<p>A lot more that 6… Obviously it’s all anecdotal, but the overall impression I got was that Princeton loses a lot of its yield in attempting to get top engineering students.</p>
<p>ggoos, sit back…relax…take a deep breath</p>
<p>and</p>
<p>think a little</p>
<p>what type of student would apply to Yale, MIT and Stanford on an EA basis?</p>
<p>would it be:</p>
<ol>
<li>The top students that feel comfortable enough that they would get in to most of HYPSM during regular admissions and are smart enough to take this approach?</li>
</ol>
<p>or</p>
<ol>
<li>The next to the top students that aren’t too sure that they can compete during Regular Admissions with the top students when applying to HYPSM and want to take advantage of the higher admittance rates for EA at these schools to see if, with a bit of luck, they get in by EA?</li>
</ol>
<p>so buddy, then how many prospective students did you talk to at Princeton Previews?</p>
<p>8?
10?
12?
20?</p>
<p>I would say I got to know (names, hometown, prospective major etc.) about 30 students, and about half of them were planning on majoring in engineering.</p>
<p>buddy, ok thanks</p>
<p>so you met about 15 prospective students that planned to major in engineering at Princeton.</p>
<p>how many of those told you they also were admitted to MIT?</p>
<p>and of those, </p>
<p>how many told you that they were absolutely sure that they were going to attend MIT?</p>
<p>12 of them had gotten into MIT and 6 were going there</p>
<p>omg who cares</p>
<p>hahaha you little goose girl, nobody is denying that removing ED caused Princeton’s yield to drop. did you not understand that, or did someone as supposedly “smart” as you miss that? THE HORRORS. i can see you trying very hard. pasting numbers from everywhere, because if you go around showing people numbers it means you are some einstein. LOL this is sad.</p>
<p>everybody knows that Princeton’s yield dropped after they removed ED. this is not in dispute. you, on the other hand, seem to think you deserve a Nobel for pasting some obvious statistic from somewhere. So how is it a valid comparison now between current numbers for YSM and Princeton anymore? Really? You have a itsy bitsy magic wand and a shiny crystal ball that allows you to peer into a magical alternate world where you can predict imaginary comparisons between non-existent and non-equivalent yield numbers? ooooooh, come Alice, hold my hand and take me down the rabbit hole.</p>
<p>I will say that Harvard and Stanford are clearly head and shoulders above Princeton in yield rate, even after accounting for Princeton’s lack of ED. See, not everyone’s a whiny insecure little tool like you who goes around shrieking when people say something you don’t like.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>[Flat</a> Earth Society - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia](<a href=“http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flat_earth_society]Flat”>Modern flat Earth beliefs - Wikipedia)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>It’s the mocha frappuccino, not me. Usually, I couldn’t give a rat’s behind about what others say or think about me. But the caffeine has its effects.</p>
<p>
</li>
</ol>
<p>johnny, I think I’ll go with no. 1. Please do not confuse higher (SC)EA admittance rate with easier admissions. The anecdotal evidence suggests that for Stanford and Yale, the SCEA applicant pool is stronger than the RD pool. And IIRC, MIT accepted fewer than 600 students from ~5,700 EA applicants. So the MIT EA admittance rate actually may be slightly lower than its RD rate.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>this is so, so sad. relying on anecdotal evidence - what, the only friend you have outside of your family? please note that everybody is laughing at you when you say that SCEA is not easier or that it does not give you a boost. it’s obvious that you’re 12, because you’ve never applied to top colleges in your life - otherwise, more possibly, you’re some loser 25 year-old who never had a shot at top colleges.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>What is it about Princetonians and their obsessive/compulsive need to mock CC usernames???</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Where did I say that somebody is “denying that removing ED caused Princeton’s yield to drop?” Why would I think anybody would deny a fact?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>No, I am no Einstein. Nor do I want to be. He is affiliated with the Institute of Advanced Studies which is located in Princeton, NJ. That’s too close for comfort.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Some people think its a valid comparison because neither YSM nor Princeton has binding early programs. Apparently, you don’t. And I can’t say that I blame you since Princeton looks bad in this comparison.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Nope. But this is what JohnAdams12 is trying to do, which is why and how we’re in this debate in the first place.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I agree. You’re smarter than I thought you were.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>That’s assuming I go to Yale or MIT. What is the basis for your assumption??</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Of course, “EA boosts yield significantly” = “the earth is round.”</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>What else do you expect me to do? Stanford and Yale do not provide available data which differentiate their SCEA vs. RD candidates.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The Princeton admitted students who were rejected by Stanford and Yale (SCEA) aren’t laughing.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>How does it feel to be schooled by a “12” year old?</p>
<p>Class of 2014 - Admissions Yield for Regular Decision Applicants* </p>
<p>76% - Harvard
66% - Stanford
58% - MIT
57% - Princeton
56% - Yale
48% - Penn
44% - Dartmouth
39% - Cornell
33% - Williams
28% - Northwestern</p>
<hr>
<p>**Assuming 97% yield for ED accepted students and 85% yield for EA accepted students for Stanford and Yale, and 70% for MIT EA. *</p>
<p>MIT Class of 2013</p>
<p>CLAS TYPE ADM ENRO YIELD WL ENRO
2013 ALL 1676 1072 63.96% 78
2013 EA 540 372 68.89%
2013 RD 1136 700 61.62%</p>
<p>buddy, so based on your observation with the prospective students that you met at Preview Days, it seems that it isn’t the “MIT effect” that lowered the Princeton yield from the previous 2 years - this is contrary to what you were claiming.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>huh? sorry but I don’t totally follow what you are saying.</p>
<p>corrected:</p>
<p>Class of 2014 - Admissions Yield for Regular Decision Applicants* </p>
<p>76% - Harvard
66% - Stanford
61% - MIT
57% - Princeton
56% - Yale
48% - Penn
44% - Dartmouth
39% - Cornell
33% - Williams
28% - Northwestern</p>
<hr>
<p>**Assuming 97% yield for ED accepted students and 85% yield for EA accepted students for Stanford and Yale, and 70% for MIT EA. *</p>
<p>Sample calculation:</p>
<p>MIT Class of 2014
ED Applications = 5,684
ED Acceptances = 590
ED Matriculated = 413*</p>
<p>Total Acceptances = 1,611
Total Matriculated = 1,031</p>
<p>RD Acceptances = 1,021
RD Matriculated = 618
RD Yield = 61%</p>
<hr>
<p>*assuming 70% ED yield</p>
<p>buddy buddy buddy</p>
<p>you stated that the cause of Princeton’s lower yield for the class of 2014 compared to the last 2 years was due to an increasing amount of cross admit kids going to MIT</p>
<p>yet</p>
<p>your sample showed that there was not much change this year from the cross admits to MIT compared to the last few years.</p>
<p>therefore your statement that it was the “MIT effect” is not correct, based on your own data.</p>
<p>
</p>