<p>"From what I’ve read, it would seem that Princeton will go against the norm of allowing students to apply to in-state public schools as well as SCEA. Can anyone confirm or deny this? "</p>
<p>Can’t comment on what Princeton’s policy will be but I suspect it will mirror Yale’s which did allow this exception.</p>
<p>
Last year, out of 2340 admits at Stanford, 664 admits did not matriculate. Out of the 664 admits, Stanford lost 497 admits to HYPM, and 167 admits lost to ALL other schools, a 7.1% of the total admits.</p>
<p>^ Right. And I’ll bet that Berkeley and UCLA each got at least 10 of those 167, probably even a few more than that. That’s what I meant by double-digits – absolute numbers, not percentages. I suppose it’s possible that Berkeley takes 10 or more kids from HYP, too, but a lot less likely that with Stanford, because there are so many more California admits at Stanford.</p>
<p>I have no precise idea what the numbers at HYP are, but a few years ago molliebatmit reported that when MIT looked at where its accepted students went, only two public universities had more than 10 apiece – Berkeley and Georgia Tech, both of which got in the low to mid teens. And MIT has significantly more accepted students go elsewhere than Harvard, Yale, or Stanford.</p>
<p>So I stand by what I said before – as a practical matter, home state publics are not meaningful competitors of HYPS.</p>
<p>It IS interesting, however, that Yale seems to have changed its policy recently. Four years ago, at least, you could apply to ANY public’s rolling-admission program and also apply to Yale SCEA, but sometime after that they limited it to home state.</p>
<p>“It IS interesting, however, that Yale seems to have changed its policy recently. Four years ago, at least, you could apply to ANY public’s rolling-admission program and also apply to Yale SCEA, but sometime after that they limited it to home state.”</p>
<p>LOL: that was probably the University of Michigan amendment! Lots of folks were applying to Yale SCEA and UMich’s rolling program.</p>
<p>@JHS, do you think that the changes at H/P will benefit the yield for all HYPS due to the possibility of reduced numbers of cross-admits?</p>
<p>I agree with you that all other schools do not matter. Stanford indicated that Cal was not even on the top 20 schools for the lost admits last year. </p>
<p>My feeling is that HYS are carefully trying to avoid each other while P is more aggressive in getting cross-admits.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Really? I can’t imagine what 20 schools took more cross-admits from Stanford than Cal. Six or seven I can imagine, maybe even nine or ten, but 20? That’s so hard to believe.</p>
<p>I suppose the change will boost the yield a little at HYPS as a group (maybe also the intellectual EA tier, too, places like Georgetown, MIT, Chicago, BC). And that means reducing the total number of acceptances handed out. But I think we’re talking only a little, tiny bit – maybe a few dozen per school.</p>
<p>Here is the statement from Stanford Minute Report:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>For the 667 admits who did not enroll at Stanford, Cal got less than 2% or less than 13 admits.</p>