<p>If Gutrade is worried about the intellect and academic preparadness of his boss then he is planning to work for others.........not for himself. Successful leaders knowingly employ as many folks smarter and more well prepared than themselves. Certainly this concept is taught at Yale.</p>
<p>
[quote]
However, UPenn is so easy to get into compared to Yale and Stanford. With its ED admissions policies UPenn is as easy to get into as state schools like Berkeley. I mean come on....it admits like 25 percent of students who apply!!
[/quote]
Um...Princeton is the equal of Harvard and Yale. It may be a little less known among the general public because of its smaller size and lack of graduate schools, but academically it is just as pretigious and as hard to get into as HY. Yet it too has an ED policy, which admits about 32% every year, to fill 50% of its class.</p>
<p>So if you are saying that Penn sucks because of its ED policy, it doesnt really hold up. And if you say that Penn sucks because its easier to get into, well thats just arrogant, illogical, ignorant and misguided.</p>
<p>Heh if you are resorting to admit rates I guess you ran out of real arguments to use against Penn.</p>
<p>Listen guys, things like HYP^2 **** me off because you assume that Penn is better than Stanford and MIT. Although Yale is part of the ivy league, I feel more loyalty to the HYSPM group than to the ivy league. (What the heck is the ivy league if UPenn, Dartmouth, Cornell, Columbia, and Brown ride off the prestige of undeniably almighty Harvard and Yale?)</p>
<p>nobody is assuming penn is better than stanford and mit. in fact, i'm going to say most ppl do not assume that. </p>
<p>repeat of widely known knowledge: the ivy league is just a sports league, formed way back, consisting of schools that still all happen to consist of prestigious schools. it's fine to be so pretentious, really. i'd rather you not associate yourself w/ the ivy league, nobody's making you.</p>
<p>and agreed w/ silmon's
[quote]
eh if you are resorting to admit rates I guess you ran out of real arguments to use against Penn.
[/quote]
columbia has one of the lowest admit rates, somewhere extremely close to harvard/yale, but you still don't think columbia's worth anything do you? penn also has a very large student body and is able to accept more students on the whole.</p>
<p>hmm, I don't even want to get into this, but i think Gutrade has some grave misconceptions about what makes Ivy Ivy, what real prestige is, and clearly the difficulty of getting into a place like penn.</p>
<p>anyway, i'll add something to the thread that's not contributing to this argument. I think Penn is great because it is the epitome of moderation in a university, especially when comparing ivies. It's got a thriving campus life, being arguably the biggest party/greek ivy (vs dartmouth i think), yet also being completely urban, opening so many other opportunities to have fun to students.</p>
<p>i was accepted from the waitlist at the wharton school, so originally i was enrolled at another school, Columbia. Columbia is great, don't get me wrong, I love that school, but the thing about it is that NYC is life. At Penn, from what I understand, it's more campus-oriented freshman year, but your social lives extend into the city as you grow out of the frat parties and stuff. It offered a similar (although philly is no NYC) urban presentation, but with the added benefit of a strong campus vibe. Similarly, it offers the campus atmosphere of a place like Dartmouth, but with a much more interesting and fun location.</p>
<p>Penn's got good sports (for the ivy league at least), good musical groups (can anyone say penn masala? how cool is that), good freaking everything. And being ranked 4th on the US News Rankings (yes yes yes, the rankings can be debated) ain't bad either. And if you're in the Wharton school, being the best damn business school isn't anything to be ashamed of either! </p>
<p>Basically I think you can't go wrong with Penn. Except for the little bit of ire caused by a lack of name recognition on the part of peers. Like most of the kids in my school didn't realize UPenn was Ivy. And of course the Penn/Penn State confusion is annoying. But honestly, I've been asked by so many random ppl where I'm going to school, and if I had said harvard or yale or something, or if they were familiar with penn/wharton, id always feel pretentious. </p>
<p>Luckily, this confusion, though annoying, avoids the awkward "oh i hope i didnt sound like a pompousjerk, cuz i said im going to ________" that would plague my thoughts. Luckily, ppl who have never heard of Penn think that I'm just some kid going to a Pennsylvania state school.</p>
