<p>sjmom, you are correct, of course. We really don't know how liquid anyone's assets are unless we are their CPA. But this particular soccer player could also have gone up the prestige ranking ladder with merit money. She committed to the athletic scholarship long before any college acceptances or merit awards would have been announced. So they were quite secure in their decision, for whatever reasons.</p>
<p>
What is increasingly at play is the claim by the flagship U that its honors grads are often out-placing Ivy grads in head-to-head competition for grad and professional school slots. This is particularly true for neurosciences.
I hate to keep beating the same drum, but this was not true in my experience (I applied to biology and neuroscience PhD programs last year). It could possibly be true for a few of the Ivies, but certainly not Harvard and Yale, and also certainly not MIT and Stanford. Several of the interview weekends I attended were half Ivy + MIT/Stanford grads and half all other schools. Of the state schools, Berkeley was the only one to have a large number of kids getting interviews.</p>
<p>My feeling is that a given bright, capable student who plans to attend graduate school is better off choosing the elite private over the big state school -- a larger percentage of the bright, capable biologists at MIT ended up in top 5 grad programs than the bright, capable biologists at any state school, probably because of the combined effect of better research experience, closer relationships with professors, and more GPA leeway.</p>
<p>A superstar would probably be fine at both places. But alas, most of us are not superstars.</p>
<p>I'm not arguing that the study cited above shows that elite privates are "really" better than the best state schools. Nor would I argue that the study is perfect. I was trying to stay within the confines of this thread: What are the considerations in play if you are choosing between HYPS and one of the best public universities for substantially less money?</p>
<p>As I said, in theory, one can (and many here have) present strong arguments for either choice. And of course many people can decide not to bother applying the HYPS, just as many people may decide not to bother applying to a state school or other lower-cost/lower-prestige option. </p>
<p>But plenty of people apply to both, and when they are accepted at both, all the evidence is that they overwhelmingly choose HYPS. Not just in the survey, but in the absolute numbers. If there is some sort of trend towards turning down HYPS, why did Yale have to reduce the number of kids it accepted last year, after several years of consistently underestimating its yield? There may be a trend not to apply to HYPS (although the numbers don't bear that out, either), but any trend towards actually rejecting HYPS has to be a very, very small trend, because it doesn't show up in the numbers or the survey. It's much easier to reject them by not applying than to reject an actual opportunity to matriculate.</p>
<p>In my daughter's cohort, there were lots and lots of kids who didn't apply to Harvard or Yale, some of whom were perfectly well qualified. But of the ones who did apply and were accepted, none of them turned down Harvard or Yale for a school that wasn't Harvard, Yale, Princeton, or Stanford. Of the 850 aggregate turn-downs Harvard and Yale received that year, I can account for almost 1% of them from personal knowledge, and none was an economic decision. Of course, I know that some economic decisions are being made. Just not very many of them.</p>
<p>molliebatmit: A lot of these large research universities that are also public, offer tremendous research opportunities for undergraduates, including close working contact with [full] professors. (And I personally don't know of any public university undergraduates who view their professors as "ceramic statues," by the by.) I can understand that people might believe, because a university is large and also has a large graduate population, that those research opportunities do not exist for undergraduates, but the truth is--they do. This is the sort of misperception that I often see repeated here, which I am compelled--heaven only knows why--to dispel. </p>
<p>Also-- excellent post (#139) by vig180, though the wonderful opportunities and experiences he recounts (all at his state university) are not surprising.</p>
<p>JHS, I'm not arguing anything about better schools.</p>
<p>If you think 2 to 1 is a better indicator than 28 to 2, because of the make-up of the 2, and you think those 2 students are better than the 28, that's your choice.</p>
<p>That is what you are arguing. Those 2 students are better than the 28 and those 2 students choose Harvard, or Yale, or Stanford, or bubble gum.</p>
<p>
I agree with Mollie. In a recent Dartmouth thread, someone pointed out that Dartmouth grads have an 83% admissions rate for medical schools. I believe that the national average is around 50% -- anyone know? This tells me that something -- prestige, academic opportunities, preselection -- is giving Dartmouth grads an advantage. <a href="http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/showthread.php?t=273678&page=2%5B/url%5D">http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/showthread.php?t=273678&page=2</a>
[quote]
Last year (2006 matriculants) the med school acceptance rate was 83% (135/162). The average stats for an accepted student: overall GPA 3.51, BCPM 3.43, MCAT 11 VR/11 PS/11 BS/Q. That's with no screening whatsoever--the premed advising team is of the opinion that if you want to apply to medical school, they'll do everything they can to help you get in.
