<p>Is the acceptance rate any higher for deferred kids as opposed to 1st time around RD applicants?</p>
<p>Arguments have been made that since deferred applicants DID pick Columbia to be #1, they are given more preference.</p>
<p>But, some people believe in this theory: If you didn't get picked the first time/round (for some obvious reason, i.e. not their "ideal" applicant), why would you get picked again?</p>
<p>I personally however, without any knowledge of statistics, believe that deferred applicants are given preference because part of Columbia adcom knows that if they accept a deferred applicant, chances are he/she will likely to matriculate (not many people will be spiteful toward past deference).</p>
<p>Princeton's app numbers came out today. With about 600 slots left open, they have RD and deferred apps totalling 15,484.</p>
<p>Wow... doing the math, and assuming a yield of 60% (not unreasonable for Princeton), that's an acceptance rate of 6.5%.</p>
<p>Again:</p>
<p>Thank god I got in ED.</p>
<p>And for being born when I was, rather than 5 years later. Imagine what the numbers will look like for the class of 2014. Applications: 30,000 and Acceptance Rate: 3% or somesuch insanity. </p>
<p>Those people from the 80s and such were damn lucky :p</p>
<p>Correction in today's paper:</p>
<p>"In "Record Number of Applicants for Class of 2009" (Jan. 31), by James Romoser, the story misstated the number of regular decisions applications, and the total number of applications received by the Fu Foundation School of Engineering and Applied Science. </p>
<p>SEAS has received 2,046 regular decision applications and a total of 2,311 applications, which represents a 2.6 percent increase over last year's total, and not a 15% increase. In addition, since the article's publication, Columbia College's application total has risen to 15,701, a 4.6 percent increase over last year."</p>
<p>which paper, Byerly?</p>
<p>if it's true, it's good news for all us applicants!</p>
<p>Not really. The article was correct regarding the increase in the College's applicant pool.</p>
<p>but still, it's much less of an increase than the previously stated 15%. thus there's less competition...</p>
<p>The incorrect 15% was at Fu Foundation SEAS, therefore there will be less competition at Fu than the article stated. The competition at Columbia College remains as stated in the article, about 4% higher than last year.</p>
<p>So yeah, if you're applying for Fu, there's less competition than you thought, but for the College, the article was correct (roughly) in the first place.</p>
<p>thanks, bird. i think i have reading comprehension difficulties. ironic.</p>
<p>Lol, no problem... (I wish lol was a real word -- putting it in a normal sentence just looks wrong to my eyes).</p>
<p>BTW- the spectator article made a mistake, SEAS increased 2.6% not 15%...</p>
<p>bird, i think it's because you capitalized the first L of "Lol." </p>
<p>it makes it look all asymmetrical.</p>
<p>Gg Columbia.</p>
<p>in repsonse to thomaschau, while columbia is like at the bottom of the ivies for alumni giving, they rank 4th in total funds (harvard, yale, princeton, columbia, forget the order of dartmouth cornell and brown)</p>
<p>historically, they've made a lot of money on property in NYC and frequently what they've been able to do academically has followed that wave</p>
<p>So why're they so friggin stingy with their finaid? >=(</p>
<p>speak for yourself, hehe.</p>
<p>Agreed, my finaid was decent.</p>