<p>It's difficult to quantify which one is harder to get in though the general consensus is Harvard is #1 and Yale is #2. Regardless, the following articles show Stanford is very much in the 4-way rivalry.<br>
<a href="http://www.princeton.edu/%7Epaw/archive_new/PAW05-06/08-0215/features.html%5B/url%5D">http://www.princeton.edu/~paw/archive_new/PAW05-06/08-0215/features.html</a>
<a href="http://www.yaleherald.com/archive/xxx/2000.11.16/features/front.html%5B/url%5D">http://www.yaleherald.com/archive/xxx/2000.11.16/features/front.html</a></p>
<p>lolabelle..again? why are you so hostile...on all threads?</p>
<p>I prefer to deal in fact, not "general consensus". For each unresearched piece you produce there are 10 showing something different. I encourage you to stick to facts, not general perceptions. Perhaps you should read INTERESTEDDAD's comments below. He seems to get it.</p>
<p>whyivy~ i guess this is what you get for asking a very simple, direct question! hope you got what you needed! these threads all take off with people's egos ! seems people answer based on what THEY need, as opposed to helping the person with the original question!</p>
<p>Cstixj,</p>
<p>
[quote]
There is no need to get angry or defensive
[/quote]
I don't think I showed my face on YouTube that showed I was angry. LOL!</p>
<p>
[quote]
But I am certain those that did (at PR) are more knowledgeable of these matters than both of us.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>This isn't rocket science. Just plug in data available to the formula (only three parameters) and you get the ranking. If you believe the formula is absolute truth, power to you. But I am sure many CC members with critical thinking can show you how it isn't as simple. </p>
<p>
[quote]
Are you also saying that US News has no credibility because it put Princeton ahead of Harvard, Yale and Stanford?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Not gonna get into that but apparently, you were the one that said US News had no credibility.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Remember, Princeton fields a full range of athletic teams that recruit as well.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Ivy athletes are held higher academic standards than other Division 1 programs.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I prefer to deal in fact, not "general consensus".
[/quote]
</p>
<p>How do you "deal in fact" without looking at it first? CDS data show Princeton has lower mid-50% SAT range and higher admit rate than Harvard and Yale. Yet PR puts Princeton ahead in selectivity. Maybe you should look at the facts first before worshipping those "experts" at PR. Perhaps you would want to say how those two alone aren't sufficient to define selectivity and I will be with you on that. My position is always that Stanford is very much in that 4-way rivalry and nobody is full of another's rejects. But something tells me you are not even at that point yet.</p>
<p>In my knowledge, not many of those rejected/deferred from HYP end up at second tier Ivys. Most people who apply to Cornell, Penn, Dartmouth, etc. seem to apply to it as their top choice/reach school, not as a second to HYP or say, Brown. Wesleyan, University of Chicago, McGill, John Hopkins, Emory, Northwestern, WUSTL, Wellesley, Tufts, USC are all choices I've heard of. </p>
<p>Something interesting would be where top LAC applicants who don't get in there end up...though say, Swarthmore and say, Williams have a significantly different applicant crowd. Bennington is famous for getting lots of disappointed Sarah Lawrence applicants.</p>
<p>Sam,
I have detected errors in nearly everything you have stated, including what you believe to be my perception of Stanford. I just don't have the energy or desire to respond (but you might learn from Interesteddad, he gets it). I'm glad to hear however that you believe you are more knowledgeable than the research staffs at PR, the Atlantic and US News.
