<p>I actually have read Byerly's articles. It isn't that the cross-admit statistic is wrong- 75 % of cross admits do choose Harvard over any other school. It is Byerly's assumption that this makes Harvard's class head and shoulders above any other that I would argue with. </p>
<p>First of all, as 4feynman posted on another thread, becuase Princeton is ED, early aceptees cannot apply to Harvard and become potential cross-admits. By contrast, students who have shown initial preference for Harvard by applyiing EA are free to apply to Princeton. Second of all, while cross-admits might be the most desirable students, they are not necessarily the "best" in a traditional sense of the word. Qualified racial, ethnic, and regional minorities are much more desirable than the average student, and therfore more likely to be accepted by multiple institutions. However, they are not necessarily more qualified academically or extracurricularly than their white, east coast counterparts. Yes, there are some kids who are cross-admits because they are exceptional even among a pool of high achievers, but we don't know how many there are, whether their accomplishments are real or a result of self-promotion, or whether they fall into the 75 % or 25 % in Byerly's oft repeated statistic. </p>
<p>According to the last US News and World Report, Harvard only ranked 4th for selectivity, behind Yale (1) and Princeton and MIT (tied for 2).</p>
<p>And don't bother replying with "blah, blah blah" as you so eloquently did to one of my previous posts on the subject, Byerly.</p>