<p>What I don’t understand about onecircuit is that his/her positions reflect the type of Princeton “homerism” one usually finds in Princeton students or alums, but his/her argumentative style reflects more of a novice high school debater. For example, if he or she believes use of the Common Application will cause Columbia’s yield to drop, why not provide evidence of yield reduction for each of Harvard, Yale or Princeton for the year of adoption of the Common Application by that institution? If he or she were to provide that information, we would have something to analyze. Mocking condescension rarely works.</p>
<p>As an aside, as both Columbia and Princeton used the Common Application this year, I wonder what onecircuit believes is the reason why Columbia received substantially more applicants than Princeton?</p>
<p>your posts pretty much show your knowledge of the admissions process and your false and misleading statements further underscore the lack of knowledge in this area.</p>
<p>Say, tell us again how you falsely claim that waitlist kids that are admitted should not be counted by a University when calculating the acceptance rate and yield. Maybe you can show further support for your arguments by mixing in class of 2013 and 2014 figures in the same post as apples and oranges in a failed attempt to prove another point:</p>
<p>pbr, again sure no problem, as soon as you explain the same for Columbia v. NYU and Boston University. Do you honestly think that receiveing more applications makes you a better University?</p>
<p>Class of 2015 Applications
42,242 - NYU
41,734 - Boston University
.
.
.
34,587 - Columbia</p>
<p>where in this post do i talk about class of 2014?</p>
<p>but let me teach you something here that schools with a stronger humanities component educate their students (even engineers).</p>
<p>a) someone cannot ‘falsely claim’ that something ‘should not’ happen. once you say should, you are not making a claim, but stating an opinion. </p>
<p>so which was it, was i making claims or stating an opinion.</p>
<p>b) my stance: universities OFTEN DO NOT include waitlist numbers in their admit rates, they don’t include that number when they have to often submit it to other agencies. and there is nothing as far as i know from NACAC (the body that oversees college admissions), or more specialized groups like COFHE (that oversees admissions/financial aid for 30 schools that are truly full-need/need blind for domestic students), by accrediting agencies (regional or national). the admit rate as of may 1 is often the number cited by newspapers. that is my stance, it is standard and normal for folks to do so throughout higher education.</p>
<p>Rule #2 for losing an argument: when someone has to change the argument in order to try and salvage something, for instance proclaiming that i was mixing class of 2014 with 2013 when i never did anything of the sort, shows desperation.</p>
<p>would receiving more applications make your institution more ‘desirable’?</p>
<p>please elaborate the concept of the ‘fallback’ ivy. how long has it been around? who created the word? does it appear in any scholarship? how large of a phenomenon is it, as in how many students can be affirmed to apply to an ivy league school simply as a fallback? would you classify students that only apply to columbia in ED as using it as a fallback ivy, would you classify students that only apply to cities as using columbia as a fallback ivy? what are the limits of your use of the term?</p>
<p>and here is the EXACT QUOTE FROM YOU whereby you use 2014 figures in the middle of all the Class of 2013 figures - something which you are DENYING that you did:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>If you were a little smarter, you would read the link that you posted and see that the 8.18% acceptance rate was reported initially for the Class of 2014 and NOT THE CLASS OF 2013.</p>
<p>therefore you have been caught in yet another lie…</p>
<p>geesh, this is just getting too easy, much too easy</p>
<p>admissionsgeek, other than Columbia, why don’t you tell us what other unversities don’t adjust their accepatnce and yield rates after admitting students from the waitlist. According to your post above their must be hundreds of them. So please show us which ones. It would be interesting to see what other universities are intentially misleading the public with their acceptance and yield figures.</p>
<p>dude did you read the actual daily princetonian article, did it not state 9.79% for the class of 2013. i never mixed anything up. you live in another world.</p>
<p>i just wanted to prove that your school’s newspaper was using the as you state wrong admit rate.</p>
<p>jesus admissiongeek, what is wrong with you?</p>
<p>the Daily Princetonian on April 1, 2009 BEFORE THE WAITLIST KIDS WERE ADMITTED used the initial admit rate of 9.79%. This is what is responsible thing to do SINCE THE ADMIT RATE FROM WAITLIST was not known at the time.</p>
<p>Now if you look at later communciations from the Unversity, you will see the final acceptance rate used by Princeton for the class of 2013…</p>