<p>And the people that really matter (employers, grad schools, basically anyone not in high school) are all familiar with the strong name attached to Penn. So once again, you get the best of both worlds here: anonymity, with prestige haha.</p>
<p>So you can't lose with Penn guys! Apply, apply, apply!</p>
<p>A two team athletic conference would be extrememly boring.</p>
<p>G trade you are a moron. Menlo school nest to SF where most alum anf faculty send their kids is a SF feeder. Roughly 10% of 130 class goes to SF. IVY pick up about 12-13% of the class in SF backyard. UC pick up another 10%. </p>
<p>At menlo SF has admit rate 40% and yield 80%. While IVY admit 20-30% and uield 50-85%. Columbia has 85% yield for 02-04 higher than SF at SF feeder school. It shows higher yield for CA kids around 80% in general. CA makes around 45% of SF class. SF has overall yield around 66%. Meaning it has yield below 50% may be around 35-40% in NE/South?midwest.</p>
<p>How can we treat SF as equal to HYPP when it only get 35% of away students while IVY can get 50-80% in its backyard.</p>
<p>ITs HYPPC only soon to be HpennY</p>
<p>No baba, its HYPSM. No matter how you put it, Stanford is a top notch school, and altho its liberal arts is comparable to Penn, its sciences/engineering ups its academic prestige above schools such as Penn and Duke. And this is coming from someone who is damn proud to be a Penn student.</p>
<p>I am glad that I got rejected from Stanford, because making a choice between the engineering superiority of Stanford and the better social atmosphere, campus and just plain awesomeness of Penn (cause in everything else both are comparable) would have been killer. And since I'm considering switching to business or international relations, Penn trumps Stanford in the latter, and every school in the world with the former.</p>
<p>So basically baba, as knightmare said, please dont say any more. You're doing exactly what Gutrade is- making unfound arguements of superiority based on meaningless stats.</p>
<p>
[quote]
"nobody is assuming penn is better than stanford and mit. in fact, i'm going to say most ppl do not assume that."
[/quote]
I fully agree. Penn is NOT better than Harvard, Yale, Princeton, MIT, or Stanford. But please, don't start calling it an "obscure school." If you don't think Penn can hold its own, you're being an ignoramus, plain and simple! And Gutrade, I'm really confused as to why you're touting the merits of "almighty" Harvard and Yale, which no one disagrees with, on a Penn board.</p>
<p>I bet a lot of these arguments wouldn't be flying around if Penn were a smaller school -- it's like the second largest Ivy to Cornell or something, right? Columbia's undergrad is pretty freaking tiny so it's no surprise that it's selective. Respectively, Harvard, Yale, and Princeton are also fairly small and thus have to take a small portion. Just because a school takes in a lot of people doesn't mean it's bad -- it could just mean it has more room. No one is going to deny that the University of Chicago is a bad school despite admitting close to half or something like that.</p>
<p>What if HYPSM were twice as large? Can anyone predict what might happen over time? I think a lot of people are bound by admission rates and use selectivity as the rule-of-thumb for a school's quality. Schools like Harvard have prestige such that it attracts a very high number of valedictorians, for instance. Valedictorians *tend to be the most qualified, so naturally Harvard would have a very good student body (I am just using this as an example). The school is the result of what the student body makes it out to be. </p>
<p>I won't just come out and say that Penn is inherently better than HYPSM at this time or whatever because it's probably not true for all departments -- but I will say that it's gaining ground quickly and I would not be surprised if it comes up to the same level as people are starting to realize how good this school really is.</p>
<p>Well....I guess I could argue with that. But you seem to be one so I guess I will let you toot your own horn....until you run into some qualified kids whose schools don't "do the rank" game and then we will see if you come out on the top.....big competition awaits you my friend.</p>
<p>"I feel more loyalty to the HYSPM group than to the ivy league"</p>
<p>Who feels loyalty to a group of schools period? I go to Penn but I don't feel connected with say Cornell or Dartmoth because they have similar acceptance rates. You're a sick person desperate for attention.</p>
