<p>True, in 1998 Harvard had 83% of common admits.<br>
Yale's admit rate was around 17% back then too.
I guess then, the discrepancy between the NBER and actual data for that year is due to financial aid.</p>
<p>Harvard's acceptance rate that year was 13%. The cross-admit edge for Harvard vs. Yale has been in that same range in every year since. For whatever reason, Harvard usually - although not always - takes a higher fraction of cross-admits from Yale than from Stanford, MIT or Princeton. One might speculate that cross-admit pools for the latter schools generally include more science-oriented applicants, and those schools are all strong in science - particularly engineering.</p>
<p>
[quote]
George Bush is as much a Harvard man as Bill Clinton was a "Yalie".
[/quote]
"W" (I can't believe you're so young that you call him "George Bush"... what are you, 18? "George Bush" is his father...) spent 4 years at Yale and 2 at HBS. So he's twice as much a Yalie as he is a Harvardite, but it's true that both schools have a claim on him. Just like Georgetown has a claim on Clinton. W is probably the dumbest of the Yalies that have been running this country for a long time anyway, must be the Harvard part? I think so.</p>
<p>I would find it hard to believe that Harvard even gets 83% of cross-admits with Princeton. The NBER is totally worthless if you believe the number was 83% when they got 59% versus Yale in the NBER. Isn't it from the same year, or only one year difference?</p>
<p>For one thing, Harvard's overall yield is about 78%, period, right? That would make it very hard to believe that their yield of Yale cross-admits is 83%, because that would seem to imply it would be more like 96% versus Princeton or Stanford. That would be impossible, given the total yield. In fact, the Yale number in and of itself would also be impossible.</p>
<p>You can't get 83% versus your closest competitor and end up with only 78% overall. Who would Harvard lose the kids to then, public schools? Doesn't make any sense.</p>
<p>As I have said, the edge vs. the other leading "competitors" - Stanford, MIT and Princeton has generally been less than vs. Yale (probably due to a greater number of science-oriented applicants and potential engineers in cross-admit pools with those schools.) </p>
<p>There have been many published "rule of thumb" estimates of 75% for Harvard's cross-admit edge vs this field. 75%, of course, is less than the normal yield rate - which is often closer to 80%. </p>
<p>Surprisingly (or maybe it shouldn't be a surprise) nearly half of Harvard's "losses" come to state flagships, other publics and miscellaneous schools at various ends of the country. </p>
<p>One can't always know for sure, of course, but it seems often the case that some of these who were admitted but chose to go elsewhere received substantial merit aid. These financial incentives are something neither Harvard nor the other Ivies can compete with currently.</p>
<p>So in your opinion, Harvard wins more common admits with Yale than it wins with Stanford or MIT (Princeton aside as it does not offer the science programs of Stanford and MIT). It must also be your opinion then that Yale must win even more than 67% of common admits with Princeton to make up for the Harvard numbers in the NBER. If you plug in 17% versus Harvard, Yale wins almost 90% of cross admits versus Princeton to make the NBER numbers work.</p>
<p>So in your view, Yale has a ~75%/25% common admit edge against Stanford and a ~88%/12% common admit edge against Princeton. Either that, or you don't think the NBER numbers are any more useful than say U.S. News.</p>
<p>The thing is, I think Yale has recently straddled 50%/50% versus Stanford as the "New Economy" has ebbed and flowed, meaning that combined with the Harvard numbers, it must get 90%/10% against Princeton and 98%/2% against all other Ivies.</p>
<p>More than likely, the 83% vs. Harvard is not anywhere near what it really is. Might have been based on financial aid for that year.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I guess then, the discrepancy between the NBER and actual data for that year is due to financial aid.
