<p>I'd choose Penn over any of those schools any day...theoneo camden most definitely sucks...but philly does not. Sure there are bad areas, but there are sweet ones too.<br>
Pariah what do you mean they play the ranking game like no other..if you ask me it's easier to say that about other schools.<br>
Oh and Stanford is the only school of its prestige on the west coast (except Caltech which is just a tech school) which definitely helps it out with yield rate if you consider most west coast people would want to stay there</p>
<p>"just a tech school"</p>
<p>Why MIT over Caltech?</p>
<p>I don't think that's true at all, lishnik21. </p>
<p>Many students from the West Coast want to head east for college, especially considering most elite colleges reside closer to the Atlantic than to the Pacific.</p>
<p>Penn is nowhere near Stanford in terms of any numerical measure other than US News' deeply flawed rankings.</p>
<p>In terms of RD's matriculation rate, Stanford is 55% compared to Penn's 48, and that's with Penn's well-known and very public propensity to like students that specifically like Penn. Stanford accepts 13% of applicants compared to Penn's 21% or so. The WSJ rankings, biased as they are, put Stanford at #4 and Penn a dozen or so places behind. </p>
<p>How can you justify associating Penn's prestige/selectivity/whatever with Stanford's?</p>
<p>40% of the kids who go to Stanford are from California..thats a big precent..For Penn class of 2009 matriculation was 65%... 3,916 were accepted, 2,566 enrolled..and the number of kids accepted to a school is proportional to the number of kids it can facilitate...so if Penn can hold more kids, they can accept more...numbers are skewed in a way. I'm not gonna put down Stanford, cause I know its a good school, and I don't know much about it in detail, but at schoosl like Harvard, Yale, and Princeton, kids just aren't always as nice and personable. To me..thats important.</p>
<p>And why do you think kids at HYP aren't nice/personable? I've found all the people here to be really nice and down to earth...</p>
<p>Okay, so they have a 65% overall matriculation rate. But that's also due to an ED acceptance rate above 30% while Stanford's is about half that. Penn artificially manipulates their overall yeild rate by using ED, so it's really hard to compare Stanford to Penn. </p>
<p>As I said before, the true indicator is RD yield, which is 55-48. </p>
<p>You seem to accept all of my other statistics that I cited, then.</p>
<p>Actually, Stanford relied just as heavily on the early pool to fill its class of 2009 as Penn did: about 48% of the class, I believe.</p>
<p>Almost all the top schools have ED/EA that are just a sliver below 50%. This is no accident. Personally, I think that this manipulation of the numbers has turned college admissions more into a "game" than anything else. </p>
<p>Strategic admissions blow.</p>
<p>Yes, I have spelled out all these numbers in detail on earlier threads. 48% seems to be the magic number, since they all wish to avoid crossing the psychological 50% barrier on the ground that this would discourage RD applications.</p>
<p>If the poor RD schlumps only realized how heavily the odds are stacked against them vs the EA/ED applicants.</p>
<p>Something to watch is the fraction of total applicants who are EA/ED applicants.</p>
<p>If too many of the wise guys begin to catch on and early apps rise, the RD round will increasingly become the "losers round" - the repassage, as it were - consisting primarily of all those who were turned down or waitlisted at their 1st choice EA/ED!</p>
<p>Ack, that sucks so much (though I've already acknowledged its truth).</p>
<p>If I don't get into Yale SCEA it'll be so much harder to get into similarly ranked schools RD.</p>
<p>In which case you will undoubtedly panic and deem it necessary to apply to 10 or 12 places in order to cover yourself, and the schools will all congratulate themselves on their growing number of applications!</p>
<p>Hope EA works out for you!</p>
<br>
<blockquote> <p>If I don't get into Yale SCEA it'll be so much harder to get into similarly ranked schools RD<<</p> </blockquote>
<br>
<p>Not necessarily. My daughter was REJECTED (not even deferred) by Yale in EA, and in the RD round she was accepted by Harvard, Stanford, MIT, Berkeley, and others. She is very happy at Harvard.</p>
<p>So if you don't get into Yale EA your life isn't over.</p>
<p>Yea, I was deferred my early round by H but then accepted RD to all the schools I applied to, including Yale where I am now...of course, I felt like my RD app was much much better than my EA app...</p>
<p>Ivies hate Harvard for the same reasons Europeans hate America. Cuz it's numero uno and that inspires jealousy, which manifests itself in various forms.</p>
<p>Seriously though, Harvard sucks. America is pretty cool, tho.</p>
<p>You're from Philadelphia; so how do you know why a lot of european people dislike the US? I'm from Europe, and I can tell you one thing, it is not because we think it stands above us on some sort of ranking list. </p>
