<p>Q&A:</a> College Admissions - Questions/Answers Blog - NYTimes.com</p>
<p>LOL@Yale saying the recession hasn't hurt the institution.
Academics started sounding like politicians since when, exactly?</p>
<p>The most important (to CC) info I think is here:</p>
<p>** Mr. Walker of Texas:**
We are seeing higher numbers of applicants to public universities than in past years. We will not know the real impact of the recession until families have to pay a deposit and commit to a known cost.</p>
<p>*Mr. Syverson of Lawrence: *
There are a number of plausibleand perhaps competingimpacts of these financial uncertainties. *For example, it is probably prudent for private colleges (at least) to anticipate a drop in their yield rates, which will mean they need to offer admission to a larger number of students to fill their class. *</p>
<p>More applications at the large State University and reduced yield at the private (more selective?) colleges. For those CC'ers whose parents can pony up for private school tuition, it might mean a greater likelihood of admission this year than last year. For example, Stanford-Berkeley cross-admits had chosen Stanford 95-5%. Perhaps this year the ratio might be somewhat less lopsided, and the likes of Berkeley, UCLA, Virginia, Texas, and other high-end Publics, might find more students who were also admitted (or could have been admitted) to Ivies and to private CC Top Universities and LAC's.</p>
<p>The</a> New York Times > Week in Review > Image > Collegiate Matchups: Predicting Student Choices</p>
<p>The</a> Early-Decision Racket - The Atlantic (September 2001)</p>
<p>
[quote]
"In a typical year Stanford would let in twenty-five hundred kids to get a class of fifteen hundred," says Jonathan Reider, a former admissions officer at Stanford who is now the college-admissions director at University High School, a private school in San Francisco. "One thousand would say no. Of them, about four hundred went to Harvard, a hundred and fifty to Yale and Princeton eachthat's 700 right there. Fifty to Berkeley, fifty to UCLA. For a number of years we looked at that Harvard takeaway number and wanted it to go down, but it never did."
[/quote]
</p>
<p>So, assuming the 95%-5% cross admit battle between Stanford and Berkeley is true, that means out of a class of 1700, 950 are admitted to Berkeley?<br>
41.8% of UG at Stanford or 714 students out of 1700 are from California. </p>
<p>Somehow these number don't add up.<br>
First, there aren't a lot of out of state students applying to both Stanford and Berkeley and are accepted to both.
Second, not all of the 714 students at Stanford are accepted at Berkeley.</p>
<p>I highly suspect the 95%-5% cross admit figure from the NYT. Maybe it's for out of state students only. In state, it isn't that bad.</p>
<p>I highly suspect the 95%-5% cross admit figure from the NYT. Maybe it's for out of state students only. In state, it isn't that bad.</p>
<p>The 95-5% cross-admit figure isn't direct, it is derived. In my post it serves mainly as an example of a potential for change this year, and so it needn't be an exact number. The NYT data are based on the NBER study, which treated cross-admit decisions amongst 3500 or so matriculants as a gigantic tournament, such as in chess rankings or the Sagarin index. So it is an estimate, because the real numbers are proprietary and closely guarded. The out-of-state numbers for the Stanford-Berkeley cross-admits must be a 100-0%, which would skew any cross-admit statistics that blend both. I do not think the NBER paper fully accounts for In and Out-of-State preferences. </p>