[/quote]
I think they must given some leeway with regard to GPA -- 3.51 sounds low to me for most medical schools.</p>
<p>dstark: At my kids' public school in Philadelphia, there are probably 30 applications to Harvard, 60 to Penn, and 200 to Penn State main campus. 90% of the Harvard appliers will also apply to Penn, and maybe half to Penn State as well. Probably two or three kids will be accepted at Harvard, 30-35 at Penn (likely including all Harvard acceptees), and 100+ at Penn State (maybe including one Harvard acceptee, since most of the more likely Harvard acceptees will not have applied to Penn State). All of the kids accepted to Harvard will go there (unless one of them gets into Yale), all but a handful of the kids accepted at Penn will go there (some will choose other prestige schools like Harvard, and some will choose less costly schools), and about 60 will go to Penn State. The choices are somewhat distorted versus the normal model, because Penn has some scholarship money that has to be given to Philadelphia kids, so its financial aid offers to Philly kids tend to be very good, and for many of the kids Penn will not cost a lot more than Penn State. (100% of Harvard acceptees will try to get Harvard to match Penn's financial aid offer, and if past experience holds 100% will fail, and will choose Harvard anyway.)</p>
<p>On your logic, the preference order would be Penn State, Penn, Harvard. But we both know that's backward. If you look at the choices made by kids who actually have choices, everyone who can choose Harvard does, and almost everyone who chooses between Penn and Penn State chooses Penn.</p>
<p>It's not a matter of vanilla vs. bubblegum. The kids have a pretty consistent value system, including not liking to fill out applications or receive rejections.</p>
<p>At least through 2005 (from inception of program) 100% acceptance rate at med, law and vet schools for the Schreyers Honors College students at Penn State who started off the program as freshmen. Will post other stats when I find them:)
<a href="http://www.scholars.psu.edu/prospectivestudents/programoverview/index.html%5B/url%5D">www.scholars.psu.edu/prospectivestudents/programoverview/index.html</a></p>
<p>JHS, the preference order is Penn State, Penn and then Harvard. The numbers don't lie. :) For you to argue otherwise is to put yourself in the minds of the kids. You are assuming that most people if they had the chance would go to Harvard, then Penn, then Penn State. But that's an assumption based on students that apply to all three schools. What about the larger majority that don't apply to those three schools?</p>
<p>You are making an assumption that because those that apply to those 3 schools choose one way, those that don't apply to those three schools would choose the same way.</p>
<p>Sorry. The study doesn't show that.</p>
<p>Well, I used the example because I don't have to put myself in the minds of those kids. I get to listen to them talk about it at length. Also, the school itself, because of its cultural diversity and the lack of college background for many parents, actually devotes some time to teaching the kids what they ought to think, in very plain terms. </p>
<p>I will grant you that I don't know what they think about Stanford -- it's too far away for most of them to think about, and probably only 4 or 5 kids applied there, maybe none of whom applied to Penn State. There may be a similar dynamic in California with the Ivy League; certainly lots of kids have no interest in leaving California for college.</p>
<p>JHS, it is very different in California than it is where you live. Harvard would rank high, but Penn and Penn State would be much lower than they are in the survey. Brown is what 4th? No way. Williams and Amherst are highly ranked. Most people have never heard of those schools.</p>
<p>There are so many factors, but the revealed preference survey doesn't pick them up.</p>
<p>Many interesting points have been brought up in this thread, but perhaps it's also enlightening to consider the level of student attainment. For example, what schools are producing Rhodes, Fulbright, Marshall, and Truman scholars? Certainly, we know that the Ivy's have successful students - but I think some might be a little surprised to see what other schools' students turn up on these prestigious awards lists. In my opinion, I think this is a good indicator of the strength of a school's program as well as an indicator of the bright, promising students the school attracts.</p>
<p>Okay...PSU Schreyers
Last two yrs. incomplete list
6 Goldwater
3 Gates Cambridge
9 National science Foundation Fellowhips
1 Marshall
6 Fulbrights</p>
<p>My point, obviously, is to show students that they can suceed at public honors colleges...maybe not in the same #'s ....but they can succeed. However , no one holds your hand. You have to want to achieve, put in the work and compete with other students from the top schools including Ivy's.</p>
<p>Also hoping this helps to counter all the bad press PSU is getting on the drinking thread :)</p>
