@Multiverse7
“I hope you’re kidding. I’ve been to Princeton games where the stands were 1/2 - 3/4 empty. They are nothing like Stanford games.”
I have been to Stanford games like that too. When Harbaugh first got hired, they were emailing me asking me if I wanted FREE tickets.
The full stadiums except for the big game is a fairly recent phenomenon.
Besides, the fun for me isn’t the national ranking but being outside with friends, watching student/athletes performing.
It’s hard to take much of what @collegedad13 says seriously, given his documented history of lying. He is a Harvard parent/mid-tier UC alum that has misrepresented his identity by posting under multiple screen-names, including but not limited to @proudparent26.
The last thing the school on the east coast is doing:
https://www.thecrimson.com/flyby/article/2017/4/27/screw-stanford/
Now we know where/why all the bashing comes from, I guess.
Such a useless and juvenile writing… I guess Harvard students are feeling the heat.
Wow, this article helped Stanford imo. I guess idiots exist in every college. I knew that, but this is a proof. Lol
I guess insecurity exists at every college.
I am quite embarrassed for my Alma Mater. The Crimson “piece” is bush league in every respect. As of late, and due to independently persuasive but cumulatively overwhelming reasons, I have been feeling increasingly alienated from Harvard. The magic is wearing off. Big fan of the Ivy plus now – UChicago, MIT and Stanford.
Just the latest in a series, and not just targeting Stanford - here’s another from last month: https://www.thecrimson.com/flyby/article/2017/3/30/pick-harvard-2017/
These are far from the best writing ever published in the Crimson, but they’re not meant seriously, imo.
Here’s some real cross-admit data from Stanford: https://stanford.app.box.com/s/y4abufqg66nte7uax6eq
To summarize, for the class of 2018 the percentage of cross admits to the following schools who chose Stanford were: Harvard - 42%, Princeton - 75%, Yale - 58%, MIT - 61%.
Overall yield rates haven’t changed by much since then, possibly by a couple of % points at most. It’s worth noting that less than 10% (!) of admits to Stanford were admitted to the rest of its ‘peer’ schools, so the applicant pools are a lot more separate than you think.
I continue to wonder where Stanford gets the above information (I don’t know what the abbreviations for the sources at the bottom of the slide mean). I’m not an expert, but it seems to me it might not be legal for universities to share with each other who got in and went where. If they can’t do that, the data must be self-reported by the students, in which case how can it be reliable or complete?
Also, I wonder how Stanford characterizes a student who gets into, say, Harvard, Yale and Stanford, and enrolls at Harvard. It’s a win for Harvard in cross-admits with Stanford, but how does Stanford reflect that the student was a Yale-Stanford cross-admit and chose to attend neither school? Also, is there double-counting in the total numbers of cross-admits (i.e., does that kid show up as a Stanford cross-admit with both Harvard and Yale)?
In this regard, the Today Show reported this morning that the set of quadruplets who all were admitted to Harvard and Yale (and at least one of which was also admitted to Stanford) have all chosen Yale (see the thread on this subject, also here: http://www.nbcnews.com/feature/college-game-plan/ohio-quadruplets-accepted-ivies-will-attend-yale-together-n753146) - so I guess there’s a real-life illustration of the problem in accounting for cross-admits to multiple places.
Finally, as I’ve said elsewhere, assuming the numbers on the slide are correct, a 10% swing in any direction with any school looks like a big shift but represents 21 or fewer people. As @finolex1 notes, given that HYPS all have 70-80% yields, the overlap in the admitted students must be small. Also, I would guess, many students give a lot of weight to geography in making their decision. I would be very interested to know the choices of Northeast/Mid-Atlantic and West Coast students cross-admitted with Stanford and any of HYP.
Tiny sample set and not strictly cross-admits, but the last time I looked, Harvard had a yield rate of 80%+ from our local high school (in Massachusetts).
In stark contrast, Stanford’s yield was about 20%! Few students were willing to go cross country given the local Harvard and MIT alternatives.
Congrats to Yale! Yale did this a few years back too. It is probably a good news for the Stanford waitlist people. Last year, Stanford accepted 50 from the waitlist.
It’s what you’d expect, @hebegebe, no? As I said a few pages ago, there’s clear geographic skew visible in the enrolled student numbers:
I think that’s a major factor in cross-admit choices, which is why I’d love to see that Stanford cross-admit data (assuming it’s accurate) segmented geographically.
Just fyi, Flyby is supposed to be humorous. They poke at Harvard far more than they poke at Yale or Stanford. Sometimes it’s funny, sometimes it falls flat but it’s definitely not meant to be taken seriously.
^ It is obvious that they were not serious but concerned. They rarely did this to schools other than Yale and Stanford.
Trust me, they are not concerned and yes, they take aim at other schools. I know just off the top of my head that I’ve read pieces about MIT (which they dub the “trade school down the river”) and Princeton.
It’s supposed to be a *** joke. *** No one doubts the quality of Stanford or Yale or Princeton or MIT.
Not sure about this. And at least they should care , especially when they accept more and more non-matriculated students.
I saw Caltech bashed MIT students’ intelligence on the Caltech Prefrosh Weekend newspaper. I was very bad. But neither school took it seriously. It was just a joke.
@coolweather In the April 17, 2017 issue of The California Tech? I don’t see that. Where?
No. In 2009.