<p>@norcalguy, post #80
It’s my contention that CC applicants who regard Cornell as a safety are either 1) trolling, or 2) so stupid that that wont get in anyway, or 3) GTs who see it as a safety because for them it is – literally (assuming they’ve fulfilled the grade and course requirements). And, for the record, I’ve already agreed that Cornell should change their policy to require 4-year colleges (but that doesn’t mean that all current-day CC admits are unqualified).</p>
<p>Well do you think in the long run, Cornell admissions will naturally get much more selective as the number of applications go up and up each year?</p>
<p>Applications are going up for virtually every college in the country. Selectivity is relative to what’s happening with your peers’ admissions. If your applications are only going up 5% while your peers are experiencing a 15% increase in applications, then you are actually becoming relatively less selective. Unless changes are made, I actually see Cornell becoming less selective as time goes on. It’s acceptance rate and average SAT scores are already near the bottom of top 20 colleges.</p>
<p>At a time when it seems college admissions is becoming more competitive, Cornell is actually making things less competitive. I don’t know why it’s choosing not to require transfers to send in SAT scores. I don’t know why it’s decreasing the percentage of students it’s enrolling via ED. I don’t know why it’s choosing to overenroll via RD rather than play it conservative and just go to the waitlist to fill any gaps. I just don’t get it.</p>
<p>Who knows just how long the trend of increased applications will continue(?), not me, but the upward trend that results in lower selectivity doesn’t seem to be over quite yet. Also, let’s hope that norcalguy’s pessimistic forecast above is off-the-mark. I think it is, just like the many shortsighted pundits who wrote off Cornell in the NYC Tech campus competition vs Stanford – Cornell can surprise you every now and then.</p>
<p>I am convinced that senior leadership is what controls the admissions policies at Cornell. Most of admissions officers at Cornell just work for their bosses and whether they agree with this kind of f-ed up policy or not, they are trained and conditioned to practice admissions as senior leadership in admissions committee pleases.</p>
<p>Hence, I don’t think anything will EVER change at Cornell’s admissions UNLESS we replace the senior leadership in Cornell admissions committee. When UPenn and Duke replaced their senior admissions leadership in early 2000s, they dramatically changed up their admissions policy and became much more selective. Look at UPenn: they rose from like #11 rank to #4 rank. Same as Duke.</p>
<p>In 2005, UChicago and Cornell were both #14. In 2006, UChicago was #15 and Cornell was #13. Look where they are today…</p>
<p>In terms of the application growth, Cornell has shown the lowest growth of application volume in the Ivy League + Stanford, MIT; Cornell usually has shown single digit growth while other institutions have shown explosive double digit growth. Please refer to the fourth chart on [url=<a href=“http://www.hernandezcollegeconsulting.com/ivy-league-admissions-statistics/]Ivy”>http://www.hernandezcollegeconsulting.com/ivy-league-admissions-statistics/]Ivy</a> League Admission Statistics for Class of 2015 Hernandez College Consulting, Inc. and Ivy League Admission Help<a href=“I%20haven’t%20verified%20the%20numbers%20so%20not%20100%%20sure%20if%20the%20numbers%20are%20accurate”>/url</a>. Compared to its peers, Cornell’s growth seems almost static. </p>
<p>Hopefully Tech campus will attract more applications but it’s a thirty year project. In the meantime, Cornell should market little better so they can increase the yield % as well as the growth of applications.</p>
<p>You haters [trolls?] are just tooo much. For what its worth, in the 2012 USNWR rankings, Cornell’s academic reputation index ranked #6 in the country [higher than Chicago, Penn, and Duke]. Cornell was also ranked #9 by academic guidance counselors. It still receives more applications than any Ivy. It’s 2016 ED application growth was 2nd best in the Ivies.</p>
<p>That’s true, but you’ve also have to look at the other side. If, for the Class of 2015, Cornell had admitted as high of a percentage of the total class side for the early decision round as Penn did (around 48%), then Cornell would have had less than a 15% acceptance rate as compared to its 18% rate last year. Penn caters to the rankings, why not Cornell? That’s how Penn shot up through the rankings.</p>
<p>Just that simply change makes a huge difference. And that’s even including the fact that Cornell greatly overenrolled last year, by nearly 200 students. They could have easily admitted less RD students and ACTUALLY use the waitlist for once.</p>
<p>Okay, I’m starting to agree with LazyKid and norcalguy here, but I have a couple questions:</p>
