Official U.S. News College yield rates

<p>

Do you do a forum wide search of “Michigan” everytime you log on to this site and then proceed to disparage anyone who doesn’t utter the Michigan name with the utmost reverence? Get a grip man. There’s nothing I said that was snide.</p>

<p>

Huh? I went to the exact opposite of an elite New York boarding school-a hard nosed public school in the suburbs of Detroit in the Midwest. I would beg to differ that most high school seniors don’t differentiate between Harvard and Vandy because they did. Whether that should be of any relevance to your personal college search is debatable but you have to acknowledge that there’s definitely a heirarchy which exists.</p>

<p>

Nope, the world isn’t as egalitarian as you’d like it to be Pizzagirl. You just need to cope with the fact that you attended an elite university (Northwestern) and not a 2nd tier state flagship.;)</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Okay then. just modify my example to Derpy McDerp the val/Derpy McDerp the sal. I think that’s basically the only difference. All you’re really doing here is showing how uninformed these kids really are. It’s sad really, but i was too their age once, and similarly uninformed. Either way, the information is purely anecdotal and, as you noted, is just derivative of USnews. your tiers can be summarized by “Ranking of desirability wrt cross admit battles by goldenboy8784’s anecdotes.”</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>i suppose you weren’t being snide, given the directness of your comments :rolleyes:</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Chicago is like Williams – known primarily and only to the cognoscenti, well represented here on CC. Chicago vs. Duke is like arguing angels on the head of a pin. 10x nobel prize winners in economics? Great, but outside of Milton Friedman, the Chicago school of economics is marginalized. If Chicago was so great, why were they at 40% admits only a few years back? Anyway, my only evidence in the hunt here is that best friend accepted to Chicago last year and to Duke. Goes to Chicago admitted students day/night and (1) miserably cold and raining in late April and (2) slept on floor while Chicago suitemates, smelly and bearded, played videogames all night. Goes to Duke the following week, sunny 76 degrees, fine classes, great speeches, normal smart kids, even a tinge of religion beating about in the weeds. Choice; smelly, computer-obsessed nerds who couldn’t hold a conversation or be minimally interested someone new versus nice kids, enjoyable talk about research projects, outdoorsy, no TVs or video grunge. It made his choice easy. Duke, even without basketball. Sorry, Chicago, wash your kids before you set them on the newbies!</p>

<p>These elitist threads are nauseating and in the final analysis UNHELPFUL. The insults here are also rather unprofessional and unworthy…and I am surprised the moderators allow them, frankly. They are sleeping on the job.</p>

<p>Like a bunch of six year olds saying, “my daddy is better than your daddy! nyah nyah nyah” Really people. Stop.</p>

<p>goldenboy8784,
As I’ve explained in another thread, most high school seniors vote with their applications. About 3 million HS students graduate each year; out of that number, about 70% (around 2.1 million) enroll in college. About 35,000 apply to Harvard. You do the math. Many don’t apply because they have no chance of getting in (though that doesn’t deter many in the 35,000 who do apply who have no realistic chance of admission but apply anyway). </p>

<p>But a very large number of those who are plausible candidates for admission just don’t care to apply. Why? Some prefer to stay closer to home. That’s one reason why Northwestern gets about 60% more applications from Illinoisans than Harvard does, and why Northwestern gets more than 4 times as many applications from Illinoisans as Duke does. And why Stanford gets 260% the number of applications from Californians that Harvard gets.</p>

<p>Some just prefer other schools. Harvard is the 7th-most popular Ivy for Connecticut residents to apply to; only Princeton is less popular, perhaps because H & P are seen as major rivals to the home-state favorite, Yale, which leads the pack of Ivies among Connecticut college applicants, followed closely by Brown which is not only nearby but also perceived by some to be the “most Yale-like” after Yale itself. For their part, Massachusetts residents appear to hold Yale in similarly low regard; Yale doesn’t crack their top 50 for SAT score reports, though interestingly, Brown narrowly edges out Harvard for most popular Ivy among Bay State seniors. New Jerseyans apply to Penn, Princeton, Cornell, and Columbia in large numbers; Harvard, not so much, as it doesn’t make their top 50.</p>

