<ol>
<li> Short people aren't annoying, ilcap - and besides, those who are not short seem like freakishly tall giants from our perspective.<br></li>
<li> E-bubbly for a week?! I love being a second semester senior!!!</li>
<li> I think going to London is definitely worth missing out on all the CC fun, Kebree. :)</li>
</ol>
<p>You're right, Kat1...still, if only everyone congregated anywhere from 6pm to 8pm ET instead of 4-6am GMT. I definitely see what Schwaby meant, lol.</p>
<p>Even assuming a slight rise to a 69% yield, PRINCETON will need to admit 1,700 people to fill the projected 1,175 slots in the Class of 2009. This translates to an admit rate of 10.5% or 10.6%. (16,077 apps, 1,700 admits.)</p>
<p>At YALE, again assuming a slight rise to a 67% yield, they will need to admit 1,950 people to fill the projected 1,305 slots in the Class of 2009. This translates to an admit rate of 10%, (estmated 19,500 apps, 1950 admits.)</p>
<p>At HARVARD, assuming the same 78% yield, they will need to admit 2,100 people to fill the projected 1,638 slots in the Class of 2009. This translates to an admit rate of 9.2% or 9.3% (22,717 apps, 2,100 admits.)</p>
<hr>
<p>The wild card, which may alter projected admit rates, is whether a school expands its use of the waitlist, increases the fraction of ED/EA deferreds who are admitted, or greatly expands use of the "likely letter" device.</p>
<p>byerly you must have done something wrong</p>
<p>for the class of 2007, princeton got 15,725 (or so) apps and the admit rate was 9.8%. This year is higher than that year, how would the admit rate go up?</p>
<p>admissions dean Fred Hargadon's last handpicked class is a record-breaker, both in the number of applications received and in rate of selectivity.</p>
<p>****In keeping with trend witnessed by other Ivies, the University received a record 15,725 applications for spots in the Class of 2007, and accepted 1,570 students, Hargadon said in an email. The acceptance rate of 9.9 percent is down this year from 10.8 last year</p>
<p>so if the University accepts 1,570 this year of 16,077 the rate will be 9.76%</p>
<p>You have, without realizing it, put your finger on what is different about the Class of 2007 at Yale and the Class of 2009. The Class of 2007 was a "hand-picked" Hargadon special. Those days are now gone.</p>
<p>Furthermore, the actual admit rate was 10.2% for Princeton when all was said and done.</p>
<p>They bragged about that "9.9%" in May (actually, it wa 9.98, which Princeton rounded DOWN to 9.9%!) but by September, after summer melt and resort to the waitlist, the actual admit rate wound up at 10.2%</p>
<p>SEE: <a href="http://registrar1.princeton.edu/data/common/cds2003.pdf%5B/url%5D">http://registrar1.princeton.edu/data/common/cds2003.pdf</a></p>
<p>(at pp 5-7)</p>
<p>I don't know why we're even arguing 1 or 2 percent...
So I hear Uva out of state is 30%ish...maybe I can go to college after all? :)</p>
<p>"You have, without realizing it, put your finger on what is different about the Class of 2007 at Yale and the Class of 2009. The Class of 2007 was a "hand-picked" Hargadon special. Those days are now gone."</p>
<p>OMFG how would that change the rate at all?</p>
<p>To begin with (see my post above) the actual admit rate was 10.2% for Princeton for the Class of 2007.</p>
<p>As for the impact of the Hargadon approach to admissions, I call your attention to the statistical analysis in the "Revealed Preferences" paper, where they demonstrate the use of "strategic admissions" at Princeton to raise the apparent yield rate. </p>
<p>The new administration (Rapelye) has candidly said it is going to pursue top scholars without considering the impact on the cross-admit rate. She acknowledges that this may impact yield.</p>
<p>Obviously it did for the Class of 2008, when the yield rate dropped from 73% to 68% in one year.</p>
<p>Is it just me or has anyone else noticed how Byerly's numbers differ than those published in the various reports and rankings? Its more of the Byerly negative spin. The time this man spends inventing this stuff is incredible.</p>
<p>Seriously, drop it. No need for a flame war.</p>
<p>Which number differs from which "published report"?</p>
<p>One of the problems with admissions data is that the "published reports" are all over the lot.</p>
<p>If you want final, fairly reliable numbers, you look at a school's CDS form.</p>
<p>Byerly, your numbers are off. You are assuming that the 69% matriculation rate applies to ED and RD alike, when it doesn't. ED is closer to 98%, from what I've heard. That means out of 593 admits, 581 will matriculate, so Princeton needs to fill about 594 spots</p>
<p>Thus, going with a 69% RD matriculation rate, Princeton needs to admit 860 people RD, which means they admitted 1,453 people, a admit rate of 9%</p>
<p>However, assuming that 69% is the average of the two, since it's about 50/50 I'm not going to be exact, but that means a 40% matriculation rate for RD, which means Princeton needs to admit 1,485 people, so total is 2078, which gives an admit rate of 13%. I feel like I did the math wrong on this one, but I think the high numbers are coming from the implausibility of a 40% RD matriculation rate.</p>
<p>Last year, the overall yield rate was 68%, but the RD yield rate was a bit under 52%.</p>
<p>Ok. So the RD yield rate is 52%. That means Princeton needs to admit 1,142 RD, bringing total admissions to 1,735, which means the admit rate is 10.8%. So I suppose our numbers actually do come out to be about equal. Crazy.</p>
<p>Byerly's number's and reasoning are solid. He seems to remind of a "NYCfan" on another message board...</p>
<p>Does anyone have any idea as to how many ED deferees are eventually accepted? Does the acceptance rate for this pool fluctuate greatly, or is it very consistent? I've heard that the deferred-acceptance rate is about 14-15%. Can anyone confirm this? I'm asking Byerly in particular, since he appears to be omniscient in the college admissions field.</p>
<p>For math....</p>
<p>16000 applicants, 617 spots, at 52% RD (I'm not sure on this one) yield means 1187 accepted. 7.42% rate.</p>
<p>HOWEVER,</p>
<p>what seems most accurate is to take last year's acceptance numbers (lets say 9%), and divide by 1.17 (due to the 17% increase). They have the same number of slots, and just 17% more applicants. This number gets 7.69.</p>
<p>So, while the acceptance rate may drop 1.5%-2%, it won't be as low as 3% or 4%.</p>
<p>ForeverZero,
I would guess that it wouldn't be as high as Yale's in comparison (16%) because even slightly weaker applicants can be accepted under ED while most are deferred under RD.</p>
<p>You can always count on Byerly to play with the variable numbers (eg. picking Ps lowest yield in the past 5 years - even as its popularity rises). His tactics are designed to obscure the fact that P wins the Ivy selectivity battle and has been recognized as such by the major ranking sources). Because his next move is to start introducing his bogus overlap numbers with H. He does this on many of the other Ivy threads and wages battles there with students on a daily basis.</p>
<p>I see the flames of two sides racing across a field. </p>
<p>Alas! Mine eyes! </p>
<p>Really now, we should all have tea and eat cookiemom's cookies and stop worrying about admission rates because it's out of our hands and depressing to boot.</p>
<p>i agree, tebro. how about some crumpets and croissants as well? perhaps some crepes? Crayons? Anything else that starts out with cr-?</p>
<p>Oh, and kebree doesn't believe you and I are one in the same. How sad is that? :p</p>