<p>I guess I just don't understand why you think more Brown students consider Columbia than Dartmouth. Just hasn't been my anecdotal experience, but I could be wrong. I think both schools are strong overlaps, along with others.</p>
<p>I told you why, Slipper! The same reason you think they consider Dartmouth: anecdotal evidence + to some extent the Revealed Pref. Rankings. The gap between Brown and Columbia is less than it is between Brown and Dartmouth.</p>
<p>that revealed preference is a bunch of worthless jargon</p>
<p>brown is not the most preferred ivy after HYP, that is such garbage</p>
<p>before brown was even an ivy, ppl thought of it like a vassar, and that's basically why a lot of ppl today think of it as second tier to other ivies...try to dispute that, u can't with facts, but i have well educated parents and family members who have confirmed that to me</p>
<p>I wonder if your opinion would be different, simbajune, if you had actually gotten into Brown as transfer this past May when you applied. </p>
<p>Oh, and if Brown =s Vassar, Cornell =s SUNY. Where does that leave Northwestern?</p>
<p>wlel, the person that did get into Brown, "Timberland," let's see what his other acceptances were</p>
<p>the last i recall, he was DENIED at Cornell, Penn, Dartmouth, Columbia etc. and even waitlisted at Michigan</p>
<p>what does that tell you????</p>
<p>and if i would have applied a year ago, i woulod have certaintly got in, dont even go there, brown's transfer rate was in the mid 20s until this yr</p>
<p>2 kids from my high school are there now as transfers, do u want their names</p>
<p>one from Brandeis and one from Tufts, both not super stars, wat-so-ever, the one from Brandeis didnt even score a 1300 on her sats....so don't go there</p>
<p>and i have names, i can pm u both of these students</p>
<p>Ivyleaf, while I completely reject your notion that there is a difference between the overlap of Columbia and Dartmouth because of 5 points on revealed preference, I agree that simba should not be ripping on a school he apparently loved a year ago.</p>
<p>I agree with you, simbajune, when you say that the "backdoor" to Brown was transferring. Up until last year, they accepted apprx. 200/800, or 25%, of all transfers who applied. Now, they're at the level of selectivity that some of their peer schools--H/Y/Col/D/S, namely--have always had with transfers. Whether this is a permanent change remains to be seen. And I agree that you would have gotten in a year ago--with the 25% accept rate--had you applied then.</p>
<p>However, my original point stands: I doubt you'd be ripping on Brown now if you had gotten in as a transfer.</p>
<p>i am not rippin on Brown, i think it is a fantastic school, just personally, i dont believe it is the 4th preferred ivy, that just doesnt seem right to me</p>
<p>am i saying, it is the least preferred, but i generally would think that Columbia wins more cross-admit battles than does brown</p>
<p>so you would think that nytimes had falsified their data?
btw, can anyone provide me with the transfer rate for brown n possibly its peers...</p>
<p>What? A major media company falsifying its news? Unheard of! (and yes my eyes are rolling). Not that i think this data is falsified...more likely screwed up. And 6 year old figures are not of much use with schools going wildly up and down in the perceptions of a rather mercurial audience</p>
<p>The study is fine, and while the numbers relied upon are 6 years old, you have to remember, also, that it as based on a <em>survey</em> - a large survey to be sure, but a survey nevertheless - of 3000 + students admitted to elites. </p>
<p>Thus you cannot take its formula numbers as equivalent to real, live cross admit numbers - either from the year 2000 or from the year 2006 - although it is very likely true that the general ratios are not much different than they were then.</p>
<p>The NY Times did not - IMHO - adequately explain this limitation on the accuracy of the data.</p>
<p>actually, the audience is not very mercurial at all. despite penn's recent climbs in the rankings, it continues to suffer from past perceptions that die hard. interestingly, the revealed preferences data is one of the few things that has remained relatively constant over the last decade</p>
<p>now byerly, does that "H" really belong in your "IMHO".. ;)</p>
<p>It is apparently true that - minor fluctuations in the USNews rankings notwithstanding - the academic pecking order is amazingly rigid and durable.</p>
<p>See: <a href="http://www.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/ffp9901.pdf%5B/url%5D">http://www.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/ffp9901.pdf</a></p>
<p>And also: <a href="http://www.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/ffp0001s.pdf%5B/url%5D">http://www.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/ffp0001s.pdf</a></p>
<p>This helps to explain the reluctance of certain schools, aware of their competive overlaps, to abandon their early decision programs. </p>
<p>Without the ED crutch, their open market yield rates would, in most cases, be amazingly predictable - and well under 50%.</p>
<p>simba isn't saying they falsified data, just is questioning the validity of the findings, ie: how well the study measured what it intended to measure.</p>
<p>He is just saying they might not have accurately devised from the parameters the correct order of preference among the ivy league schools.</p>
<p>On a personal note, i would pick brown over columbia in a second.</p>
<p>The formula reflects known cross admit ratios to a fairly accurate degree, although not with mathematical precision.</p>
<p>my biggest problem with the study is that it favors schools with brand loyalty (such as notre dame, kids who grow up their whole lives thinking they want to attend notre dame, and choose it irrationally over other schools in cross-admits) and also public schools, because many people will likely choose to attend public schools they don't actually prefer attending (everything else being equal) due to the reduced cost.</p>
<p>I think those two factors skew the results slightly.</p>
<p>That being said, personally i would probably attend brown over any ivy except for harvard yale and princeton, so individually it falls right about where i would put it.</p>
<p>EDIT: Brown's high placement on the revealed preference list might be explained by the fact that it is a "niche" school, and students who apply there really want to go because of its uniqueness, and choose it over the other ivies when accepted, while the majority of people applying to the ivies ranked lower than it might not also apply to brown because it doesn't appeal to them.</p>
<p>I agree somewhat with your edit, although I believe its also true that Brown has benefitted by serving as an historic backup - or second choice - school for HYP applicants. No harm in that.</p>
<p>Fan, excuse me, Byerly, Brown has been an historic back-up for Harvard and Yale because of proximity. It has not been a historic back-up for Princeton. I've seen in the past the cross application numbers with Princeton, and Brown has a very small cross application pool with Princeton, MIT, and Caltech. The latter three schools are so different from Brown, that there is little applicant mutual affinity.</p>