<p>^really… you speak for most people do you? Does the arrogance of such a statement escape you?</p>
<p>Not unlike your comrade who is not relegated to offer the simple opinion of one person, but instead offers self important decrees of fact that require finality and for everyone to then move on:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Why not simply offer your opinions, once is sufficient - and they will be noted. Instead of what seems to me to be an effort to prop up your fragile self esteem by demanding that you speak for some large braintrust or that your opinions are more valuable, more well considered than anyone elses.</p>
<p>I realize that a few members should not be considered representative of the whole forum but as a senior member in several other forums I find that we generally tend to try to be more constructive and measured than a few that have posted in this thread. This is the behavior generally reserved for ■■■■■■… at least in my experience.</p>
<p>I would rather not engage in the typical pis*ing contests with the worst kind of forum denizen. Please rest assured that your opinions have been noted - perhaps not taken as the omnipotent proclaimations that you believe they deserve, but they have been read and understood so you can move on.</p>
<p>“Does the arrogance of such a statement escape you?”</p>
<p>Yes. I reviewed the thread, finding one poster in support (Desperatu).</p>
<p>“at least in my experience”</p>
<p>That is indeed one pertinent issue here, your experience with college and membership on this board. Imagine how much more you will know in 4 1/2 years, and then going though it again with your own children and those of your friends.</p>
<p>BTW, you know a lot more about colleges than I did at your age.</p>
<p>Are you serious? You correlate that because a thread has varying offers of critical opinion (which is really the point of the thread) on different aspects that somehow this means you speak for everyone ? </p>
<p>Buckle up folks… looks like the ■■■■■■ have escaped. Hope this thread is not lost to them.</p>
<p>Rank 7 97 Deep Springs College
Rank 13 95 Franklin W. Olin College of Engineering
Rank 43 88 Pitzer</p>
<p>I neglected to add the footnote schools to the initial list. Deep Springs and Franklin W. Olin were not included due to size (sub 100 freshman class). Pitzer is ACT/SAT optional so the avg SAT/ACT data is extrapolated from outside sources just to give an approximation of score/rank. </p>
<p>Secondly, I am not convinced that the full list of top colleges is complete, so if anyone has any suggestions of colleges/universities that you believe may be of similar selectivity, simply reply with the school name and they will be calculated/scored to determine ranking.</p>
<p>Forgive me if I 'm way out on a limb here, but after reading this thread (and understanding the main gist) there seems to be a missing factor in the equation. That being: where is the room for deviation from the norm? In other words, yes, the bottom line acceptance rate at Uni A may be 22%, but what is going unsaid is that the acceptance rate for Hispanic applicants with SATs and GPAs slightly lower than those of the Caucasian applicants might be a 42%/16% ratio. </p>
<p>So “chance me” is only as good as an educated guess. Unfortunately, college admissions are not college blind, legacy blind, diversity (i.e. recruiting from other parts of the country) blind, etc. If and when we were to have those additional stats, then I would think the “chance me” thread would have a bit more credibility.</p>
<p>also, you have to remove all SAT optional schools from your list. Since only the top scorers submit them and half don’t, the numbers are entirely skewed.</p>
<p>^ I agree that a ‘chance’ thread thoughtfully responded to by someone experienced with a particular school and it’s admission tendencies is ideal but this can often be the exception and certainly not the rule in CC. And more likely a responder may be truely only familiar with a single school and not a list of schools as is requested frequently. </p>
<p>This list simply gives you an opportunity to take any thoughtful ‘chance’ response you may have received and then extrapolate from that which other schools may be more or less challenging admissions.</p>
