Is it HYP or just HY?

<p>Harvard was spelled wrong in that Princeton article, hehe.</p>

<p>P's lower down on the preference scale because ethnic minorities (overrepresented and underrepresented alike) tend to favor Yale, Harvard, and Stanford over Princeton, mostly because of hearsay that Princeton is "too white." Mind you, I'm not saying that's true. I go to an Asian-majority school, and I know that's the perception about Princeton here. </p>

<p>The perception that Princeton isn't diverse and is for rich kids really hurts Princeton's yield. But it doesn't hurt Princeton's prestige. It's definately HYP. Actually, it's HYPS.</p>

<p>Princeton's yield has been higher than Yale's in each of the last 15 years or so, I believe, by a greater or lesser margin.</p>

<p>From my perspective, it's HYP. The fall from there is dramatic, far more than not getting into your first choice among those three. (IE, you wanted H but got into P only, not so bad; having to go to Brown/Dartmout/Columbia much worse than not getting into P)</p>

<p>"Princeton's yield has been higher than Yale's in each of the last 15 years or so, I believe, by a greater or lesser margin."</p>

<p>That's because Yale loses a larger percentage of Yale-Harvard cross admits, I think, than Princeton does Princeton-Harvard cross admits. Isn't that right? You know all the stats. Yale and Harvard are more similar to one another than they are to Princeton, and Harvard has the additional advantage of having that incomparable name over Yale. </p>

<p>Yale dares to admit stronger entering classes, and that has consequences for the yield. Princeton, by contrast, selects a slightly less qualified pool to keep its yield numbers up. Read the revealed preference study. It's interesting.</p>

<p>Yield means almost nothing at this level. Even USSnooze dropped it.</p>

<p>Yield is entirely decided by Princeton's high Early Decision acceptance rate and Yale's low Early Action acceptance rate. Princeton knows they will get a 100% yield on those students (which Yale does not bind its own applicants to) and so admits an abnormally large percentage during Early Decision.</p>

<p>This year, Yale accepted 18% of early applicants (Harvard, 21%) with an expected 88% yield in its non-binding program and Princeton accepted 29% of applicants with an enforced 100% yield. Princeton doesn't want its admits to apply to Yale, whereas Yale could care less if its admits apply to Princeton.</p>

<p>I'm not sure you can say Yale has had, in recent years, a markedly "stronger class" than Princeton, so as to rationalize Princeton's uniformly higher yield rate. How do argue that this is so? There doesn't seem to be much to choose from between the two with respect to SAT ranges. </p>

<p>I am aware of the Revealed Preference study, but it doesn't support a claim that Yale has - on average - a "stronger class," does it?</p>

<p>And the alleged "advantage" Princeton has in obtaining a high yield because it offers ED rather than "restricted EA" is more apparent than real. </p>

<p>To begin with, both Princeton and Yale had binding ED from 1996 to 2004. and Princeton's yield was higher in each of those years.</p>

<p>Secondly, "restricted ED" is the functional equivalent of binding ED in that those applying are prevented from applying elsewhere early. The option of applying RD elsewhere is a hollow one, since the RD admit rates are so much lower.</p>

<p>Third, the fact that the three "restricted EA" schools "enjoy" a yield rate of upwards of 90% - vs a normal yield rate of 98% for ED - means that "restricted EA" isn't as open as it pretends to be, and that the "restricted EA" schools run very little risk of losing their early admits.</p>

<p>“It looks like HY are 1 and 2, but P is definitely not 3”</p>

<p>At least you are partly correct Breeze. P is definitely not 3. In the world of undergraduate education it is clearly #1. As an institution made up primarily of undergraduates, it will never appear at the top of “research university rankings” so often cited by H boosters. But in terms of the value of what it offers students in years one through four, it is unmatched.
A sampling of those who agree with me are as follows:</p>

<ol>
<li>The U.S. News & World Report Annual Rankings</li>
<li>The Boston based Atlantic Monthly </li>
<li>The Prowl’r Student College Guide</li>
<li>The Princeton Review’s List of Toughest Schools to Get Into</li>
<li>The Early Admissions Game (where Avery himself, a Harvard employee/researcher
lists Princeton’s median SAT as the highest in the country (behind only CalTech/MIT).</li>
<li>The Consus Group which regularly flip flops H and P at 1 and 2.
Etc.
Etc.</li>
</ol>

<p>The bottom line is that in the world of UNDERGRADUATE rankings no school gets more number one rankings than Princeton. As for graduate school, well that’s another matter.</p>

<p>alphacdcd, the flaw of your argument is that each of those references use quantitative factors to measure selectivity. Princeton has a higher yield and lower admit rate than it would if it had the same policy as Yale (Early Action). In the actual preferences of the students, then you can see the large difference between Yale and Princeton without relying on statistics (i.e. yield, acceptance rate - both altered by Early Decision program) that Princeton can manipulate to blur reality.</p>

<p>SAT scores aren't everything, but Byerly brought them up... Yale has had a higher range of SAT scores for at least the past 22 years (1983 to 2004). The difference is lower now than it has been for most of that time, but Yale's have always been higher than Princeton's.</p>

