<p>In Bucknell's Common Data Set, it states that 69% of admitted students were in the top tenth of their class. In the viewbok I just received from Bucknell, they state tht 95% of enrolled students were in the top 5% of their class.</p>
<p>I know there is a difference between admitted and enrolled students....but is it that big?</p>
<p>Remember that every one who gets admitted to a school does not necessarily enroll at the school. School admit more students than they enroll because they know that some student won't attend for various reasons.</p>
<p>Well yeah but wouldn't it work the opposite like 69% of ENROLLED students were in the top tenth of their class? Because why would the students who enroll have much better overall stats than the accepted students a lot of whom can probably get into better schools?</p>
<p>Because the ability to pay for a college education is a very real concern, at some schools like Bucknell, they offer both merit money and need based financial aid. This is especially true when it comes to middle class families where merit money can be used to woo a student from a school where their parents would be paying full freight.</p>
<p>For a family in the "middle class squeeze" who would be full payers, yes, some of those students can and probably did get into better schools but parent may not have or want to pay the 40,000+ out of pocket price tag it pays to attend because they were not eligible for aid (I would suggest going on the parents forum and looking at the number of threads written by parents caught in the middle class squeeze being too rich to get aid and too poor to afford to pay it all our of pocket). </p>
<p>For these families, saving 10,000 to 12,000 per year over the course of 4 years due to renewable merit money to a student makes a big difference.</p>
<p>95% of enrolled students were in the top FIVE percent??? why do i find that hard to believe?</p>
<p>I agree with Fandangoya, that the statistics sound odd, given that they were read correctly.</p>
<p>Bucknell's student profile for the class of 2010 states:</p>
<p>Percent of enrolled first-year students in the top 10% of their graduating class (of those ranked) 71%</p>
<p>Percent of enrolled first-year students in the top 20% of their
graduating class (of those ranked) 90%</p>
<p>yeah, i assume that was supposed to say 'top 25%.' go editors.</p>
<p>Yeah, that's got to be a typo. I'm not sure I agree with the explanation that Sybbie gives of why it might not be a typo (besides the fact that 95% can't be in the top 5%, if only 90% are in the top 20%) because I didn't think Bucknell gives any more merit aid than Dartmouth would, but I could be wrong on this. </p>
<p>I've seen for last year that Colgate and Bucknell both had a ~ 40 point drop between admitted avg SAT and enrolled avg SAT and that for admitted students Colgate had 80% in top 10% and for enrolled students it was 68% in top 10%, so would expect Bucknell to have a similar drop in % in top 10% from accepted to enrolled students too.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I didn't think Bucknell gives any more merit aid than Dartmouth would, but I could be wrong on this.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Bucknell gives more merit aid than Dartmouth does because Dartmouth does not give merit aid, only need based financial aid :D</p>
<p>Just read it again, says "top FIFTH". My bad. Read that wrong as top 5%, when it is really the top 20%.</p>