<p>"UPenn is as easy to get into as state schools like Berkeley"</p>
<p>You're probably just mad because you got into Stanford but not UC BErkeley</p>
<p>Hazmat that wasn't what I was implying at all. I am very well aware that great skill can be found anywhere, if you read what I was talking about. I was using the valedictorian thing as an example as I read a statistic somewhere that most valedictorians apply to Harvard or something along those lines. My point was, an extremely large portion of the qualified applicant pool applies to Harvard and attends if accepted, hence Harvard's high yield. This only adds to its prestige and quality of student body. I wasn't "tooting my own horn".</p>
<p>I'm sorry, but Harvard lives off its rep and will continue to do so. There's no other way to say it. That's why out of the 5 or so people I've talked to are completely NOT impressed after visiting and coming into contact with the students who go there. If it fits you, go for it. Yale, to an extent, also lives off its rep. Princeton, Stanford and MIT do too. Nothing against these schools, but if they weren't as selective as they are, things would be different.</p>
<p>Prestige whores on this board crack me up. Who the **** feels "loyalty" to a group of schools? I'll feel loyalty to wherever I attend, plain and simple. </p>
<p>legendofmax, good question. If those schools were way larger, I absolutely think things would be different. UPenn accepts about 21%, NOT 25% as someone said, of those who apply. It has an undergraduate body of close to 10,000. HYPMS are all smaller schools, plain and simple. Cornell is even bigger than UPenn, with 13,000+ students, so if Cornell shrank down to, oh say, 6,000, no doubt would it gain more respect over time, especially as they'd need to reject more and more applicants.</p>
<p>The awesome thing about UPenn is that it doesn't have this inflated rep like some others, but it is becoming better known and ranking higher because it deserves to be. The kids who are there REALLY want to be there and love it. They didn't really just apply for the sake of prestige. Sorry, I tend to believe that a lot of times, people make the school. Yes, it does have the best business school in the country, but it's so much more than that.</p>
<p>I had to voice my opinion here. But yeah, at the same time I wonder how one kid's question started all this bee ess.</p>
<p>xhohosntwinkiesx, I agree. I think a lot of places are enhanced in reputation by the sheer amount of people they turn down. Thus, the small amount accepted "have to be amazing" and thus the school becomes amazing. </p>
<p>I recall reading somewhere that Hargadon from Princeton said if you were to take the accepted Princeton class, reject all of them, and accept a new class all over again from the initially-rejected applicants, the quality of the class would be the same. There is a huge group of bright people -- where the majority of these people choose to go helps define the school's reputation, coupled with how many of these amazing applicants actually get turned down.</p>
<p>"However, UPenn is so easy to get into compared to Yale and Stanford. With its ED admissions policies UPenn is as easy to get into as state schools like Berkeley. I mean come on....it admits like 25 percent of students who apply!!" -Gutrade</p>
<p>Surely you are joking. Do your research, please. It's amazing to me that someone of your intelligence doesn't know basics. It's people like you that keep some of the best and brightest away from schools like HARVARD, YALE, or STANFORD - the places lose their appeal due to ****s like you. Shut up now, for god's sake. You're making your school look bad. </p>
<p>Another question did arise in my mind. Don't Yalies have better things to do than post haughty responses on a board intended for a school they aren't even GOING to?</p>
<p>I agree with twinkies. It's all about the admittance, people. And this is coming from someone who was accepted to a bunch of those overly massive rep schools. :D</p>
<p>Oh I forgot...</p>
<p>HYPP. HYPP. HYPP. HYPP. HYPP. HYPP. HYPP. HYPP. HYPP.</p>
<p>Ok, I'm done.</p>
<p>Psst. They're "Elis"</p>
<p>Its not wrong to feel loyalty to a group of schools, if for the right reasons. If the loyalty stems from admission rates, USNWR, etc, then it is wrong. But I currently feel loyalty (and sometimes hatred, often at the same time) to Arizona, ASU, Cal, Oregon, OSU, Stanford, UCLA, USC, Washington, and WSU for reasons other than the schools' percieved quality. For the same reasons, I know I will feel a loyalty to the Ancient Eight.</p>