Princeton v. Harvard

Colleges and Universities A-Z Princeton University
61

<p>
[quote]
Of those admitted to both Harvard and Princeton, the overwhelming majority choose Harvard, and always have.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>we all know that...we all know why harvard has the highest yield...harvard is harvard. even though princeton's undergrad is better, which i fully believe and did NOT apply early to harvard like the rest of my family, harvard is still harvard, princeton just doesnt have the same prestige. as my friend said, her first choice was stanford, upon being accepted to harvard...she no longer knew and eventually chose harvard because harvard is harvard....though there are some that choose harvard because they like it, i truly believe most choose its undergrad simply for its prestige/reputation. its student reviews reflect this.</p>

<p>its obvious when comparing the rest of the ivies on CC to harvard's. every other ivy board has ecstatic students ready to attend next year, look at their 2009 forums, packed with excited future students. where are harvard's future kids?</p>

62

<p>Dispite your rather typical rationalizations, the fact is, those choosing Harvard are just as "enthusiastic" as those who choose any other Ivy - more so, in fact, because Harvard is far, far more likely to be their first choice.</p>

<p>Harvard has the highest retention rate of any college in the United States of America - bar none.</p>

63

<p>how is retention rate an argument against students choosing harvard because of the name? seems as circumstantial as anectodal evidence from cc boards. Shrek isn't saying they don't stay at harvard or aren't happy there. He's just saying that people choose harvard over other colleges because of its name, which you can't really deny - nor should you feel it belittles their decision. I mean, how "knowledgable" can a high school student <em>really</em> be about where they are going to be happy for the next four years. The student going into college is almost a completely different person coming out of college. </p>

<p><a href="http://www.dailyprincetonian.com/archives/2005/05/04/opinion/12846.shtml%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.dailyprincetonian.com/archives/2005/05/04/opinion/12846.shtml&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

64

<p>Most people choose the best college they get into.</p>

<p>Harvard traditionally has its pick of the top students, because they WANT to go there - to associate with each other.</p>

<p>You can belittle Harvard and Harvard students all you want, Mr. Bulldog: There is nothing shallow about to motivation of the top students who regularly prefer Harvard to other alternatives. It is revealing that those who prefer other schools - such as yourself - find it impossible to state that preference without coupling it with a sneer directed at Cambridge. </p>

<p>Picking a school because you sincerely believe it to have the smartest students, the most brilliant faculty, the best facilities and the most exciting location is not a bad parley.</p>

<p>This bull about Harvard students "picking it for its name" is something you generally hear by way of peevish rationalization from propagandists for other schools. A "name" and a "reputation" are not meaningless concepts. Generally speaking, a good name and a good reputation are earned over time and are well deserved.</p>

65

<p>lol. byerly....stop living in denial</p>

<p>my school has had a number go to harvard each year and each year they admit, they go because of its name, not because of anything else. same with my friends from camp. no one is denying harvard's faculty/facilities nor is anyone denying that there are people at harvard that want to be there, but a great number of students ultimately choose harvard because of its name. </p>

<p>
[quote]
A "name" and a "reputation" are not meaningless concepts. Generally speaking, a good name and a good reputation are earned over time and are well deserved.

[/quote]

that is true, it is the most prestigious university and has all right being named that. but now, many other universities are gaining academic prowess and a number have surpassed harvard in undergraduate academics - a fact u cant deny. but harvard's name has been a "pow" name for so many years that harvard is still untouchable. nowadays, its prestige is still untouchable, but its academic quality is comparable.</p>

66

<p>You are entitled to believe whatever gives you comfort. People likewise go to Yale or Stanford or MIT because of their "name."</p>

<p>People buy BMW and Mercedes because of their "name" too - assuming they can afford one.</p>

67

<p>Byerly, did you ever attend any college besides Harvard? Would Oxford be the Ferrari, then?</p>

68

<p>"nowadays, its prestige is still untouchable, but its academic quality is comparable.'</p>

<p>Very well put, Shrek. That's exactly how I'd put it, because it's true. Harvard students are incredible, it's true, and many of the students do want to go there. I remember asking a friend that went there whether he loved the school. At first, I was surprised because he simply shrugged. When I asked him if he hated it, he hastily said, "No, no...I just don't feel the need to scream it out." I have the feeling that the passion that many of the students feel for the school is one of awe of the appreciation of the oppurtunities the institution offers, not a need to belong to a larger community. It certainly isn't a place where one is coddled, but my final conclusion is that Harvard students are simply too busy to be rah-rah that something put such a high value on. We hear reports about unhappiness because they're always finding (note the choice of word) to change, or protest about, but simply express the overall experience of BEING Cantabrigdians (sp?) a different way than most people expect.</p>

69

<p>
[quote]
People buy BMW and Mercedes because of their "name" too - assuming they can afford one.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>yes, but are BMWs and Mercedes the best? Mercedes are infamous for falling apart - especially their windows tend to break easily. BMWs dont make their interior very well and things inside break a lot. is that what u are saying? Harvard, like BMW and Mercedes, have the name but the quality sucks?</p>

70

<p>shh, shrek, byerly drives one of those, and he's very proud of it.</p>

71

<p>Nope. I drive SAABs because I like them, all things considered, and the dealership is convenient. But anybody pretending that BMW and Mercedes aren't well built is being pretty silly.</p>