<p>My own D1 had Ivy-level credentials and we would have paid for her to go to any college she chose. She looked at 7 of the 8 Ivies (ruling out Dartmouth as a non-starter on the basis of location and its reputation as a hard-partying, Greek-dominated school). The only Ivy she cared for at all was Brown and she would have applied there RD, but her clear first choice was the LAC where she applied ED, was accepted, and is now happily attending in her sophomore year. She’s hardly a unique case: she’s one of tens of thousands, nay, hundreds of thousands who preferred a non-Ivy to all the Ivies, and whose preferences won’t show up in parchment.com’s cross-admit data because she voted her preferences with her applications and took herself out of the running for that rarefied data set.</p>

<p>As I’ve explained before, I think what’s mostly going on with the cross-admit data is that if people are contemplating an extremely selective school and a slightly or somewhat less selective one, they’ll act differently depending on which of the two they prefer. If their first choice is the more selective school, they’re likely to apply to both, because they need back-ups (not necessarily just safeties, but also matches and even additional reaches that are slightly less reachy). But if their first choice is the less selective school, they’re much less likely to apply to both, because they’ll still figure they need a hedging strategy in case they don’t get into their first choice school, and it’s kind of dumb to think that if you don’t get into your first-choice school, your fallback should be a school that’s even more selective than your first choice. So the cross-admits are going to be heavily biased in the direction of people whose first choice was the more selective school; those who prefer the less selective school in most cases won’t even apply to the more selective school, even if objectively they have a reasonable chance of getting in. So you can’t read cross-admit data as reflecting in any absolute or general sense the preferences of HS seniors, or the absolute or relative desirability of schools. </p>

<p>For all we know, there might be just as many HS seniors who prefer Brown to Harvard as vice versa (I believe Brown may actually get more applications these days), but most of those who prefer Brown (as between the two) will not apply to Harvard; they’ll choose schools with a higher admit rate than Brown—say, a Johns Hopkins, a Chicago, a Duke–as their fallback schools. But of those whose first choice is Harvard, many will include Brown on their list of fallbacks. So the Harvard-Brown cross-admit pool will be overwhelmingly composed of people who were predisposed to choose Harvard over Brown, because of selection bias in the class of cross-applicants. The cross-admit data that show Harvard crushing Brown 90% to 10% doesn’t tell us anything about the desirability of each school to the broader group of HS seniors–roughly 99% of whom will apply to neither school. It only tells us about the preferences of the cross-admits. Meanwhile, those whose first choice was Brown and cross-applied to Johns Hopkins, Chicago, and Duke on their back-up list will be similarly biased in favor of the most selective of these schools (Brown), and sure enough, in the cross-admit data Brown crushes all three slightly-less-selective schools (84-16 over JHU, 69-31 over Chicago, 73-27 over Duke). It doesn’t have anything to do with the preferences of HS seniors in general, or the absolute or relative merits of these various schools. It doesn’t even have all that much to do with US News rankings (Chicago, Duke, and JHU are all ranked higher than Brown in US News). It’s just about which school is the most selective (Brown’s admit rate is roughly half of the three other schools), and the sensible hedging strategies that most college applicants employ–starting with your first-choice school, and then adding some slightly to somewhat less selective schools to your list.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Probably a large percentage of these students enroll in the local community college.</p>

<p>^ About 1/3 of enrolled freshmen are at 2-year institutions, but it looks like I underestimated the total number. According to the Pew Research Center there are almost 2.5 million first-time, full-time freshmen enrolled at 2-year and 4-year colleges and universities. Of those, 857,000 are at 2-year colleges (which includes not just community colleges but also some private 2-year colleges), and 1,609,000 are at 4-year institutions.</p>

<p>Hmmm, that seems like over 50% of high school graduates go to a four year college, but bachelor’s degree completion has leveled out around 30-35% of the age 25+ population for several years now. That implies that a significant percentage of those who go to a four year college do not complete a bachelor’s degree (and even more after considering that the bachelor’s degree completion includes two year college students who transfer to four year colleges later to complete bachelor’s degrees).</p>

<p>

I think most people don’t have a problem with others putting one school above another as long as it’s expressed politely and as a personal opinion or within a certain context (e.g. kids at a certain high school). It’s when posters are hell-bent on generalizing that opinion to everyone that feathers begin to get ruffled. </p>

<p>As a good example within this thread, the reason phuriku is annoyed with goldenboy (whose posts are admittedly often cringe-worthy) is because he insists on generalizing his experiences to all students.</p>