<p>Do you call a peer assessment a quantitative factor? I respectfully suggest you go back and read the publications cited. They are popular for a reason.
The report you cite was assembled largely by a Harvard employee. The evaluations I cited were independent. The reports I cited are well known to many GCs and college hopefuls. The report you mention, for good reason, is cited by few and recognized by less.
But the real bottom line is that Princeton is known for its undergraduate focus. Harvard is not and Yale is making a legitimate effort to develop that reputation. Unless these truths change, the rankings will remain the same.</p>

<p>So let me be clear, alphacdcd: You see the USNews rankings as the most legitimate and worthy indicator - absent any better or more widely-accepted standard -of the relative quality of undergraduate educational institutions?</p>

<p>alphacdcd, you think that Princeton is known for its undergraduate focus and that Yale is "making a legitimate effort to develop that reputation"? Yale has historically been known for its unique system of undergraduate residential colleges, and was the first school to adopt them in the United States. Princeton copied Yale's residential colleges later, yet Yale remains the only Ivy where 100% of undergraduates have the opportunity to live in residential colleges today. Recently Princeton announced that they will partially switch to a system where juniors and seniors will remain at their residential colleges, the Yale way.</p>

<p>Princeton is making a legitimate effort to adopt Yale's residential college system, yet it is not there yet. Yale is unrivaled in its undergraduate experience, and Princeton knows this (or why would they try to copy Yale and its residential colleges?). You are simply assuming that because Princeton is smaller, it is a better place for undergrads. That is plainly wrong.</p>

<p>Quite the contrary. What I am saying is that the sum total of those unbiased publications exceeds the value of the one biased study. After all, isn't the proof in the pudding?
I don't see any GCs or students lined up to purchase the Harvard employees findings? Do you?<br>
Are you also claiming that Harvard (with its 6k undergraduates and 14k graduate students) has a greater undergraduate focus than Princeton or Yale (especially after President Summers told those two undergrads recently that if they wanted more contact with their professors they should have gone elsewhere)?</p>

<p>alphacdcd, peer assessment plays a very small role in the rankings you cite. That's the only thing out of all of those rankings that you could say was not manipulated by Princeton? Both Yale and Princeton have 4.9's in peer assessment, so obviously that's not what I was referring to.</p>

<p>Princeton has...
1.) Tried to copy Yale's system of residential colleges for undergraduates.
2.) Broken into Yale's admissions website entering student info w/o permission.
3.) Instituted an Early Decision program to falsely boost its yield and lower its acceptance rate.
4.) Been shown by its own study to be the least sexually active campus in the Ivies.
5.) Been shown to be #6 (H-Y #1/#2)in the actual preferences of high school students.</p>

<p>That's an all-star record of undergraduate excellence! Congrats.</p>

<p>Breeze. again I respectfully suggest you go back and do your homework/due diligence. Princeton doesn't need to copy anyone. For the most part it has nothing but undergraduates (something H&P cannot say).
Are you saying that P is trying to separate undergraduates from themselves? Princeton has the best of both worlds. The intimacy of the best LACs and the resources and quality instruction of the best universities.<br>
It is able to do this because its endowment, on a per student basis, is the highest in the nation. But please, respectfully, do your homework.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Princeton doesn't need to copy anyone.

[/quote]
Then why do you think they are increasingly copying Yale's system of undergraduate residential colleges? It appears that Yale has defined undergraduate education for Princeton. Yale is the leader, Princeton a follower.</p>

<p>
[quote]
The intimacy of the best LACs

[/quote]
Wrong! Look at the statistics... Yale has smaller classes than Princeton. Less classes than Yale with under 20 students and more classes than Yale with over 50. That's in the "stats" of your own favorite ranking. It appears you are the one who has not done your homework.</p>

<p>I think you were better off when you referred to sex surveys to support your position. You'll forgive me if I move on. This discussion has degenerated.
Take care and good luck.</p>

<p>P.S. Food for thought. Can you think of a single UNDERGRADUATE ranking listing Yale ahead of Princeton. I listed 5 nat'l. rankings above that had P over Y and could have listed several more! Can you think of any?</p>

<p>
[quote]
Can you think of a single UNDERGRADUATE ranking listing Yale ahead of Princeton. I listed 5 nat'l. rankings above that had P over Y and could have listed several more! Can you think of any?

[/quote]
</p>

<p>NBER, the only one that can't be manipulated. Yale is well ahead of Princeton. Dude, no survey that puts Princeton above Yale, or either above Harvard passes a sanity check.</p>

<p>"4.) Been shown by its own study to be the least sexually active campus in the Ivies."</p>

<p>What does that have to do with /anything/? I suppose your other points could be debated to be true, but the fact that Princeton students have better things to do with their time than have wild indiscriminate sex (i.e. actually going to COLLEGE and STUDYING) has absolutely nothing to do with "quality of undergraduate experience." If anything, it indicates that you have a /better/ educational experience at Princeton.</p>