<p>OMG, if there's any school thanking its lucky stars that it wasn't mentioned in that condescending NYTimes article, it would be Amherst (I know because I was busy crossing myself that Wesleyan wasn't mentioned.) o-0</p>
<p>why can't we all just agree that because of the major influx of very intelligent and talented students into the "national college applicant pool" all of the colleges that were not quite ivy, but still good colleges to get a degree from (almost all of the colleges that were mentioned in this thread) will inevitably get better and better and smarter and smarter therefore necessitating an improvement in all categories that are academic. for example, if a college did not really have that great of a science program before the influx, after the influx when students that could have been admitted to ivies, or the schools right unde them, got rejected they will instead go to these schools, so in turn they will become much smarter therefore yielding a better science program, or any other program for that matter. </p>
<p>the truth in the situation is that because of the increasingly large number of "ivy capable" students and just overall capable, intelligent students the colleges that were never quite as good as the ivies, but were still considered top 50 colleges are all going to get much much better</p>
<p>I don't know how reliable these numbers are. The SAT for 2006 (excluding writing), was 1440 at Hopkins. I write to correct, or update this number because it is dangerous for kids who will be applying for 2008 to have erroneous information.</p>
<p>Numbers given are always for admitted students. There is no value to giving perspective students "enrolled" numbers, because what they want to know is the number they need to get admitted.
Also, where is the actual number for enrolled students available? I have actually never seen these numbers. Do the colleges/universities release these numbers?</p>
<p>
[quote]
There are only 8 unis that comprise the ivy league, so any school not in the 8 is considered NEW ivy, if you refer ivy as a high standard school.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>That is incorrect. If you and I are referring to the same article, you will see that they specifically mention "academic powerhouses" that have long been considered the top schools along with ivies such as: UChicago, Stanford, MIT...as well as the top LACs that have long been considered among the best for undergrad education: Amherst, Swat, Middlebury, Wesleyan, Williams. Then they go on to say "these are schools that have NOT been long considered the best but now are making a place at the top" and present their list of 25 "new ivies."</p>
<p>Yes, they are available. The common data set is "supposed" to have numbers for enrolled, though recently I found one of the colleges seemed to be using the number for admitted couple years ago. Northwestern's "fast facts" has the average SAT of the enrolled. The numbers for enrolled are valuable and reflect the stats of the actual student body. I think the numbers hawkette listed are for enrolled students.</p>
<p>Furman is a school that is very comparable to Davidson/Bowdoin/etc. The reason it doesn't rank highly on US News Rankngs is 1) it's acceptance rate 55%. If it only admitted 1500 like Davidson it would be in the 20s. 2) It's endowment amount per student (again if the student population was lower the average would be much higher) and 3)the perception that it's ultra conservative and a religious school which is not true (the school's chancellor at a new parent orientation meeting joked that studies had shown that after a 15 minute speech most audiences started thinking about sex so he needed to hurry up). For you SAT scores buffs 2006 middle was 1380. </p>
<p>With a 70% med school and 99% law school acceptance rate it should not be overlooked.</p>
<p>Reported SAT scores can be very different between accepted vs. enrolled students. Most numbers for 2007 will be for accepted students only (since enrolled students are still coming in off the wait list).</p>
<p>For instance, for 2006 Pomona enrolled students, SAT average is 1455. </p>
<p>For 2007 Pomona accepted students, SAT average is 1490 (740M, 750R, 740CR), but these numbers will likely go down for enrolled students.</p>
<p>Exactly. The further down the school is on the preference list (the lower the yield), the wider the gap between the numbers for admitted and enrolled. Schools like HY would have both roughly identical.</p>
<p>Enrolled student statistics (as opposed to admitted students) are a lagging indicator. If you want to know what the current students average SATs are like, you usually have to go to the school's admissions website and look at the current year's frosh class. Wesleyan usually makes available the admitted student stats just after the first wave of mailings in April and publishes the <em>enrolled</em> figures later in the Fall.</p>
<p>The sad truth is that a lot of schools play games with how they report their SAT numbers, eg, their websites will show the 25/75 SAT scores for admitted students rather than enrolled students. Clearly, schools would love to enroll all of these students, but the yields clearly show that many matriculate at other schools further up their preference chain and, as a result, the enrolled SAT numbers decline. It is correct that the accepted numbers have value in evaluating the difficulty of acceptance, but it is the enrolled numbers that truly reflect the quality of the students that are enrolled. </p>
<p>BTW, the numbers that I have presented here are from the current online edition of USNWR. These numbers are gathered from the Common Data Set of each school. At this point, they are a little dated as two more classes have been admitted and made the decision to enroll since these numbers. Nonetheless, the numbers do provide an apples-to-apples comparison. New numbers will be available in August, 2007 when the next edition of USNWR is released.</p>