<p>People here dislike the US for a lot of reasons: fist of all your president and political system, i'm sorry guys but most european country's are a lot better off that you americans! Second of all because America BELIEVES it is number 1 (of course in many ways it is) and often acts as if they can decide everything alone, without considering other country's or the UN (irak, irak, irak) and that makes a lot of us angry and it isn't that good for our pride either...</p>
<p>But there are a lot of prejudices as well, especially about your social system (which of course is bad compared to most of the european systems, but those are impossible in the us and a lot of people don't realise this) and about american people, people here often believe americans are stupid. I would like to advice all of them to spent some time on this forum, and be proven wrong. American people are just as smart as european people and often more active and involved than we are. </p>
<p>And there are many other reasons I can't think of right now, anyway, the European dislike for the US is a lot more complicated that JohnnyK says... and of course a lot of us don't dislike the US at all, we just disagree with some things...</p>
<p>As an ending to this ridiculously long post I would like to point out that despite all this there is no place in the world I would rather go to college than New Haven, Connecticut, United states of America :)</p>
<p>Geez, talk about wrong place wrong time...</p>
<p>Any notion that European countries were better than the US (or even had achieved some sort of "European Social model") went up in flames with the 3000 French cars burned by disenfranchised, poorly integrated, and economically disadvantaged youth).</p>
<p>And no, France is not the exception to the rule. Similar tensions exist in other European countries. Need I remind you of the Van Gogh assassination in your own country? The list goes on...flight of the creative class (your desire to go to Yale being a prime example), high unemployment, shrinking populations...</p>
<p>As for the UN, well, gee, where to begin...I won't even bother. Anyone who takes that institution seriously either works for it or hasn't studied it and thus presumes it as functional (thank God for John Bolton, a Yalie no less)</p>
<p>Anyway, this has nothing to do with Yale, Penn, or even Harvard, but Europe and the United States. Both have deeply flawed social systems, but unfortunately, neither seems to have the answer for the other. Even if they did, the other side certainly isn't listening.</p>
<p>On a side note, the English word for "Irak" is "Iraq"</p>
<p>I don't know how you can say that the UN doesn't "work"...yea it's flawed and yea there's corruption...but it does so many good things too...but you talk as if the US--through John Bolton--is a moral force that will whip the UN into shape...there's corruption in the US government--I think anyone who thinks George Bush is doing only good for the country and for the world either works for him or is just biased...</p>
<p>we have a president who is an arrogant, narrow-minded, dim-witted (if at all) religious crazy who can't say "nuclear" and uses religion as an excuse for his stupidity, and a vice president who has a penchant--and probably a fetishistic fascination--with torturing people..."hi pot, i'm kettle...you're black!"...any American who critices other governments or organizations as being corrputed and ineffective needs to realize that perhaps the world may in some way be holding up a mirror, and we just don't like what we see.</p>
<p>First of all..since I just saw like the last ten posts I would like to comment that...yes Penn's early decision acceptance is higher than many other schools on this level...but it's only cause Penn is smart. They are accepting applicants who really truly want to be at Penn above all other schools (almost all of them at least). Sounds like a good move to me. Accepting a kid regular decision automatically produces the chance that they turn down enrollment for another school they like more, or accept enrollment because they didn't get into the the school they like more. So then you have a kid at Penn who doesn't truly want to be at Penn. With early, you get a kid that wants to be there, and is willing to pay up. Penn's higher early acceptance rating also attributes to it having one of the highest "happiness" ratings (I know thats not what its really called but I dont remember the name of the stat)</p>
<p>As far as America goes...it of course is endlessly flawed..but its the best out there right now. And yes Bush is a dumbass, but he has doen a couple good things. All in all, Lieberman should've run and won..GO JEWS.</p>
<p>Harvard's engineering makes Stanford look very good. Unlike other Ivies, Stanford loves Harvard. ;)</p>
<p>See: "We offered, they declined" <a href="http://news-service.stanford.edu/news/2004/october6/decline-106.html%5B/url%5D">http://news-service.stanford.edu/news/2004/october6/decline-106.html</a></p>