<p>Okay: “In my opinion, Georgetown is more prestigious than Emory.”
Bad: “You are WRONG. Everyone knows that Georgetown is more prestigious than Emory.”
Okay: “The Peer Assessment scores indicate that professors consider Berkeley stronger than Rice.”
Bad: “Everyone considers Berkeley far better than Rice.” (with an implied “I don’t know why anyone would want to go there.”)
Okay: “USC has a better reputation than Vanderbilt in California.”
Bad: “USC is much more prestigious than Vanderbilt.”</p>

<p>

Not sure I agree.</p>

<p>(1) It assumes that students actually have a clear first or second choice. How often is that really the case for RD applicants? (Answer: Not often.) Anyone who’s been on CC for more than a year knows that the forum absolutely explodes with “vs.” threads in late March and early April – Stanford vs. Brown, Chicago vs. Northwestern, Hopkins vs. Cornell, etc. Many of these should be no-brainers if students are selecting simply based on selectivity, but many times they are clearly agonizing over the decision, and some wind up choosing a less selective or famous school (e.g. the poster who chose Pomona over Harvard). </p>

<p>(2) It ignores various factors that go into the list-making process. What if that applicant was a legacy at Harvard and thought he had a better chance of getting in there? What if he needed a lot of financial aid and thought he could get better financial aid at Harvard? What if he liked Brown a bit better but it wasn’t as strong in his field as Harvard? Heck, what if he just wanted to see if he could get in? There’s all sorts of reasons why he might apply to both. By far my first choice in high school was Chicago back when it admitted nearly half of its applicants, but I still applied to several other colleges with noticeably lower admit rates. </p>

<p>(3) It assumes applicants are dumb enough to assume tiny differences in admit rates equate to meaningful differences in selectivity. Is a college with a 9.5% RD admit rate like Penn really a “fallback” for a college with a 7.5% RD admit rate like Brown? It’s much more likely that an applicant sees both as a long shot and applies to both to maximize his chances. Most applicants realize that admissions at the most selective colleges is a bit of a crapshoot, and a student with the stats to get into one would do well to apply widely. (Some people take this to the extreme…)</p>

<p>I think your point is more accurate for more predictable colleges. If his top choice is Wake Forest, Michigan, Miami, etc., he may not apply to as many highly selective colleges. A college like Cornell, Hopkins, or Dartmouth? No harm in spreading apps around. It’s far from uncommon, for example, for a student to get into Stanford but not Chicago or Harvard but not Cornell (browse past admit threads here). Columbia but not Tulane is much more unlikely.</p>

<p>

Overall numbers are irrelevant when better figures are at hand. </p>

<p>Only 38,000 seniors scored 1450+ on the CR/M portions of the SAT. True, many applicants to Harvard do not have the requisite stats, but at least 80% of applicants do, based on statements made by adcoms at comparable universities. True, many applicants do not take the SAT and instead take the ACT. Still, only 28,000 scored similarly on the ACT (33+), and a hefty percentage of those students undoubtedly also took the SAT.</p>

<p>No top college draws every top applicant, but many of them are doing a pretty good job of attracting quite a few of them.</p>

<p>The only thing bclintonk’s excellent analysis leaves out is that there is a difference when you’re talking about preference between two things you’re very much excited about, and preference between two things you feel very differently about.</p>

<p>Put another way, I prefer a trip to the beach over a trip to the lake, but I’m still pretty pleased with a trip to the lake. On a 10 point scale, the beach is a 9.8 and the lake is a 9.6.</p>

<p>I prefer a trip to the beach over being tarred and feathered, too, and I would really rather not have the latter happen to me. The beach is still a 9.8 but the t&f is about a 1.1.</p>

<p>If all you do is focus on the preference ratings and don’t consider monadic ratings, you’re missing the point. The preference ratings are often misinterpreted on CC as “see? X beats Y in cross-admits, so anybody winding up at Y is secretly annoyed they couldn’t get to the greatness of X.” No, they may be perfectly happy there - the 9.6 may still be more than enough to make them happy. Any market researcher who looked at preference and ignored monadics would be fired.</p>

<p>Why do you people care about these things? College is just a stepping stone and it depends what you make out of it. Who cares about nobel prize winners at a particular school? Is it your dream to be a nobel prize winner? Heck, do you feel that increases your odds?</p>

<p>Like seriouslyyyyyyy. What do you want in life? Do you want to be an esteemed researcher–then work hard and you can do it, regardless. Do you want to make money? Heck, I know plentyyy of kids that go to state schools and have starting jobs that pay over 100K.</p>

