<p>Harvard admissions officials have publically indicated, in a general way, that "3 out of 4" cross admits with Harvard's chief "competitors" - Stanford, Princeton, Yale and MIT - choose Harvard. Usually but not always the largest cross-admit pool is with Stanford, and usually but not always the closest "battle" is with MIT - presumably for talented science students.</p>
<p>I note that Yale increased the fraction of its class filled from the early pool this year, and this may reduce the size of the common admit pool somewhat.</p>
<p>oh, and by the way, all that money, at least from andover, came from rich alumni who benefited from the school's giving aid in the past. Andover and Exeter have run massive campaigns to raise money-from alumni-to increase financial aid. just like harvard and yale and other elite schools. i absolutely hate it when misinformed people unfairly resent the "rich" prep school kids.</p>
<p>Well it's still fair to call them mostly "rich" schools.. after all, 60% of the students come from families that are able to pay $38,000+/year for their high school education! This is a FAR CRY from an accurate cross-section of American society.</p>
<p>Of course, Harvard/Yale/etc. have a similarly-high percentage and I do know some people who find that a turnoff. Like it or not, elite education is currently biased towards very wealthy families. To someone from a modest background, this is potentially intimidating.</p>
<p>And since youre obviously very defensive about this issue, I will concede that all of the schools mentioned (elite prep schools, ivies) are taking steps in the right direction to becoming more universally accessible. They're just not there yet.</p>
<p>Thanks for the info, Byerly! I wish the schools were more transparent with the data, as comparing Harvard to Amherst/Williams/Swarthmore would be interesting as well....</p>
<p>its <em>only</em> $30,000 (that extra 8 would give my dad a heart attack!) but yes i am very glad that my school is very diverse. its actually one of the primary reasons that i go. and one of the primary reasons i want to go to yale.</p>
<p>Believe me, they all HAVE the data in great detail - it is THE key tool to measure the effectiveness of recruiting, the impact of developments at - and recruiting tactics utilized by - other schools.</p>
<p>This data - from Stanford - leaked by accident last year. You may never see its like again. Of course it gives only half the picture.</p>
<p>Hi all, I'm new here, having trouble deciding as well. Actually, sort of leaning towards Penn...I'm not too sure what I want to do, other than business. I have heard from some that Harvard is better for general business studies? Any advice much appreciated.</p>
<p>I'm Yale '03 and do alumni interviews. The cross-admit win rate versus Harvard for last year's class (2008) was 1/3. It is the only relevant piece of data because the numbers for all other classes are skewed by the asymmetry in admissions policies--Yale had binding ED, so many of those who (insightfully) saw it as their top choice never applied to other schools. When Byerly quotes other numbers he is talking about previous years. Our win rate is impressive considering that most people's default is, on account of the name, Harvard. I find that the more people inform themselves about the experiences at the two institutions the more likely they are to matriculate at Yale.</p>
<p>When you visit the schools, ask people why they came and what they like about the place. Yalies will always talk about <em>the experience</em> and not the name.</p>
<p>Gutenberg point is a really good one. As someone who has been a student at both, I'd say that the biggest challenge for cross admits is to look hontestly and carefully into what each institution has to offer YOU--not just in term of your intended major but also what kind of person you are. Going to Harvard is the "default" for a reason, most people want to feel they are connected to what is perceived by the vast majority as the "best". They care and others care. On the other hand, Harvard "plays" its allure to its advantage (like any institution its first interest is itself not its undergrads or other students). It does this not just to undergrads but grads and faculty too.</p>
<p>Think about that allure. But also think about your own interest, just as Harvard thinks of its (and Yale thinks of its). You may need Harvard (it is a special badge to have gone there) and/or you may need Yale (it has other things to offer, some better). Good luck making what is for you a difficult decision. And realize you can't really lose.</p>
<p>I can't quarrel with Yaleman Gutenberry's assertion that 2008 H/Y cross admit ratio was roughly 3:1, but disagree as to whether the character of any early admissions program at either school has ever made a substantial difference in that ratio. </p>
<p>Note that for the Class of 2008, Harvard, Yale and Stanford all had about a 90% yield on SCEA admits, so that two conclusions may be made, both of which I submit, are valid:</p>
<ol>
<li><p>Early pool applicants may act strategically in some cases, but the impact of this factor is minimal. Whether the program is EA or ED, early applicants at these schools tend to enroll, if admitted, at the school to which they have applied early. There was never more than a tiny number of "open EA" applicants to Harvard during the 1997-2003 period who ever exercized their option to apply to Yale, let alone to attend if admitted.</p></li>
<li><p>The alleged "freedom" enjoyed by current SCEA admits to apply elsewhere is essentially illusory: the absolutely huge difference between the EA/ED admit rates and the RD admit rates at virtually ALL elites means that there is no functional distinction between applying SCEA and ED: if you want to get in, you damn well better apply early. The cross-applicants come overwhelmingly from the RD pool at other schools.</p></li>
</ol>
<p>Finally, I will note that while both the size of cross-admit pools and the exact ratios has varied a bit from year to year, Harvard's large edge over its chief rivals has remained constant, and, if anything, has increased in recent times. More so than a generation ago, Harvard's "losses" are not to SPYM but to schools such as Duke, UVa and a host of others giving large "merit" scholarships, full-rides, "presidential fellowships" with money thrown in for foreign travel, guaranteed funding for graduate study, and the like.</p>
<p>Indeed, it should be recalled that it was not until 1996 that Yale and Princeton switched from EA to binding ED, while Harvard stayed with EA. The relative yield rates did not change dramatically after the switch - and nor did the cross-admit numbers - from what I have been able to learn.</p>
<p>There is little evidence, I would like to add, for the assertion sometimes made by partisans for other schools (including Gutenbery) that those choosing Harvard are less enthusiastic, or less informed, about their choice - and the reasons for it - than admits to Stanford, Princeton, Yale or MIT. It is sometimes argued by these partisans that shallow Harvard matriculants (presumably unlike more clear-eyed matriculants at other schools) are unduly influenced by abstract "reputation" or "prestige" factors that, in the view of these partisans, have no basis in reality, and that slavish reliance on these irrelevant factors persuaded these "unfortunates" to act against their own interest.</p>
<p>If Harvard's "reputation" attracts certain matriculants away from SPYM, it is no less likely that Yale's "reputation" - for example - attracts matriculants away from Penn, or that Princeton's "reputation" attracts matriculants away from Duke, or that Stanford's "reputation" attracts matriculants away from Berkeley.</p>
<p>There IS - it must be said - some evidence that the physical setting (Cambridge/Boston) , provides a marginal recruiting advantage for Harvard, just as the weather and California setting provides some marginal edge for Stanford with subsets of their applicant pool. All of the schools have their attractions, however, and all try equally hard to sell recruits on those attractions.</p>
<p>I have two questions:
1) what is the number of students admitted to both harvard and yale
2) is it 1/3 as gutenbery stated, or 1:3 as byerly stated. The two are different.</p>