<p>45 Percenter is comparing UPEnn 2014 admit rate vs Cornell 2013 admit rate. LOL.
Anyway, UPenn still ramains Second easiest IVY.</p>
<p>sounds exactly like gogupo…and no 45 percenter didn’t compare anything…he(she?) just gave stats for Penn alone.</p>
<p>^ “Second easiest Ivy,” “LOL”–DEFINITELY gogupo (and Y<strong>7</strong>_). Anyone remember when he started all those outrageous Penn-sucks threads, including the one based on the number of Penn grads who go on to the CalTech physics Ph.D. program? He’s a real hoot! ;)</p>
<p>admit rate doesn’t mean crap, nice try though</p>
<p>Penn seems easier to get into than Harvard, Princeton, Yale, Columbia, and Dartmouth. Not sure about Brown and Cornell. At best it’s the third easiest Ivy to get into in my opinion.</p>
<p>
No. You are getting paternalism mixed up with elitism. A lot of times they overlap. But one can be elitist without being paternalistic and vice-versa. In my opinion it’s more elitist to not correct the person because you think they are some random (likely not wealthy) person who doesn’t matter and therefore doesn’t need to be corrected. You would surely correct a potential employer. This difference in how you treat people is elitism at its core.</p>
<p>Dartmouth is easier. This year Penn might be about on par with Columbia. It’s rate is about to drop I feel.</p>
<p>That said, who cares about the difference of 9% vs. 10%, or even percent acceptance in general.</p>
<p>
I disagree, but I guess we are each entitled to our own opinions.</p>
<p>
It doesn’t matter if “Joe Schmo” makes $10,000 a year or $1,000,000, if he’s just some guy down the street who doesn’t matter, he’s not worth correcting. Are we still elitists?</p>
<p>I’d say just based on my experience; no. Simply because of still prevalent mix-ups with Penn State, despite living only an hour away.</p>
<p>Nevertheless, it shouldn’t matter. If it does you’re coming for the wrong reasons.</p>
<p>Penn has almost consistently been the Top 5 colleges, tied with Stanford, just under harvard princeton yale and i forgot the other. obviously, this means its one of the best colleges.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>you are right that this is a surprise to me… i thought stanford was always at the top… well, “always” as any school can be. it’s sad though that just because columbia has passed stanford and caltech in the rankings that the latter two seem less relevant now; i saw a thread comparing columbia’s prestige to stanford’s, and a lot of people said columbia was more prestigious. and now, people think the “C” in hypsmc stands for columbia just because usnews ranked it 4th last year.</p>
<p>also, cornell’s acceptance rate last year was 18%. i don’t understand why usnews reports the acceptance rate from 2 years ago.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>LOL…what’s your point? That paternalism is acceptable but elitism is not? </p>
<p>
random person = poor person? Prove it.</p>
<p>
No…I would not need to. At least not for any employer that I would want to work for.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>So now you’re “limiting” and “narrowing” the definition of prestige to a college’s acceptance rate?</p>
<p>
Obviously. Didn’t you know that Alice Lloyd College, College of the Ozarks, and Alaska Pacific University were more prestigious than half the Ivy League? ;)</p>
<p>UPenn is bottom Ivy, at the same level as Cornell.</p>
<p>Thanks for your contribution and insight radiosix (gogupo)</p>
<p>gogupo/radio six is hilarious, he probably got rejected 20 years ago and still comes back here to make himself feel better</p>
<p>Radiosix’s lack of insight is very disappointing. Penn’s departments consistently rate in the top ten for many fields according to NRC, and rate competitively, otherwise. It is in the top 25 most selective colleges in America, and as a national university, USN rates it 5 out of 1400. It also has the US’s number 1 business school where Donald Trump and Warren Buffett (incompletely, albeit) studied. Beyond these over-played numbers, ENIAC, the first electronic computer, was invented at Penn, and prion proteins (infectious proteins, the only molecules known to cause disease without a genetic component) were discovered here. Penn’s chemistry department alone has 7 Nobel Prize winners (please see how many HYP holds). There are over 700 natural science labs on campus. In terms of graduate schools, many of their programs hold their own–the following come to mind: psychology, education, and medicine (screw HYP, can you say HHP?). How much cooler can you get?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>LOL
[NRC</a> Rankings in Each of 41 Areas](<a href=“http://www.stat.tamu.edu/~jnewton/nrc_rankings/nrc41.html]NRC”>NRC Rankings in Each of 41 Areas)</p>
<p>UPenn ranks</p>
<p>Classics #13
Phlosophy #26
Biochem #16
Cello Bio #22
Ecology #14
Genetics #15
Electrical Engineering #41 LOL
Mechanical Engineering #22
Chem #25 LOL
CompSci #24
Geoscience #75 LOL
Math #22
Physics #17</p>
<p>Political Science #42 LOL
.
.
.</p>
<p>UPenn is a lot worse than I thought.</p>
<p>
How can it be? You’ve cherry-picked and posted that exact same list at least 2 previous times under 2 prior identities! You need to review your old shtick!</p>
<p>How about resurrecting that old CalTech physics Ph.D. program chestnut? That one was hysterical. :D</p>
<p>Thank you, Radiosix, for ignoring the rest of the 41 ratings. Besides the numbers, Penn is clearly hyper-productive. I would like to second the Caltech Ph.D. program bit, too. I am pretty sure that if you have nothing productive to say on a thread devoted to Penn, you should pretend to have some semblance of a life elsewhere.7</p>