No one said no girls want to go to MIT only that fewer girls make that choice. The 800 in math is a metaphor for the engineering school culture. An 800 in math at MIT, CT, or even Harvey Mudd is the standard score the vast majority will have obtained. I have two girls that had 800 in math. Neither had the slightest interest in going to an engineering school. Both instead went to large D1 top ten schools. The student body composition is vastly different and attending the Rose Bowl creates a far different culture.
Also, the parent of a girl who had an 800 on SAT math. She visited MIT and hated it to the extent that she refused to apply, visit, or look at the brochure of any other school that had the word technical in it’s name. DD2017 attends Stanford and I have already met two girls that were accepted at MIT but chose Stanford. Shortly after my daughter’s visit to MIT, I attended a very large five day conference with many professors from MIT. I seemed to be on the same schedule as one of the MIT professors and we had breakfast and rode a van to the conference together on multiple occasions. I told her how much of a turn off the information session in particular had been when my daughter visited MIT and that she should give some feedback on the issue since we all want more women in stem. She told me to go complain to the president of MIT who was also at the conference but that as a mother of two girls she would never want them to attend MIT as undergrads. She said MIT kills their undergrads and it is better to wait and go to grad school there.
My D14 also had an 800 math SAT.
Never considered MIT, CalTech or Mudd.
Not for a minute.
This thread has been enormously helpful and interesting over the last year. Now I just kinda like to see how long it goes, since ED/EA deadlines are starting come around for the Class of 2022.
Hm, my son had a great time at MIT; he’s still alive, so I guess he didn’t get killed. 
Oh, his wife had a great time, too, and she’s still alive! Two for two! And we met about 60 of their friends at their wedding, and wouldn’t you know it, they were all alive and happy to be at MIT. Different strokes for different folks. That’s why there are lots and lots of colleges to choose from.
Ironically, MIT didn’t get on my son’s list until September/October of his senior year when he was flown there for a special program. He didn’t think he wanted a STEM college, but after being flown to Princeton in the spring of senior year, he realized that was a distant third (after Mudd and MIT), and a STEM school was exactly what he wanted.
He did so many wonderful non-academic things at MIT (Cru, worship, IM flag football and softball, rooming chair, Next Act, had a sports talk radio show at 1 am for a semester, ran a music production company out of his dorm, etc.)-he was all about people. It was very magical meeting all of their friends at the wedding.
MIT is certainly not for everyone, and there’s a lot that could/should be changed when it comes to the stress (though some of that is self-imposed, sadly) , but my son and his wife loved it, miss it, and they plan to visit again for the MIT hunt in January just as they did last year.
Ok, off my ra-ra box, and back to the purpose of this thread. Sorry!!
Emory finally released their stats
Emory college
Applicants: 23,747
Admitted: 5,234
Enrolled: 1,407
Acceptance Rate: 22%
SAT-
EBRW: 690-760
Math: 690- 780
(1380-1540)
ACT-
31-34
GPA(Unweighted)-
3.75- 3.98
trying to find Standford stats for Restrictive EA… Anyone?
Gatech released its EA number of applicants today. 17,700. Up 18% over last year.
@eskafu Stanford doesn’t report stats for REA.
Stanford’s last stats for EA acceptance was 9.5%… assume they are around that now.
Stanford announced that they were no longer supplying EA stats last year
I guess they got tired crowing about their increasing selectivity.
Or they didn’t want people to be able to figure out how small the RD admit rate is, because RD apps might tank.
Stanford has been the most selective university the past 5 years… with an admit rate of 4.6%… with the highest application fee of any university in the US. Somehow I don’t think they’re worrying about apps tanking:)
I think my explanation makes more sense than yours, tbh. If Stanford acknowledges that its RD admit rate is 2%, or whatever it is, it stands to reason that some number of people won’t bother applying, or application growth will slow. I think if you could disaggregate the secular growth in international (esp. Asian) applicants, you might find this is already having an effect.
I think @DeepBlue86 is onto something. I know that this article made some folks at Stanford squirm.
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/30/opinion/college-admissions-shocker.html?_r=0
I know that DeepBlue86’s rationale makes sense to me - for example, my daughter has Penn on her list for RD schools, and I am not going to fan that flame. I really don’t want her to agonize over that application if the admissions for RD at Penn are 4%, I think (not overall, just for RD). Feel free to correct me if my stats are wrong. It’s just not a priority at all because of the slim chances, and I wouldn’t be sad if she never gets to that application.
@DeepBlue86 @sbballer @Winky1 At this point, Stanford is one of the very few schools, if not the only school, where most of the applicants really don’t pay too much attention to their acceptance rate. Whether it is 4% or 2%, they just don’t want to regret not taking a chance at their dream school. I don’t see it changing anytime soon.
I don’t think it’s a coincidence that three of the best-known schools declining to disclose early admissions statistics are (i) UChicago, which last year apparently filled two-thirds to three-quarters of the class with EDI/II, so that the RD admit rate had to have been minuscule; (ii) Columbia, which has a similar issue because it also admits lots of kids ED and got over 37,000 total apps last year (close to similarly-sized Harvard and more than Princeton or Yale), probably also resulting in a very low RD admit rate; and (iii) Stanford, which has far and away more apps than any peer, so that if they admit even a reasonable number of applicants SCEA, the RD odds are extremely long.
I think these places don’t disclose the data because they don’t want to discourage people from applying RD, and growth in total apps to slow or possibly go negative. For 44,000 people to apply to Stanford, which will admit just over 2,000 of them, is already crazy. If it were revealed that (my guess) 38,000 - 39,000 were RD applicants (including a limited number of deferrals), of which maybe 1,300 - 1,400 were admitted, a lot of people might conclude that applying wasn’t worth the time and money. Pace @fivesages, at some point it turns into an expensive and time-consuming lottery ticket.
Bryn Mawr released some data:
https://www.brynmawr.edu/admissions/class-profile
1116/2937 (38%) Applicants Admitted, 363 enrolled
So did U of Richmond
https://admissions.richmond.edu/studentprofile/index.html
3301/10013 (33%) Applicants Admitted, 806 enrolled
As did Washington & Lee
https://www.wlu.edu/admissions/apply/first-year-class-profile
1200/5456 (22%) Applicants Admitted, 471 enrolled
Still waiting on data from these LACs:
Grinnell
Lafayette
Smith
@DeepBlue86 You could have said the same thing when Stanford’s acceptance rate was 15% or 10% or 7% or 5%. Also, we could say Harvard is trying to keep its applications high by making a single essay requirement optional, while Stanford still has three supplemental essays. Bottomline, I believe that there are enough people who are willing to take that chance, either at Stanford or Harvard. Low acceptance rate is not going to discourage from applying. I also think the way high school kids think today is very different from 10-15 years ago. They are not as attracted to the past glories as they are to the current ones.
When Stanford’s admit rate was at those levels, they were still disclosing early admissions stats. What’s your explanation for why they stopped doing so? It’s not credible to say that they’re just being modest. Stanford, which is in the best position to judge, seems to think this is a bigger deal than you do.
Trees don’t grow to the sky, not even El Palo Alto. I don’t know how low the admit rate has to go before apps hit a ceiling, but eventually it will happen. Again, I believe if you could disaggregate international apps, you’d find that the ceiling for US applicants was closer than you think.