[/quote]
That does seem the only plausible explanation. ~59% preferred Harvard to Yale in that pre-Gilmore Girls Era but many of those who prefer Yale ended up at Harvard that year due to Harvard throwing more money at them. These things can change year to year, but the important number is the actual preference.</p>
<p>I just hope that Yale doesn't live up to the "Old Boy, Old Blue" stereotype that America used to have of it. It seems that the average student at Yale comes from a family of slightly higher net worth than his counterparts at Harvard these days. At least a lot of networking opportunities come from being associated with those circles, I suppose.</p>
<p>At some point you are going to have to recognize the NBER survey for what it is - a biased and tainted report. It is authored by a Harvard employee. Enough said.</p>
<p>Today's RD report from Princeton confirms what H.S. students are looking for. Top quality education with an uncompromised, total focus on undergraduate education. The numbers in the Princeton report are real, unbiased and untainted.</p>
<p>alphacdcd, I don't think you have the intellectual horsepower to be participating in this Harvard and Yale discussion. Again I remind you that the original U.S. News ranking was developed by a Princeton grad as another sorry attempt to jab at the old guard of Harvard and Yale.</p>
<p>Princeton is creating Yale-like residential colleges at this very moment, am I wrong? It would appear that even Princeton agrees that Yale has the ideal undergraduate experience. And did I mention that class sizes are smaller at Yale than at Princeton? Despite Yale offering a greater breadth and depth of courses?</p>
<p>The most intimate atmosphere for undergraduate education in the Ivies is clearly that of Yale. If you want to hold Yale's enviable graduate and professional school students against it, that's your choice. But Yale undergraduates seemm to enjoy rubbing shoulders with Yale Law School students and other elite graduate students. The mixture at Yale is perfect - 50/50 between undergrads and grads. Harvard is far too oriented towards its graduate programs and Princeton doesn't have anything but the basic undergraduate stuff.</p>
<p>
I don't think you have the intellectual horsepower to be participating in this Harvard and Yale discussion.
</p>
<p>Ouch. Burn.</p>
<p>Ah. It looks like I caught that before breeze edited.</p>
<p>Hehe, you're a quick reader and typer! Since it's now a matter of record, I restored the original.</p>
<p>Meh. I found it amusing. I usually stay out of the proverbial "my ___ is bigger/better than yours!" threads.</p>
<p>Good idea, Schwaby. You're a good man, and strangely decent for a Princeton guy. ;)</p>
<p>Today's news about Princeton confirms that last year"s mega drop in Princeton applications was a fluke. But more students still apply to Yale than to Princeton. And if you are going to make a big difference between the 9% admission rate for Princeton this year (estimated on the Princeton page) and the 10% at Yale, then man, you need to get a life.</p>
<p>
[quote]
And if you are going to make a big difference between the 9% admission rate for Princeton this year (estimated on the Princeton page) and the 10% at Yale, then man, you need to get a life.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>You do realize you guys are arguing about relatively trivial cross-admit percentages and revealed preferences studies, right? :p</p>
<p>Breeze, Go back to defending Rice. Your out of your league. I have never attacked Yale. I challenge you to find any such attack. I have always believed Yale to be a great school.
I respectfully suggest you stop paying attention to tainted and biased material like the NBER report. Today's Princeton reports blows a huge hole in your twisted logic. The youth of America have made a seat a Princeton the most sought after in the country (again). That is a fact - get used to it.</p>
<p>If you have proof that the U.S. News is tainted, then tell us. Otherwise, go away!</p>
<p>Today's news doesn't prove anything about the NBER study. That study was a head to head challenge between schools for preference - not some sort of "how many people apply to this college". The two have nothing to do with eachother. And where is your proof that it is "biased and tainted" Though it has its flaws, it is better than actual yields since, as the NBER demonstrated for the case of Princeton, colleges go to great lengths to alter their numbers. Read it before commenting on it.</p>
<p>And how is Princeton the most sought after if less people apply to it than to Harvard or Yale?</p>
<p>Crimson, I am far from confused.
First, I dismiss the NBER survey in total because it is biased and tainted. It was written by a Harvard employee. Tainted information is ignored in all areas of study (unreliable info. in, unreliable info. out). Hence, you do not see this report being used or recommended by any GCs at the H.S. level. It was introduced to CC by a H booster in a self-serving manner.
Second, when looking at applications, you cannot look at the raw numbers (if you did, Ohio State might look to be the most selective school in the country). Instead you must look at the seats available as a percentage of the total number of applications. This is what the pros do (Princeton review, US News, Atlantic Monthly, etc). And it is exactly this group that has put Princeton in the #1 spot year after year (although they use other criteria as well).
I hope this clarifies matters.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Your out of your league.
[/quote]
That's classic. They didn't teach you how to spell you're at Princeton? And surely you don't think that Princeton wins a majority of its head-to-heads with either Yale or Harvard, do you? That's so cute.</p>