Harvard drops SCEA; Princeton drops binding ED; when will Stanford follow?

<p>Last week, Harvard dropped its early program and gained virtually unanimouds praise for doing so; today, Princeton, which had been a binding ED school, followed suit.</p>

<p>It seems likely that President Levin of Yale - after a decent interval to show that he didn't just take his cue from Harvard, will likely make the same move. After all, only two years ago he said he thought early programs should be eliminiated, and that he'd love to do it if only Yale's peer schools would follow.</p>

<p>What about Stanford? I's think that Stanford would pay less of a penalty in terms of a yield hit than any other elite except Harvard.</p>

<p>They never emphasize SCEA to begin with. I'd bet they will all drop it sooner or later.</p>

<p>yeah i agree</p>

<p>I would think that Richard Shaw would be especially able to make a case for doing without SCEA at Stanford. Of course, the president of the university will get to make the public announcement, as was done at the peer institutions.</p>

<p>Brown has stated that they will not be getting rid of their ED program.</p>

<p>But with every valedictorian this side of the Mississippi applying SCEA to Stanford now, because the east coast elites have dropped all the early admissions programs... I can see how their pool will really increase.</p>

<p>Shaw and Hennessy know what it takes to compete. </p>

<p>They'll drop SCEA in good time to stay competitive with their only peer school--Harvard.</p>

<p><a href="http://www.nytimes.com/imagepages/2006/09/17/weekinreview/20060917_LEONHARDT_CHART.html%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.nytimes.com/imagepages/2006/09/17/weekinreview/20060917_LEONHARDT_CHART.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>Thanks for the link, byerly. This helps during the conversations about top students' desire when chosing schools in a 'global sense' or a quick glace without much drilling down into individual departments, special programs, etc. It would be nice to see what the model would look like if top schools from other contries are included as well.</p>

<p>The number of cross-admits with individual schools outside the United States is probably relatively small in most cases.</p>

<p>It is my view that Yale reached its high point with the cross-admits several years ago around the time of the study.</p>

<p>With the waitlist use this year at Yale, clearly they weren't as dominant as in years past.</p>

<p>
[quote]
With the waitlist use this year at Yale, clearly they weren't as dominant as in years past.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I'm not so sure if that's the biggest reason. Yale's done well as of late, and with a rising yield, it'd make sense that adcoms would be cautious about having too many matriculants (they've been facing overcrowding issues lately) and thus resorted to the waitlist to have a little bit more control over the matter.</p>

<p>Stanford is certainly a peer school to HYP, but I was actually surprised it didn't do better in the NYT table. I would have guessed that Stanford would beat out Yale in cross-admits. Even against Princeton, which can't even include presumably enthusiastic ED matriculants among cross-admits, Stanford barely wins. And the Sole-CA-Superpower factor didn't help much with cross-admit protection against Harvard, it seems.</p>

<p>It doesn't really lower Stanford, but I'm surprised nonetheless.</p>

<p>The data is several years old. Stanford has done better since.</p>

<p>What is a source of newer data?</p>

<p>
[quote]
And the Sole-CA-Superpower factor didn't help much with cross-admit protection against Harvard, it seems.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Because of Caltech and Berkeley?</p>

<p>See: "We Offered, They Declined"</p>

<p><a href="http://news-service.stanford.edu/news/2004/october6/decline-106.html%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://news-service.stanford.edu/news/2004/october6/decline-106.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>
[quote]

[quote]

And the Sole-CA-Superpower factor didn't help much with cross-admit protection against Harvard, it seems.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Because of Caltech and Berkeley?

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Berkeley, I can see. If you're a Regents scholar with a limited budget, makes sense. Caltech I can see as well, but Caltech tends to be far more specialized and the number of the kinds of students who are Caltech-oriented to the point that they would pick it over Stanford, I'd guess, are relatively limited.</p>

<p>according to the revealed preferences study of a couple years back, stanford takes a whopping 95% of cross-admits from berkeley. so it doesn't have much competition from its bay area rival.</p>

<p><a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/17/weekinreview/17leonhardt.html%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/17/weekinreview/17leonhardt.html&lt;/a> (graphic)</p>

<p>[edit: double post]</p>

<p>I wouldn't exclude the possibility, however, that some families in some income ranges much prefer applying to Berkeley (to "save money for the next degree," as they say) to applying to Stanford at all. They wouldn't show up in cross-admit statistics.</p>