<p>-Hasn’t Cornell’s acceptance rate been constantly decreasing over the years? Or are you guys just talking about acceptance rate relative to other top schools?</p>
<p>-Brown is tied with Cornell right now at #15, but its admissions rate is like half of Cornell’s. Is this because Brown doesn’t have some of the excellent programs that Cornell offers, or is it more a lack of graduate school prestige?</p>
<p>-Don’t you feel like admitting even more kids through ED rounds is a bit unfair for the kids who can’t afford to go without knowing their aid?</p>
<p>I’m not sure about why Brown is ranked #15, but I will tell you that #15 is the lowest rank Cornell has had since 1995.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Yes, its acceptance rate has been constantly decreasing over the years. Back when I entered Cornell (in 2003), its acceptance rate was 30%. Yet, it continues to slip in the rankings. That’s because relative to other schools, its acceptance rate and SAT scores continue to lag. </p>
<p>UChicago is a good example. In the past, it was largely an undesirable school with good academics that attracted a very self-selective group of applicants. Then it switched to the Common App and aggressively marketed itself to lower its acceptance rate and it has shot up the rankings, despite being largely the same school it was 8 years ago.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I’m sure it’s hammered by the academic reputation/peer assessment score (which is tied largely to the quality of graduate problems). I thank god for the PA score because if not for that, Cornell would probably be ranked around 25. That said, having a PA score does not preclude Cornell from increasing its selectivity so I fail to see how behappy7’s post is relevant. Why not have an excellent PA score AND be selective?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>You need ED admissions to stay competitive in today’s market. That’s just the truth of the matter. No need to admit 48% via Ed. But, it’s not terrible to admit 40-45% via ED. People who apply ED generally bring extra benefits (such as being a legacy or athlete) or, at the very least, are extra interested in Cornell. I’d rather fill my school with ED applicants for whom Cornell is their #1 choice than RD applicants who are Ivy rejects and using Cornell as their safety.</p>
<p>As mathstarftw, I, and others have pointed out, there are simple things that Cornell does that make no sense. Why overenroll by 200 students? It puts even more of a strain on university resources, not to mention artificially raises your acceptance rate. Why not underenroll by 50 students and then just fill the 50 from the waitlist?</p>
<p><a href=“http://digitalcommons.ilr.cornell.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1000&context=cheri[/url]”>http://digitalcommons.ilr.cornell.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1000&context=cheri</a></p>
<p>This is a paper, ironically published on an ILR website, about the impact of rankings on a college’s acceptance rate, desirability to prospective applicants, and yield.</p>
<p>Plus if Cornell makes it self much more selective, the brightest students in the nation may actually start coming to Cornell. Like I haven’t enrolled yet and there are smart people at Cornell, very smart, but are there the geniuses and whizes you see at MIT and Caltech? I would like to see more of those at Cornell.</p>
<p>And Cornell’s acceptance rate is dropping not because Cornell is accepting less students, but because more students are applying each year. The total number accepted is relatively constant each year, which is in the mid-6000</p>
<p>lazykid on this thread:
</p>
<p>Lazykid started this thread
<a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/harvard-university/1264022-harvard-admissions-unfair-5.html:[/url]”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/harvard-university/1264022-harvard-admissions-unfair-5.html:</a>
</p>
<p>LazyKid - I believe you are a transfer student.</p>
<p>I brag about my daughter? What about this post from someone about you on the Harvard thread:
</p>
<p>The thread was shut down becasue of repetitive whining by OP, which is what I am seeing here.</p>
<p>I couldn’t let this one go by:
My youngest is 18, so that would mean I had her when I was 42. How many women have babies at 42?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Yes. The best that Cornell has the offer is as good as the top students at Harvard, MIT, Caltech, etc. Cornell still produces Rhodes Scholars. Cornell still sends people to Harvard Medical School, Goldman Sachs, and Stanford Law School every year. Cornell still wins international and national competitions.</p>
<p>However, the difference is that Cornell has more students who are barely scraping by than those other colleges. It’s the quantity of bottom students that makes Cornell unique. Honestly, if you have a 2300 SAT score and a good GPA and you apply ED, you should probably get into Cornell. I have no idea why every single year, on the ED thread, there are so many 2300 scorers rejected and 1900 scorers accepted.</p>
