<p>If you decided to attend one of the two, which one did you decide on, and why?</p>
<p>I applied EA to Yale, got deferred, then got into both Yale and Harvard RD. I chose Harvard. It's hard to explain why. They're similar schools on paper, but vastly different in person. I guess I chose Harvard because of the intangibles. I got "the feeling" at Harvard.</p>
<p>At least 75% of Harvard and Yale cross-admits pick Harvard.</p>
<p>I chose Harvard. Variety of reasons, most of them revolving around Boston. The schools are far more similar than some people think.</p>
<p>i chose harvard. Boston > New Haven. easy.</p>
<p>I started an equivalent thread on the Yale board. </p>
<p>It is interesting that nobody will say he/she selected Harvard because of prestige. Nothing is wrong with this, but I think people tend to come up with other reasons even for themselves.</p>
<p>If there is a single factor standing out in this small sample, it seems that New Haven is still dragging Yale down, and that Harvard benefits from its location.</p>
<hr>
<p>The P R stats site shows that of 28 Yale admits, 6 were also admitted to Harvard. Of those 6, 4 chose Harvard and there is no indication of a choice having been made by the other two.</p>
<p>Harvard is for nerdy, brainy people and Yale is for sneaky, future leaders of America. People go to Harvard if they want a distinguished academic career. People go to Yale if they want money and power.</p>
<p>And what is this laughable generalization is based on?</p>
<p>It is repeated all throughout Yale. </p>
<p>In jest, of course. :P</p>
<p>If Harvard is for nerdy, brainy people, then who is MIT for?</p>
<p>Having been admitted to both, and having visited both, I was surprised both by how similar the schools were. Both are beyond beautiful, both are more urban than I had expected, both have incredible living accomodations (houses/colleges), both have large lectures for entry-level subjects which are split into sections, etc. etc.</p>
<p>By way of the differences, I did percieve a greater general sense-of-community at Yale. In fact, I almost chose Yale for that very reason. However, in the end, the oppertunities that come with living in Boston were too great to pass up. When compared to Boston, New Haven just did not excite me. </p>
<p>And prestige? Sure the Harvard name is fun and all, but I'm not convinced that it influenced me much. Yale is plenty prestigious in its own right....</p>
<p>Feel free to e-mail me with any specific questions about my choice...</p>
<p>I didn't apply to Harvard, I didn't apply to Yale, I'm going to Cornell for Engineering...However I would probably go to Harvard over Yale. When I think of Yale I think of this dark and dreary place, where I would probably hate everyone there. I just think the people at Yale have this phony feeling about them. That is just my opinion, I don't think I would like it at Yale or the people. So I would go to Harvard, just so I wouldn't have to go to Yale.</p>
<p>The question is, don't we simply convince ourselves that prestige has nothing to do with our decision? When I visited Yale, MIT, Harvard and Columbia last year, I liked Harvard less of all. Admission people there acted as if they didn't care. A guy who conducted a campus tour didn't know a thing and kept saying: "don't ask me, I'm not a historian". </p>
<p>So when I got admitted to Yale and MIT and not to Harvard, I was perfectly fine - after all Yale was my first choice anyway. However, I can't honestly say that, had I been offered a Harvard acceptance, I wouldn't have chosen it. Then of course I would come up with a number of reasons for myself and others why I did it..</p>
<p>It is interesting that nobody on the Yale board replied to the thread "who chose Y over H". And you can find a lot of ppl there who applied early to Yale, then got accepted to Harvard and went to Harvard. Since they applied to Yale early, it was their first choice, yet they switched to Harvard, and none of them would say it was prestige that influenced them..</p>
<p>Oops.. wrong about nobody chosing Yale over Harvard. Just saw a few posts on the other board.</p>
<p>my impression when i visited harvard was yeah, the admissions staff really didnt care, almost to the point of being arrogant about taking for granted all the applicants they would receive. however, the students and the people of the university were surprisingly nice. they defied the stuck-up harvard stereotype. and there were surprisingly many females with...um..."fine physiques." (actually these were other prospective applicants, but the students walking around were above average id say)</p>
<p>MIT on the other hand, lives up to its stereotype and in some cases actually exceeds it.</p>
<p>Re: the admissions offices</p>
<p>No question, I enjoyed my visit to the Yale admissions office more than the my visit to Harvard's. Yale completely rolled out the red carpet for me - when they found out I was an admitted student (as opposed to one of the legions of juniors visiting in the spring), I was whisked to the "Admitted Students Room," with plenty of snacks. While I was there, several admissions officers made it a point to come chat with me, and everyone was extremely hospitable. </p>
<p>By comparison, the Harvard admissions office was comparably uneventful, and certainly not nearly as "warm". No special rooms, no personal "we want YOU" speeches, no free food....</p>
<p>In the end, though, Harvard's yield will be ~80% and Yale's will be ~70% -- so who are we to judge which school has a "better" admissions staff? </p>
<p>And, if I have my way, I never intend to step foot in either office again...!
Point being, judge the school, not the admissions office :)</p>
<p>its a shame though that harvards admissions staff can get away with being arrogant.</p>
<p>What you consider to be "arrogance," Harvard's admissions staff likely sees as "common sense." After all, if their acceptance rates are going DOWN and their yield is going UP, why would it make sense for them to invest precious time and money in a revamped, more welcoming admissions setup? </p>
<p>Maybe they've instead opted to spend those resources elsewhere (e.g. directed mailing, online resources, etc.), ways that they've possibly found to be more effective? That's what I mean when I said:* "who are we to judge which school has a 'better' admissions staff?"* -- we don't know the whole picture, or even a sizable chunk of it!</p>
<p>lol their directed mailing was never flattering, and their website is unimpressive.</p>
<p>i know they can get away with it, obviously. its just a shame that they dont have to put more effort into it.</p>