I will continue to cite researched data and you can go on with your "general perceptions". Good Luck.</p>
<p>Oh Plllllllllllllllllllllllllleasssssssssssssssssssse</p>
<p>What Is Your Name = Your Name
Who Gets HYP Rejects? = Your State School With A Full Ride , Top 20 Colleges In The Nation........................not A Debate Team On Cc</p>
<p>I've volunteered as a Harvard interviewer in 2 states, and I've seen a lot of Ivy rejects go to their state's flagship even if that school isn't a top 25 university.</p>
<p>Cstixj,
PR and US News rank Princeton's selectivity #1 and #4, respectiviely and they (obviously) DO NOT agree. Seems like you are confusing selectivity and overall ranking, which I haven't even said anything about. If I were you, I'd go with US News, not PR that says Brown is more selective than Yale. </p>
<p>Interestedadd was pointing out that almost half of the people who applied to Harvard had SATs below Harvard's 25th percentile and that 85% of Harvard's applicants were not valedictorians of their high school. He didn't say anything about Princeton. So that automatically means Princeton's pool is stronger or more self-selecting? How do you know? What we do know is the mid-50% SAT range of the enrolled HY class is higher than Princeton's. </p>
<p>The self-selection of Chicago's applicant pool is reflected by it's HIGHER average SAT or mid-50% SAT range than those of schools with lower admit rates. Same thing can't be said about Princeton vs HY. Apparently, you don't seem to have a strong grasp of what the indicators of a self-selecting pool are. </p>
<p>The answer to the original question is pretty obvious--the other top-25 privates, UVA, UNC..etc.</p>
<p>I think Northstarmom is right, as far middle class and slightly upper middle class is concerned.<br>
Speaking for myself, I can think of only HYP as the schools where my parents and I would be willing to spend 40k+ per year tuition+fees. If not HYP, then it is state flagship (or similar private) with full ride for me!</p>
<p>Sam Lee and Cstixj, I am quite sure both of you have broken one of the fundamental rules of statistics, the rule of causation. </p>
<p>The acceptance rate is due to the admissions committee of a university selecting the number of students that it did from the applicant pool in a given year, it is not entirely the result of the school having standards that make it more "selective" than any other institution. Thus, the so-called selectivity of Princeton, Harvard, and Yale are not statistically significant, because one of the major components of selectivity depends on the size of the applicant pool vs. the number of given spaces available in the freshman class. If significantly less students (5% decrease) decided to apply to Harvard one year for some unknown reason, its acceptance rate will most likely increase. This does not mean that the next year the case will be the same. I would argue that the fluctuations in the admit rates between Harvard, Yale, and Princeton make their admit rates, and their selectivity, practically the same. The same goes with SAT scores. If Harvard decides to accept more kids that do not have the top range SAT scores but rather for other reasons, its average and mid-50% SAT range may fall. However, the credentials of these students may have other factors you are not considering, and it in no way means suddenly it is easier to get admitted at Harvard. This is where your statements go awry in my opinion. </p>
<p>In reality, the selectivity of Harvard, Yale, Princeton, and other comparable schools will be almost the same.</p>
<p>From the College Board website for admits to the class of 2010-</p>
<p>Princeton<br>
10% admit rate
2050-2360 SAT 25-75% range</p>
<p>Stanford
11% admit rate
2000-2300 SAT 25%-75% range</p>
<p>I wonder if Stanford's selection criteria differ from HYPs in some ways. For instance, I know they use athletic scholarships.</p>
<p>whyivy -
"Who Gets HYP Rejects? = Your State School With A Full Ride , Top 20 Colleges In The Nation........................not A Debate Team On Cc"</p>
<p>LOL.</p>
<p>Other students will look for outstanding programs at a variety of uni's and LAC's.</p>
<p>tokyo,</p>
<p>You are confusing me with Cstixj. He/she's the one who insisted that Princeton is more selective than Stanford and that Princeton is "ahead" of YHS because "experts" from PR said so even the US News and many people (including you) have different opinion. I always view them as comparable in a 4-way rivalry.</p>
<p>by the way, BC is more of a peer school to Tufts than it is to BU..whoever was saying BC and BU have similar quality students is way off.</p>
<p>Well, I don't know if post #58 is referring to me, but that is definitely not what I said in my first paragraph of my post #27.</p>
<p>That post is reinforced by student decisions reported on CC a couple of cycles ago (reported both by parents & by students): Highly-qualified, Ivy-qualified students specifically choosing in some cases BC, in other cases BU, because they wanted to stay in the NE and had been watching dismal admissions results for Ivies for students residing in the NE. They chose the safe route of ED for one of those schools. Now I would not know what proportion that consisted of -- then or now -- of the whole BC student body or BU student body. However, from our own private high school Naviance scattergrams, the <em>range</em> of acceptances to BU is considerable -- from the quite overqualified to the barely-meeting-the-standard. Those graphs do not tell where a person matriculated (unless ED).</p>
<p>Perhaps I'm being too literal -- the title of this thread being, Where do HYP rejects go? (Who "gets" them?) Many of the non-Ivy NE colleges have been reporting over the last few years a heightening of the admitted profiles, which is pushing up the bar & tending to confirm the reports on CC of students dispersing to a number of institutions. </p>
<p>Some students want challenge & rigor as a first priority; they'll leave the area for that as a strategy if necessary. Others want the region first, the rigor second. Depends on personal & family priorities.</p>
<p>Danas, even so, I think it depends on the group in which that applicant competes. </p>
<p>For example, given that two students that applied had identical applications transcripts and backgrounds, except for the fact that one lived in NJ and the other in CA, it would be easier for a New Jersey resident to get into Stanford, than for a California resident to get Stanford OR Princeton, just because Californians are overrepresented in both pools. If you single out the admit rate for one state's residents', Stanford's would undoubtedly be lower for Californians. Thus the total admit rate really has little use except to make a general assessment, something that 1.) doesn't matter for a difference under 5%, and 2.) you could have done anyway without numerical data.</p>