<p>no lie, guy:</p>
<p><a href="http://sciserv.org/sts/64sts/finalists.asp%5B/url%5D">http://sciserv.org/sts/64sts/finalists.asp</a></p>
<p>See also: <a href="http://www.nydailynews.com/news/local/story/275147p-235603c.html%5B/url%5D">http://www.nydailynews.com/news/local/story/275147p-235603c.html</a></p>
<p>What is most interesting about the Intel Finalists, is how many are the children of immigrants.</p>
<p>Should we be listening to Bryerly? </p>
<p>The PR in their latest published rankings of the "Toughest Schools to Get Into" had the following results: 1. MIT 2. Princeton 3. CalTech 4. Yale 5. Harvard. In response to the PR rankings Byerly stated the following:</p>
<p>"silly PR "rankings" (biggest party school, most tree-huggers, toughest to get into, best food, etc) based on tiny, non-scientific returns from survey forms handed out on street-corners at various campuses, on which respondents rate only <em>their own school</em> and don't (how could they anyway?) compare their school to any others."</p>
<p>The reality (from PR itself) is as follows:</p>
<p>"Admissions Selectivity Rating
This rating measures how competitive admissions are at the school. This rating is determined by several institutionally-reported factors, including: the class rank, average standardized test scores, and average high school GPA of entering freshmen; the percentage of students who hail from out-of-state; and the percentage of applicants accepted. By incorporating all these factors, our Admissions Selectivity Rating adjusts for "self-selecting" applicant pools. University of Chicago, for example, has a very high rating, even though it admits a surprisingly large proportion of its applicants. Chicago's applicant pool is self-selecting; that is, nearly all the school's applicants are exceptional students. This rating is given on a scale of 60-99. Please note that if a school has an Admissions Selectivity Rating of 60*, it means that the school did not report to us all of the statistics that go into the rating by our deadline. "</p>
<p>You've just proved that Byerly is a scheming bastard!!!!! OMG OMG OMG</p>
<p>my point: Your example of overy dishonesty sucks!</p>
<p>what's the point of attacking byerly on this thread? you're no better than him when you do it without provocation.</p>
<p>for the record, by "overy" I meant "overt" </p>
<p>LOL :)</p>
<p>hehe...i did wonder about that. :)</p>
<p>What in the world...a simple correlation study became one of the finalist projects while our schools excellent semifinalists never made it to the finals? This makes no sense...</p>
<p>my search for a dance date is over...kidding</p>
<p>I'm just curious, do intel-science finalists ever have economic/political projects?</p>
<p>I couldn't seem to find one, browing through the list - most were pure math, biology, or engineering related.</p>
<p>Economics/Politics aren't one of the categories. You'd have to modify the project to fit the social sciences.</p>