<p>I looked at the Rhodes Scholarship website, a very interesting mix of recipients from all sorts of schools, elite and otherwise. :-)</p>
<p>And for all of us out there whose kids are not Rhodes material, I think the point has been made that your own state U may not be the best place to bring out the best your kid has to offer. If you're facing the choice of OOS tuition at a top public, or no aid at a top private, the fact that a kid in Virginia or Michigan can suceed in-state while you get suckered into paying full-freight isn't all that relevant. For us, the increment between OOS public and private was the relevant number... and since we didn't have to sell blood or a kidney to finance it, it was a good decision.</p>
<p>JHS stated: "When you get down to it, there can't be more than a couple hundred kids, nationally, any year, who turn down an actual acceptance to Harvard or Yale on economic grounds, even for very good alternatives."</p>
<p>Oh, I'm not so sure about that.</p>
<p>At least in the suburbs of this major metropolitan southeastern city, numerous kids each year turn down actual acceptances at their "first choice ivy/elite" - including Harvard and Yale - to attend the state universities. It is always for economic reasons. All qualified for either no or minimal financial aid and based upon future career goals (professional schools, etc) just couldn't afford or justify the additional cost of going to their "dream school". I believe this scenario is more common than many believe.</p>
<p>Now, for these students, it may be as Molliebatmit stated, "A superstar would probably be fine at both places." </p>
<p>These were indeed "superstars" - top of their class, perfect SAT's and SAT II's, and all 5's on numerous AP exams, great extracurriculars, etc.</p>
<p>Blossom:
I think the original point of discussion was cheap IN-state public with a very good reputation or a prestigious and ridiculously expensive private. Then the conversation, as it always happens, meandered off the path. :)</p>
<p>Reflectivemom: Everyone says that. Everyone says that in the suburbs of this northeastern city. But the numbers aren't there.</p>
<p>Only about 850 kids nationally send any rejection letter to Harvard or Yale. Conservatively, at least 350-400 of those, maybe more, are kids who are turning down one in favor of the other -- the overlap in admissions can't be much less than that (if I were extrapolating from people I know, it would be close to 50%, but that's impossible under the numbers, too) -- and at least another 100-150 who turn down one, the other, or both (in which case they use up two rejections) in favor of Stanford, Princeton, MIT, or other Ivy-type schools. Then there will be a few who decide to go to top LACs, and a few kids who decide to go to Oxford or Cambridge, and outliers like the kids I know who turned down Harvard for Deep Springs, or to dance professionally. That just doesn't leave a lot of room for kids who turn them down to attend a cheaper, public college. Maybe it's 300, maybe it's 100. Not enough for a trend in any case.</p>
<p>Look at the survey. Harvard scored 98%+ vs. UCLA and Berkeley. How many kids does Harvard accept from California? 200? 300? How many of those applied to and were accepted by one or the other top UC? Giving the benefit of the doubt, let's say 100% (it will be less). Can we assume that 15% went someplace other than Harvard or a UC (like, Yale or Princeton)? So that leaves about 250 kids, and 2% of that is 5 kids. And that is making assumption after assumption to maximize the number of kids we're talking about. Double it and we're talking about 10 kids. In California. With a choice of great schools like Berkeley and UCLA. </p>
<p>When you get past the HYPS level, yields go down fast, and I wouldn't claim that lots of kids don't turn down Columbia, or Penn, or Duke, in favor of a public alternative. But the notion that there are lots of kids at state unis who turned down an actual Harvard acceptance has got to be a myth.</p>
<p>JHS, you don't get it.</p>
<p>50,000 kids apply to UCLA. Over 14,000 have 4.0+ gpas. (Might be 20,000 kids).</p>
<p>Most want nothing to do with Harvard. Nothing. They don't apply. They would never apply.</p>
<p>So you take your 2 kids, 5 kids, or 250 kids.</p>
<p>So you take the 3,000 that applied from California to Harvard and assume that everyone of those people also applied to UCLA and would rather go to Harvard.</p>
<p>I'll take the other 47,000 that didn't apply to Harvard, but did apply to UCLA, and say more people would rather go to UCLA.</p>
<p>No, dstark, YOU don't get it. I'm not saying that lots of people don't choose to go to UCLA. I'm saying that the notion that lots of people are turning down Harvard to go to UCLA is a myth. It's not a myth that lots of people choose not to apply to Harvard, for all sorts of reasons. Many of them feel, I'm sure, that they would have a good chance of being admitted if they applied; others may not care at all. But the few who actually have a choice go to Harvard, regardless of the economics, in almost every case. That's what this thread was about -- how do you make that choice.</p>