72

<p>Now that Harvard has made its fin aid package more attractive to many applicants, do you think its yield will be affected?? How about Princeton using the common app this year, how much do you think their yield will be affected by applicants who are SCEA at HYS and just applied RD to Princeton because it was easy this year and wanted to brag they got in?? With so many cross admits I would think these two new policies will affect yield at both, + for Harvard and - for Princeton.</p>

73

<p>Saabs are excellent. BMWs are, too, though. I'm not a big fan of Mercedes, just because they're pretty boring. I used to like their CLK until the new design became so flabby and bland. I like the CL coupe. Not that any of this matters.</p>

<p>Did you ever go anywhere besides Harvard, Byerly?</p>

74

<p>"its obvious when comparing the rest of the ivies on CC to harvard's. every other ivy board has ecstatic students ready to attend next year, look at their 2009 forums, packed with excited future students. where are harvard's future kids?"</p>

<p>In response to shrek2004, Harvard has it's own message board... that's accessible only to accepted students. If you were to go there, you would find many excited students. Furthermore, there are people who choose all schools for the name, no matter the school. This phenomena is not unique to Harvard. I know a kid who was deciding between Cornell and NYU.. and chose Cornell because it was Ivy Leauge.</p>

75

<p>since we're talking about cars, here's a bit of food for thought:
one of my distant relatives who went to harvard for both grad and post grad told me that harvard was a mercedes and princeton a rolls royce.
(don't flame me, that's his opinion)</p>

76

<p>byerly, you might choose to call shrek's wise words rationalizations, but what he says is true. I was accepted at both princeton and harvard and hesitated for a long time. princeton was my first choice, the only argument in favour of harvard was it's name. but it was still a tough choice, because harvard's aura is really powerful, because people from my country know harvard but not princeton... and i know many people who were attracted to harvard for the same reason.
if princeton had the same prestige as harvard, more undergrads would choose princeton. because academically, princeton is AT LEAST as good as harvard at an undergrad level</p>

77

<p>maybe i'm not enough of a car freak, but what does that analogy imply, axfr?</p>

78

<ol>
<li>AT HARVARD, AND GENERALLY:</li>
</ol>

<p>I've been informed that Harvard may indeed enjoy a slightly higher yield rate among what might be called the marginal applicant group attracted by the new financial aid policy. But (in my cynical view) that new policy was adopted from a position of (relative) weakness to offset rising challenges from schools offering substantial tuition reductions styled "merit" aid to the top students that Harvard generally targets.</p>

<p>There are many schools now that are granting large awards to National Merit Scholars and the like irrespective of need. It requires something of a balancing act to retain Harvard's "normal" percentage of the (statistically) best students while also attempting to achieve greater economic diversity.</p>

<p>Clearly, HYPS have the resources to "buy" the best students - NY Yankee-style - if that's what they wanted to do. Likewise, HYP could "buy" top athletes with athletic scholarships (as Stanford does) if they wanted to.</p>

<p>Without awarding "merit" aid, and focussing recruiting more broadly on those entitled to receive "need-based" aid, the end result will be, I expect, a wash when it comes to the overall yield rate.</p>

<hr>

<ol>
<li>AT PRINCETON:</li>
</ol>

<p>The recent yield rate drop at Princeton has been primarily due to changes in "enrollment management" practices following the ouster of Fred Hargadon as Dean of Admissions, and his replacement by Janet Rapelye.</p>

<p>Princeton has continued to fill half its class via binding ED, but has been going after a different type of applicant in the RD round. Princeton's RD yield has dropped precipitously as it has tried to cast a wider net for the type of applicants it used to leave to Harvard - and, to a lesser extent, to Stanford, MIT and Yale. </p>

<p>As the size of Princeton's overlap pool with Harvard etc has grown, the RD yield rate has fallen. What is happening? Rapelye is no longer following the Hargadon policy of seeking the "Princeton type", and is actively seeking to recruit the academic superstars who (according to recent studies) it sometimes avoided on the grounds they were likely to prefer Harvard or MIT, the artsy-craftsy types who tended to prefer Yale, or the Western egalitarians put off by the whole "eating club" scene, who tended to prefer Stanford.</p>

<p>This is a quite conscious policy change in an effort to remake Princeton's image that will - one assumes - eventually affect the perceptions of college applicants nationally. </p>

<p>If, as I predicted last year, Princeton goes to SCEA, it will ease the transition by obtaining a larger, more diverse early pool from which to choose - so that all the "social engineering" won't have to be achieved via the RD pool, from which (if you subtract ED deferreds who are admitted later) only 1/3 of the class is currently drawn.</p>

79

<p>There is no such thing as a "Princeton type" </p>

<p>Princeton students are from all walks of life</p>

80

<p><a href="http://www.dailyprincetonian.com/archives/2004/04/05/news/10132.shtml%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.dailyprincetonian.com/archives/2004/04/05/news/10132.shtml&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p><a href="http://www.dailyprincetonian.com/archives/2004/12/06/opinion/11667.shtml%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.dailyprincetonian.com/archives/2004/12/06/opinion/11667.shtml&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>