<p>Go talk about something productive.</p>

<p>"“You and I both know that xiggi was being ridiculous by claiming that applications at “Ivy Plus” were flat when you include Chicago and Duke’s numbers, applications to the top schools were up by a nontrivial amount.”"</p>

<p>Golden Child, since you have decided to display once more what a challenge reading comprehension really is for you, let me take this one very slooooowly.</p>

<ol>
<li><p>Learn to quote correctly. I used the term Ivies Plus. Check the spelling, as it is not a reference to that silly elitist group that organizes social functions for the prestige obsessed wannabe Ivy Leaguer.</p></li>
<li><p>The term I used represents TEN schools, and is a copyrighted term. I am sure you learned what that means in your Durham years.</p></li>
<li><p>Read 1 again. And stop misquoting me.</p></li>
<li><p>I hope this is the last time I need to correct you on this.</p></li>
<li><p>Now you can return to your silly debate with Phuriku about preferences and yield. Fwiw, you should team up as you are remarkably similar in your discourse.</p></li>
</ol>

<p>Phruku keeps citing these mythical SAT scores next to Harvard and Stanford. All I see is they around Cornell and below Duke, Dartmouth, Brown, and Penn. Phruku have a source? I doubt it.</p>

<p>“5. Now you can return to your silly debate with Phuriku about preferences and yield. Fwiw, you should team up as you are remarkably similar in your discourse.”</p>

<p>You’re really enjoying this, aren’t you xiggi?</p>

<p>“Phruku keeps citing these mythical SAT scores next to Harvard and Stanford. All I see is they around Cornell and below Duke, Dartmouth, Brown, and Penn. Phruku have a source? I doubt it.”</p>

<p>Source? Go to Collegeboard.com. Christ, it’s like I’m talking to idiot high schoolers. (Oh wait, I am! LOL.)</p>

<p>Chicago (<a href=“College Search - BigFuture | College Board):%5B/url%5D”>College Search - BigFuture | College Board):</a>
CR: 700-790
M: 700-780
W: 700-780
Total: 2100-2350</p>

<p>Stanford (<a href=“College Search - BigFuture | College Board):%5B/url%5D”>College Search - BigFuture | College Board):</a>
CR: 670 - 770
M: 690 - 780
W: 680 - 780
Total: 2040 - 2330</p>

<p>Tell me, you little genius. Which is higher? Do you know how to compare numbers?</p>

<p>For reference, this is why it sucks being a math major. Because 99% of the population can’t add, subtract, or compare numbers. Try to do the simplest mathematical analysis, and little freaks will come out of nowhere and criticize you for the magic you’re performing.</p>

<p>Oh, and let’s have a little fun with MIT too!</p>

<p>MIT (<a href=“College Search - BigFuture | College Board):%5B/url%5D”>College Search - BigFuture | College Board):</a>
CR: 670 - 760
M: 740 - 800
W: 670 - 770
Total: 2080 - 2330.</p>

<p>Let’s perform a little summary for the less intellectually privileged members of our conversation (all but me, apparently):
Chicago: 2100 - 2350
MIT: 2080 - 2330
Stanford: 2040 - 2330</p>

<p>Maybe we can have one of our privileged geniuses around here provide a really complex mathematical analysis and tell me which of Chicago’s, MIT’s, or Stanford’s SAT scores is the highest? How about you, admitone? What do you think?</p>

<p>Still all dancing on the head of a pin; it’s extreme dorkiness and cluelessness to posit that there are any truly meaningful differences in intellect among those 3 student bodies.</p>

<p>Phuriku,</p>

<p>After a certain point, SAT scores are not indicitive of selectivity or academic strength of an institution. I’m sure you understand that. All top schools can fill their class with 2300+ students (some can do this many times over), but choose to consider other factors. Common Set Data from different schools show that each place different emphasis on the importance of SAT scores. </p>

<p>Your statistics actually prove this point. While it is completely reasonable to argue that Chicago is academically similar to Stanford and MIT (although many, including me, would disagree. But we are all entitled to our own opinions), you’d be fighting a losing battle if you argue that its more selective.</p>

<p>Sent from my HTC Vision using CC</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Not particularly. I do not take great pleasure in seeing very smart people making fools of themselves.</p>

<p>How is this thread not locked?</p>