p>

<p>



IVY         6.2 ---- Harvard
IVY         6.9 ---- Columbia
    HS      7.1 ---- Stanford
IVY         7.4 ---- Yale
IVY         8.4 ---- Princeton
IVY         8.7 ---- Brown
    HS      9.6 ---- MIT
IVY         9.7 ---- Dartmouth
    HS      12.0 --- Cal Tech
IVY         12.3 --- Univ. of Penn
    HS      12.6 --- Duke
        LAC 12.8 --- Amherst
        LAC 13.6 --- Pomona
        LAC 13.8 --- Claremont McKenna
        LAC 14.9 --- Swarthmore
    HS      15.4 --- WUSTL
    HS      15.5 --- Vanderbilt
        LAC 15.6 --- Bowdoin
    HS      15.8 --- Univ. of Chicago
        LAC 17.1 --- Williams
        LAC 17.4 --- Washington & Lee
        LAC 17.7 --- Middlebury
IVY         18.0 --- Cornell
    HS      18.0 --- Northwestern
    HS      18.0 --- Georgetown
    HS      18.3 --- Johns Hopkins
    HS      18.6 --- Rice</p>

<h2>        LAC 19.5 --- Harvey Mudd</h2>

<p>8   11  9   28


</p>

<p>PS That list excludes the specialty arts schools.</p>