<p>THIS IS EXACTLY the point that I am trying to make that Columbia unethically is failing to do…</p>
<p>geesh, this is really getting embarrassing for you and your college</p>
<p>“In the most selective admission process in the University’s history, Princeton has offered admission to 2,148, or 8.18 percent, of the record 26,247 applicants for the class of 2014. This compares to an admission rate of 9.79 percent at this time last year, and 9.25 percent the previous year.”</p>
<p>As a current student, I do not know that much about the projected acceptance and yield rates for this year and future years. Both schools are incredibly competitive to get into (have ridiculously low admissions rates) and have very high yield rates. If you are making a decision between both schools, congratulations!! It is not a bad problem to have. I think it is silly to make your decision based on admissions stats or yield rates. These rankings/rates will change every year. Ultimately, you want to choose a school where you think you will be happy and thrive.</p>
<p>During my senior year, I was faced with similar issues and it can definitely be stressful. You are deciding where you will spend the next four years of your life and that is definitely a big decision to make. Luckily, it is hard to go wrong. I can honestly say I have had an incredible experience at Columbia. One of my best friends goes to Princeton and she has had a great time there.</p>
<p>Many people on this board have raised issues about difference in community and under/grad focus at both institutions. In terms of undergrad/grad focus, Princeton is largely an undergraduate campus. Columbia does have graduate schools (we have the top law, medical, business, dental, journalism etc schools in the country). Graduate students have not been a big part of my experience on campus. My classes have largely been comprised of undergraduate students. Student spaces like Lerner are dominated by undergraduate students. Graduate students live off campus and often have their own separate set of professors/classes. Particularly as a junior, when I have been thinking about graduate schools and post-college plans, however, Columbia’s graduate schools have played more of a role in my life. For example, the economics society sets up a mentorship program with business school students that have had experiences on Wall Street . Students can explore different graduate school options if that is something they are interested in. I have found Columbia’s graduate schools (especially since they are some of the best in the country) to serve as an great resource to the undergraduate population (my friend has been able to gain clinical experience useful in preparing her for the med school application process because of Columbia’s Medical school). </p>
<p>In terms of community, my favorite part of Columbia’s campus life is its activity. There is never a dull moment on campus. There will always be some sort of talk, cultural show, protest that is happening. One thing I can promise you is that you will never be bored. Because of everything going on around campus, I barely leave the Morningside Heights area (some students are better about exploring the city than me. Especially when it gets cold, I get a bit lazy haha). We have the traditional Greek college scene. Students especially when they start living in suites after their freshman year tend to host parties. You will meet a diverse group of students upon coming to Columbia and you won’t be confined to one social group/activity, which I love. Columbia does not have the same kind of community as one might find at a state school, but it definitely has a strong community. Everyone is incredibly proud of their school and proud to be here.</p>
<p>“This compares to an admission rate of 9.79 percentat this time last year”</p>
<p>that you really don’t understand?</p>
<p>Princeton is correctly comparing the admit rate for the class of 2014 to that of 2013 as of the time the initial admit rate was announced and before the waiting list students were admitted for both years, in order to compare apples to apples…</p>
<p>seriously, there is something wrong with you when it comes to reviewing these things</p>
<p>Re #198:
"…look at the combined increase in applications for Brown and Cornell this year. It was very small, 1.1% "</p>
<p>I don’t know anything about what’s going on with Brown. But as for Cornell, It seems likely to me that applications were negatively impacted by adverse publicity surrounding the tragic suicide cluster that occurred there, which followed multiple years with no such incidents whatsoever.</p>
<p>Moreover, from 2001-2 to 2009-10 applications to Cornell increased by over 108%; the next greatest increase in the Ivy League was Yale at 77%. They are already getting over 36,000 applicants, and the national pool is no longer growing, so at some point the numbers will be hard to increase. Maybe that time has come earlier for Cornell than for some other schools, due to its greater increase in applicants during the prior period.</p>
<p>IIRC, during the prior admissions cycle, Yale applications were stagnant or declined.</p>