<p>prestgious CA hangouts</p>
<p>UC Berkeley
Catech
UC Palo alto( Leland Stanford Jr College)
UCLA
UCSD</p>
<p>high school data"</p>
<p>Top East Prep school( Exter,Milton Groton)
IVY:40%
HYP:15%
Stanford:less than 2%</p>
<p>Menlo School, CA(2002-04)
IVY 70
HYP35
UCB 62
Stanford40</p>
<p>In in CA IVY take 2 to 1, UCB takes 1.5 to 1 compare</p>
<p>So for CA Berkeley slighly more popular than SFord, IVY high appeal.</p>
<p>East Coast HYP outdo SFord 7 to 1.</p>
<p>this kid is such a bitter reject</p>
<p>^ agreed .......</p>
<p>more food for that.</p>
<p>Stanford 19000 applicant 12% admit 2/3 yield.
1000 enrolled from CA would mean 12000 applicants from CA
1000 International, 2000 West ex Ca, 2000 MidWest /South
ledt with 2000 applicants from NE.</p>
<p>more than 2000 NE apply to Colgate, Prestige of course.</p>
<p>does a rejection merit this much time wasted on a lost cause??</p>
<p>Baba, I think the idiom is "Food for thought," not "Food for that." Maybe its different at UPenn?</p>
<p>Also, Stanford has 5-6% international student body not 10% as you suggested earlier.</p>
<p>I was actually reading the revealed preference ranking and it said some stuff about how Princeton does not compete with HYS for students. Princeton admits less qualified people in order to increase its yield. Is this true? </p>
<p>The data gathered by the team that compiled the Revealed Preference ranking indicates that Princeton practices "Strategic Admissions," quite heavily; more so than peer institutions. In other words, Princeton does not compete for the very top students as much as Harvard (which wins nearly all of them), Stanford, MIT and Yale do. In addition, Princeton gives admission to students it feels will not be admitted to universities such as Harvard, Stanford, MIT and Yale, thereby guaranteeing their matriculation. It also denies admission to students it feels will gain admission to colleges such as Harvard, Stanford, MIT and Yale so as to avoid competing with these schools and take a hit on its yield. This is detailed on pages 8 and 9 of the report and on Figure 1.</p>
<p>inn</p>
<p>1000/19000 is about 5% international applicants.</p>
<p>Here is how I would work up the data.</p>
<p>19000: 12000 from CA Admit rate 10% Yield80% 960 Enrolled
2000 West exCA Admit Rate 10% yield 80% 160
1000 Inter admit 15% yield 80% 120<br>
2000 southmidwest admit 30% yield 50% 300
2000 Northeast admit 20% yield 25% 100</p>
<p>nevertheless, princeton is considered more selective than HYS.</p>
<ol>
<li><p>Lower admit rate</p></li>
<li><p>Lower yield</p></li>
<li><p>FAR lower RD yield</p></li>
<li><p>Lower SAT median</p></li>
<li><p>Lower fraction of cross-admits</p></li>
</ol>
<p>im referring to selectivity rankings such as princeton review.</p>
<p>Princeton Review? You must be joking.</p>
<p>i posted my estimate for Sford admit yield by region above. clearly a regional player with 60% coming from West.</p>
<p>You are, however, pulling those "estimates" out of your rear end.</p>
<p>As Byerly was referring to, the methodology for the Princeton Review rankings is terrible. Those "rankings" are created by randomly surveying college students at various universities. Obviously, that's not the best way to generate an accurate list of rankings.</p>
<p>Anonymous, even US News ranks Yale as being more selective than Princeton so Princeton is not the most selective by that measure either. </p>
<p>The data suggests that Harvard is the most selective of the 4 elite universities since it has the lowest acceptance rate, highest yield (particularly RD yield) and highest SAT I median. However, there is very little to choose from between the 4. </p>
<p>As usual, baba's comments are utter nonsense.</p>
<p>Wait a sec. So if Princeton isn't as selective as Harvard, Stanford, and Yale, why do most rankings claim that it is the most selective school that's even harder to get into than Harvard? </p>
<p>Also, is this the reason that Princeton is the only school out of HYSMCP that still uses early decision rather than early action? What I don't understand is why Princeton is being so self-destructive in its admisions policies. It is clearly just as prestigious as Harvard and Stanford, and can certainly hold its own against those schools. Why are they being so afraid? Is there something they know that we don't?</p>
<p>Princeton Review's silly "rankings" aren't doing them much good these days. Stock is down 40% in the last year.</p>
<p>They just appointed a new "Chief Information Officer" to fix things.</p>