<p>may i have the link to the article that says how many people applied to each school?</p>
<p>To answer your first question, <a href="http://www.yaledailynews.com/article.asp?AID=31173%5B/url%5D">http://www.yaledailynews.com/article.asp?AID=31173</a>. </p>
<p>"Harvard University had the fifth most selective rate, admitting 807 of its 3,872 applicants for an early acceptance rate of 28.1 percent, a sizeable jump from last year's 21 percent." </p>
<p>Second of all, where do you have proof that Harvard students are more accomplished than Wharton students this year, or even the last couple? And I don't know where you got the idea that CAS students are admitted at the same rate during RD. For Wharton, it's like 6-7% versus CAS's 13-14% for last year. And I'm not basing my conclusions of student bodies on acceptance rates, I'm just saying that it has a high correlation. And how can you compare NYU to UChicago. A specific group of people apply to UChicago, VERY specific, while everyone and their mom applies to NYU. And UChicago's acceptance rate is not really higher than NYU, if so, only by a fraction of a percent. It's pointless to argue; my original point was that it's harder to get in this year for Wharton. And by the numbers, it is without a doubt. I don't know why you're getting into quality of the student body.</p>
<p>AJ, look for the threads way back in december and november. Search for "Penn apps increase"</p>
<p>cant find it anywhere lol</p>
<p>i think Wharton applicants are just as qualified as Harvard applicants. Anyone who claims otherwise needs to take off their crimson tinted glasses.</p>
<p>im quoted in the paper.. haaha</p>
<p>quoting lishnik in that early decision apps up 21%:
"actually...there was a 34% acceptance rate last year..and this year it should be around 28...so 6...not that im picking at facts or anything :) haha..really though just thought id put the exact numbers out there"</p>
<p>prescient indeed. good work.</p>
<p>hm how the hell did i get in....</p>
<p>just for the record:
i'm a siemens finalist and intel winner, and im gonna be at Wharton =)
Wharton attracts its fair share of national winners as well.</p>
<p>in conclusion, this argument is like debating what's better: BMW or Mercedes. Louis Vuitton or Burberry?</p>
<p>Either way it's quality, so let it drop.</p>
<p>wooorrrrd, although audi is the best...the new RS4 spanks the M3.</p>
<p>Actually, the audi styling is getting a bit tiring. They should stray away from the soap box styling and add some flare to their cars, just like BMW did to the 3 series. Although, I do believe the engineering on the RS4 is very impressive. That's my two cents, but yeah, I know that it may seem like Harvard applicants are more accomplished than Wharton applicants, but you don't have hard evidence to support your statement. Your basing your claim on generalizations. I must agree it's apples vs. oranges.</p>
<p>But anyways, Penn Rules!</p>
<p>Eckie - The dean of admissions has already gone on record to say that they plan to keep the percentage of the class filled by ED applicants, about the same - I think it has been around 47%. There are higher numbers of ED seats filled this year as last, but it shouldn't translate into a big difference percentage wise.</p>
<p>njchino, just for the record, that Yale article did the math wrong:</p>
<p>807/3872 = 20.8%</p>
<p>That being said, the 2.2% difference in Wharton & Harvard acceptance rates is significant enough that I think the pools are roughly a wash. My rationale for this is the fact that Penn - and in particular Wharton - is more inclined to take athletes early decision than Harvard is EA. So the quality at the top of each pool is likely very similar, even if it is to be assumed that the EA pool at Harvard has more "out-of-this-world" applicants.</p>
<p>Hahah, Harvard easier to get into than Wharton?</p>
<p>Cmon now, you really don't believe that, now do you?</p>
<p>Don't delude yourselves now.</p>
<p>while harvard may have more of a 'wow' effect, my experience in the sf bay area with EA applicants has been less than stellar. one girl just got reCREWted for the hahvad team, pulls about a 3.4 in a less than rigorous curriculum, and has ****ty test scores. our valedictorian, on the other hand, is going to wharton.</p>
<p>njchino, now that the 28% has been shown wrong, I have no idea where you get Wharton's 6-7% RD rate from. It's more like 12-13%.</p>
<p>And Upennohten, you underestimate the power of being good at rowing in girls' admission to Ivies. Good rowers, basketball players and hockey players have it much easier. And she must be pretty good at rowing, considering Harvard has (and has always had) one of the best crew teams around. Besides, I'm sick of people trashing athletes--if you're good enough to make one of the best college crew teams and you can still keep up a respectable 3.4, that's pretty darned good.</p>
<p>staycee - Were you the one interviewed for the DP article? Cool!</p>
<p>There's no way that RD acceptance rate is 12-13% since that was the ED acceptance rate for last year, and Wharton takes 45% of its class from ED.<br>
Ok, you win, whatever, there's no point in arguing. In my perspective, Wharton is the best at preparing its students for what they want to do, and Harvard arguably does that also.</p>
<p>Njchion371- I think you're wrong again. Wharton does a superb job at preparing students, because it's a highly specialized institution. Harvard is just amazing, amazing, ultra-super students with profs who don't care about undergrads. I'd say Wharton does a better job at preparing you. Does Harvard need to do much with it's kids? Prob not.</p>