<p>Or it can be used to give a less subjective comparison of school selectivity to reference when responders provide their assesment of your chances at a 7 different schools - that can sometimes be nothing more than personal impressions and without foundation in admission statistics. This just hopefully gives some a better oppurtunity to question and perhaps dig deeper when someone tells you that, for example, you are a safety at Wash U but a reach at Georgetown.</p>
<p>I wasnt aware that it had been reported by any school involved that only the top scorers submit their SAT stats (although I would have to be suspect when considering the data point ). I agree that this is something that may need to be better considered and at the very least should certainly be footnoted. Is it better to have half the data points without being certain it is representative or to simply not attempt any approximation at all? </p>
<p>I welcome feedback or thoughts. I am about to watch the Bears game (I recorded it) so I will give it some more thought and check back later.</p>
<p>yes - only the top scorers submit. That’s the benefit of applying to SAT optional schools. A girl I know just got accepted EA to Bard with 14 hundred something SATs (out of 2400), but great GPA, and she got in. Of course she didn’t submit her SAT scores. I know many such examples, although that one was the most extreme I think.</p>
<p>^The ACT data published by the schools is rounded. For example they may report the top 75% ACT number (in their 25% - 75% spread) as 31 but that could mean 30.51 or 31.49. - which in terms of ACT scores is faily substantial difference. The SAT data is also rounded but the difference between 2157.51and 2158.49 is not statistically significant. I believe the rounding issue reduces the usefulness and reliability of ACT data in making fine distinctions between schools and accounts for the smaller weighting.</p>
<p>Hinsdale, you should only factor in the SAT/ACT scores of the ENROLLED students, not the accepted students because many schools like NU,WashU, and Tufts are considered safety schools for HYPSM level students. This inflates your SAT/ACT ranking which accounts for 70% of your score.</p>
<p>^Only a result of typing too quickly – the data is for enrolled freshman students (I am not aware that this sort of data for is available for all accepted applicants but I would be interested in that data if it were).</p>
<p>I am not sure what point you are attempting to make regarding Northwestern U, WashU, Tufts as “safety” schools for HYPSM applicants. Might not any school possibly be considered a “safety” school for a strongly qualified HYPSM candidate? </p>
<p>If you consider that NU and WashU have strong applicant interest (heavy application numbers with above-trend yearly growth) and that they both present below 20% admission rate challenges (projected as of current admissions cycle), and have mid-point SAT scores of enrolled freshman that are ~equal to or higher than M.I.T., Dartmouth, Stanford, Penn, Duke, Cornell, UChicago, Brown and Columbia - then it may be imprudent for almost any applicant to consider these as a “safety”. IMO.</p>
<p>Although it is not terribly informative to compare schools using mixed data (from different admission cycles), I have updated the stats of some of the schools incorporating the newest admissions data in order to see how things are shaping up in terms of selectivity this year. For those interested in seeing how the new 2011 stats are shaping up:</p>
<h1>Rank Score College</h1>
<p>Rank 1 100 Harvard University*
Rank 1 100 Princeton University*<br>
Rank 3 99 Yale University*<br>
Rank 3 99 Columbia University*<br>
Rank 5 98 California Inst of Tech*<br>
Rank 5 98 Stanford University*<br>
Rank 7 97 MA Inst of Technology*<br>
Rank 7 97 Brown University*<br>
Rank 7 97 University of Pennsylvania*
Rank 10 96 Dartmouth College*<br>
Rank 10 96 Duke University*<br>
Rank 12 95 Northwestern University*<br>
Rank 12 95 Pomona College<br>
Rank 12 95 Washington Univ in St Louis
Rank 12 95 University of Chicago*<br>
Rank 16 94 Vanderbilt University<br>
Rank 16 94 Cornell University*
Rank 16 94 Tufts University*<br>
Rank 19 93 Amherst College
Rank 19 93 Swarthmore College<br>
Rank 21 92 Harvey Mudd College
Rank 21 92 Rice University
