<p>Harvard has been criticized in the past for taking "risks" in the admissions process by accepting low stat, hooked applicants that have done phenomonal things in their community like reforming the entire state education system, despite their 1200 SAT score. </p>
<p>Can the same be said for Yale, or is their admissions process more stat driven? PR rated Yale second hardest to get into, behind MIT. Harvard was third.</p>
<p>Most of what you hear on this point is anecdotal and not too reliable.</p>
<p>To establish a pattern at each school, I suppose, you'd have to (1) compare the admission rate for those in various SAT bands, (2) know the number of applicants each school had in each of those bands vs. the number of admits, and also (3) know what the admits in the lower bands brought to the table.</p>
<p>Although I have some hazy understanding of the situation at Harvard with respect to (1) and (2), I suspect that at most elites the "risks" being taken primarily involve recruited athletes and/or URMs, with the "economically disadvantaged" as an emerging group of "recruits" who may receive a thumb on the scale. Of course, the "economically disadvantaged" may also be recruited athletes and/or URMs.</p>
<hr>
<p>Not to be overly cynical, I might also note that at some addresses, the greatest "risk-taking" comes when a school admits too many top students/high SAT-scorers, etc., since generally speaking those will have a geometrically lower yield rate for admits as median their SAT scores rise.</p>
<p>The PR "selectivity rankings" to which you refer are virtually worthless, since the basis for them is not disclosed.</p>
<p>Like them or not, the USNews rankings are based on specific criteria, which are disclosed. In the case of "selectivity" the USNews rankings are based on the admit rate, the SAT median and the percentage of admits in the top 10% of their high school class.</p>
<p>Applying these criteria, based on stats for the class of 2009, Harvard was ranked #1 in selectivity in the 2006 USNews "America's Best Colleges". For the class of 2010, Harvard seems to have improved its relative ranking in each of these categories: the admit rate dropped to an all-time low 9.1%.</p>
<p>That Harvard has the highest SAT median may or may not prove much about its "risk-taking" penchant, since it appears to have a larger number of high-scoring applicants - ie, those with 800 in Verbal, Math or both, in the number with a combined 1,400 score, and a larger number of valedictorians in the applicant pool.(The class could be filled twice over, if Harvard chose, with 800 scorers or valedictorians.)</p>
<p>Right. Let's discuss Harvard yet again...on the YALE board. Ah, yeah, and a round of applause for USNews, everyone!</p>
<p>The OP posted the identical message on the Harvard and Yale boards.</p>
<p>Yep. That's exactly why it makes a lot more sense to post your Harvard-related comments on the Harvard board.</p>
<p>I believe the original post wants a comparison of admissions practices at each re alleged "risk-taking" - hard to do while keeping each board "pure" - ie, uncontaminated by the mention of other schools, as you seem to think appropriate.</p>
<p>The OP also raised the issue of the relative "selectivity" of admissions at the two schools; formulas to compare "selectivity" can differ of course, and the results can vary, year to year..</p>
<p>I believe the original post asks if Yale takes risks in admissions and gives Harvard as an example of a college that is known (or at least thought) to do so.
The question, at least by the way its worded, is about Yale's admissions policy.</p>
<p>The same question, with the same wording, is posted on each site, and, as I noted, contains assumptions about what it assumes Harvard's policy that may be mistaken. My point is that no valid comparison of "risk taking" (however defined) can be made without more hard data rather than relying on anecdotal evidence.</p>
<p>I don't see why this board has to be restricted to those who are applying to yale, are in yale, or will only say nice things about yale. Byerly hasn't said anything derrogatory about the school, so how about we get over it? It's a bit early to begin a rivalry, how about we get into the school first? :)</p>
<p>real question: what are the criteria for USnews selectivity? It seemed to me that yale should have had a higher selectivity since it was "better" than harvard in 2 of 3 rated area. Are the criteria weighted differently. This is just a technical question and does not mean I think that yale should be considered more or less selective than harvard.</p>
<p>The "selectivity" rankings in the 2006 edition of America's Best Colleges are based on three factors: (1) admit rate (weighted 10%), (2) percentage of matriculants in the top 10% of their high school class (weighted 40%), and (3) SAT scores (weighted 50%).</p>
<p>Data in this edition is based on stats for the Class of 2004. In admit rate, Yale was #1 and Harvard #2; in percentage in the top 10%, Harvard was #5 and Yale was #10; and in SAT scores, Harvard was #1 and Yale was #4.</p>
<p>Data for the Class of 2005, becoming available now, seems to indicate that Harvard will again be ranked #1 in "selectivity" next year, if the formula remains the same.</p>