<p>Apparently Harvard, the best institution, does that too- rejects 2300 (no, I think it’s 2400 for Harvard) and accepts 1900 (2100 for Harvard) scorers. Maybe Cornell is not so unique.</p>
<p>Not in the same quantities if you compare average SAT scores and acceptance rates. And you’re right, 1900 for Cornell is like 2100 for Harvard. At other top schools, you need great quantitative stats + great intangibles. At Cornell, you seem to only need great quantitative stats OR great intangibles (and most of the time, Cornell sides with the intangibles). I still fail to see how a great essay can substitute for intelligence and hardwork.</p>
<p>College admissions is never perfectly quantitative. But, I think pretty much everyone agrees that Cornell’s admissions is the least quantitative out of all top schools. If I hear, “you just have write a great essay” one more time…</p>
<p>Just to follow up, USNWR’s reputation ranking for Cornell (2011; do not have most recent edition) was 92, higher than Penn and Brown (91s) and Dartmouth (89).</p>
<p>norcalguy - you could just be an extremely smart guy, so most normal people would seem like bottom of the barrel to you. </p>
<p>My kid was getting kiled in most of her math classes. She was actually getting help from a brilliant math major from Tufts (lower ranking than Cornell). Yes, when she crossed over to Hotel or AEM to take some finance or accounting courses, she did find some students had difficulties in grasping some concepts quickly. D1 found it quite easy because of her strong math background. But when D1 took an art history course, she got her first C on a test, while other students got As. Most people are not good at everything.</p>
<p>Good or bad, Cornell is made up of many colleges. Each of those colleges look for different type of students, and that’s where fit comes in. A brilliant engineering student may not be able to do well in American Literature. A student who could ace the securitization course in Hotel (I believe that’s where it is taught) may do very poorly in biology. My kid took few courses outside of comfort zone as P/F because she wanted to explore, and she ended up adding “Gender Studies” as a minor.</p>
<p>D1’s roommate was a fashion design major (human ecology), and D1’s big sister was a meteorology major (more specifically as a weather reporter). I don’t know what kind of math SAT score a fashion design major would need to be successful, or as a meteorology major. But they are both working, the big sis is working at a TV station as a weather reporter.</p>
<p>Oldfort, I argue that there are really only two true “fit” majors at Cornell. One is Hotel School. And one is Architecture. These two schools have by far the lowest average SAT scores. And I’m fine with that. They’re tops in their fields. And one can easily see why SAT scores are not as important for them. </p>
<p>However, for other colleges within Cornell, admitting people based on fit is silly. </p>
<ol>
<li><p>These people are going to change majors once they enroll. That’s just a fact of life. College kids are fickle and change majors all the time. Anyone can write a great essay about agribusiness or food science. But, there’s no guarantee that they’ll actually remain in those majors for very long.</p></li>
<li><p>Despite their reputation as “fit” colleges, what are the most popular destinations for graduates from CALS, HumEc, and ILR? Medicine, Business, Law. Shocker, right? Ivy League students aspiring to be doctors and lawyers? Unheard of! What these 3 pathways have in common is that they are professional/vocational pathways that require almost no background knowledge. You can major in literally anything that still become a doctor, lawyer, or go into investment banking. Instead, these 3 pathways all require hardwork and intelligence. That’s where Cornell skimps and consequently Cornell students are worse at getting into top med schools, law schools, and banks than students at other top colleges. Cornell students (on average) simply aren’t as smart. So, I argue that SAT scores and GPA are as important for admission into CALS, humEC, and ILR as they are for CAS and Engineering.</p></li>
</ol>
<p>
</p>
<p>I’m a smart cookie. I know that. I averaged over a 4.0 in my last 5 semesters at Cornell as a science major and premed. But, my conclusions are not just based on first hand experience. If you read over my comments in this thread, I don’t think you’ll find many anecdotes from me. My opinions stem from looking at the statistics of entering Cornell students (freshmen and transfers) and the post-grad data of outgoing Cornell students (such as med school acceptance rate, average LSAT score, etc.). There’s no data that suggests Cornell students perform better.</p>
<p>Cornell shouldn’t be enrolling “normal” people. Cornell should be enrolling superb people.</p>