Rank 21 92 Williams College<br>
Rank 21 92 Johns Hopkins University*<br>
Rank 25 91 Bowdoin College
Rank 25 91 Claremont McKenna College<br>
Rank 25 91 Cooper Union<br>
Rank 25 91 Georgetown University*<br>
Rank 25 91 University of Southern California<br>
Rank 30 90 Emory University<br>
Rank 30 90 Middlebury College<br>
Rank 30 90 University of California Berkeley*<br>
Rank 30 90 University of Notre Dame<br>
Rank 30 90 Washington & Lee University
Rank 35 89 Haverford College<br>
Rank 35 89 Tulane<br>
Rank 35 89 Vassar College<br>
Rank 35 89 Wesleyan University
Rank 39 88 Boston College<br>
Rank 39 88 Carleton College<br>
Rank 39 88 University of California-Los Angeles<br>
Rank 39 88 US Naval Academy Annapolis<br>
Rank 39 88 Carnegie Mellon University<br>
Rank 44 87 Davidson College<br>
Rank 44 87 Hamilton College NY
Rank 46 86 Bates College<br>
Rank 46 86 Brandeis University
Rank 46 86 Colgate University<br>
Rank 46 86 Oberlin College
Rank 46 86 University of Virginia<br>
Rank 51 85 Barnard College
Rank 51 85 College of William & Mary<br>
Rank 51 85 Macalester College<br>
Rank 51 85 New York University
Rank 51 85 Wellesley College<br>
Rank 51 85 Colby College<br>
Rank 51 85 Reed College<br>
Rank 58 84 Bucknell University
Rank 58 84 Colorado College<br>
Rank 58 84 Grinnell College<br>
Rank 58 84 University of North Carolina Chapel Hill<br>
Rank 58 84 US Military Academy West Point<br>
Rank 63 83 Northeastern University
Rank 63 83 Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute<br>
Rank 63 83 University of California, San Diego
Rank 63 83 University of Rochester
Rank 67 82 Kenyon College<br>
Rank 67 82 University of Michigan Ann Arbor<br>
Rank 67 82 Whitman College
Rank 70 81 Occidental College<br>
Rank 70 81 University of Miami
Rank 72 80 Smith College<br>
Rank 72 80 Trinity College (Connecticut)<br>
Rank 72 80 Villanova University<br>
Rank 72 80 McGill University<br>
Rank 72 80 University of Richmond<br>
Rank 77 79 Boston University<br>
Rank 77 79 Lafayette College<br>
Rank 77 79 Rhodes College<br>
Rank 80 78 Mount Holyoke College<br>
Rank 80 78 University of Texas at Austin<br>
Rank 80 78 Georgia Institute of Technology
Rank 83 77 Bryn Mawr College<br>
Rank 83 77 University of IL Urbana-Champaign<br>
Rank 83 77 University of Tulsa
Rank 83 77 University of Wisconsin Madison
Rank 83 77 Case Western Reserve University
Rank 88 76 Trinity University<br>
Rank 89 75 Stevens Institute of Technology
Rank 90 74 Colorado School of Mines<br>
Rank 90 74 Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology
Rank 92 73 Wheaton College </p>
<p>2009-2010 Admission data by National Center for Education Statistics
*Schools noted have released partial 2010-2011 stats, the admission rates used for these schools are projections. </p>
<p>“Difficulty of Admissions” score weightings:</p>
<h2>70% SAT/ACT midpoint scores</h2>
<p>55%|SAT midpoint between 25% - 75% ranges for accepted applicants
15%|ACT midpoint between 25% - 75% ranges for accepted applicants</p>
<h2>30% Admissions Selectivity</h2>
<p>20%|Percentage of applicants accepted
5%|# of freshman openings as a percentage of total # of applicants (1)
5%|Total # of applicants (2)</p>
<p>^Just noticed how similar the ranking order on the above listing is to the US News rankings (except Brown and Pomona are slightly lower on US News). When considering this list uses a formula based predominantly on just published avg SAT/ACT data and admission rates, it makes one wonder how much more insightful the US News rankings are than just a one dimensional look at admission stats.</p>
<p>princeton review also does an academic selectivity rating (1-100) it may be outdated a bit though. but for those who are applying to schools not on this list, you can refer to that as a rough estimate.</p>
<p>^actually there was little substantial change… some of the schools moved up a score or two as the lower admissions rates for 2011 were utilized. Duke moved up a couple of scores, and Northwestern (which had already been using the 2011 data - dropped a score relative to all the schools that were updated). Perhaps you have a Duke bias when judging accuracy? Remember the formula has not changed and the results are completely data driven, so it would not make sense that it is more or less accurate now.</p>