<p>but SEAS accepts more than 20 percent. You are talking about just Columbia College. I do not understand why you keep citing that 10 percent, when you are in a school that accepts more than 20 percent.</p>
<p>^Actually, SEAS doesn't accept more than 20%. It accepted 18% this year.
And you can't compare tech schools acceptance rates to non-techs. They're simply more self-selective. Examply...CC accepted 8.9% this year, SEAS accepted 18%, yet SEAS has a significantly higher avg SAT and avg GPA.</p>
<p>There are 2 Engineering schools in the country that accept under 20%: MIT and Columbia SEAS (Caltech is something like 21).
There are probably close to 20 non-engineerings under 20.</p>
<p>And no, I wasn't talking just about Columbia College.
CC = 8.9%
SEAS = 18.something%
Overall= 10.4%</p>
<p>^ Caltech has a 17-18 percent acceptance rate.</p>
<p>^Are those this year's numbers? Where did you find them? (I'm not denying them...I just thought this year's still hadn't been released)</p>
<p>Um, I'd choose Harvard over Columbia</p>
<p>A) the admissions rate is not lower, they are all tied statistically speaking and after factoring in SEAS, Barnard, etc., Columbia actually has a higher rate, and B) in terms of accounting for yield rates and where the best of the best students choose to go, Columbia is much, much, much less selective than HYP/MIT/Caltech.</p>
<p>Why on earth would you tie in Barnard statistics with Columbia's? They are separate institutions.</p>
<p>Class of 2011 Admit Rates (per Hernandez Consulting)
Admits Applied Ratio
Brown 2577 19044 13.53%
Cornell 6229 30382 20.50%
Columbia 2210 21343 10.35%
Dartmouth 2165 14176 15.27%
Harvard 2058 22955 8.97%
Penn 3610 22634 15.95%
Princeton 1791 18942 9.46%
Yale 1860 19323 9.63%
Stanford 2465 23956 10.29%
MIT 1533 12443 12.32% </p>
<p>1) So, Columbia's admit rate is quite impressive but not the lowest among top schools. And all urban schools (Columbia, Penn, Chicago, etc.) have benefited from a trend where students increasingly want to be educated in big cities. Hence more apps to CU, lower admit rate.</p>
<p>Perhaps more important than admit rate (which can be manipulated many ways), Regular Decision yields show overall demand for the institution and generally correlate nicely to your next question re prestige:</p>
<p>Estimated RD yields for Class of 2011 (lifted from another college board, so i don't own these numbers, but they seem pretty accurate given historical rates)</p>
<p>Harvard: 73% RD est
Yale; 59% RD est
Stanford: 57.7% RD est
Princeton: 53.7% RD est
Penn: 52.6% RD est
Brown: 48.4% RD est
Columbia: 46.2% RD est
Cornell: 42.7% RD est
Dartmouth: 40.0% RD est
Duke: 35.7% RD est</p>
<p>2) Re overall prestige, I agree with you; Columbia is a notch below. IMHO:</p>
<p>Tier I: HYSMP (in that order)
Tier II: Penn/Columbia/Duke
Tier III: Cornell
Tier IV: Brown/Dartmouth</p>
<p>This says nothing BTW re quality of education or teaching. Its more general perception, which is greatly skewed in favor of big research focused schools (espc universities with large academic medical centers like Penn and Harvard) and/or schools with very visible athletic programs (Duke, Stanford)</p>
<p>To be honest, I really don't see why people want to only include RD yields when comparing schools. Why discount all of the people who do in fact see Columbia as their first choice and hold it in extremely high regard when applying ED? It's interesting to see that the EA schools are also the top 3 for RD yield.</p>
<p>yield shows how attractive a school is to applicants. The fact that Penn can enroll more than 50 percent of accepted students whereas Duke cannot even grab 40 percent shows something.</p>
<p>It shows something for sure, but you also have to consider the strength of the applicants and the entering class. For example, Harvard and Yale each have 18% of their entering class as NMSC-sponsored Merit Scholars ("cream of the cream of the crop", they say), and Princeton is 16%. For all other Ivies, that number is in the 2-4% range.</p>
<p>
Those were last year's numbers (though this year was similar). I couldn't find the 2005-2006 Caltech data set online to confirm this, but they were published in the campus newspaper and in other places off-line; I'm pretty confident that 18 percent is correct, though I guess you'll just have to believe me on that until they get around to publishing a recent common data set.</p>
<p>Another reason why you can't look at yield: cross admits.</p>
<p>For example, Penn's yield rate may be slightly higher than Columbia's, but Columbia's students are most likely admitted to HYP at a greater rate than Penns, and therefore have more of an incentive not to enroll at C. However, there's no statistical evidence of this, but in general, you can see why yield rates cannot be directly compared.</p>
<p>Columbia's rate is lower because more weak applicants apply. Columbia is definitely lower in prestige than HYP, and therefore these kids think that it is easier to get into. I know plenty of people that have Columbia as the only Ivy reach. It also has the benefit of being in NYC, yet most people don't know where Princeton and Yale are located. </p>
<p>Red&Blue: I assume you meant public prestige by "overall" prestige"- since you ranked brown and dartmouth so low. If anything, Penn would be the least prestigious of all the Ivies.</p>
<p>Dionysus: I sort of disagree. HYPS certainly get tons of unqualified apps, as many students are way overly-ambitious, or there parents make them apply to those schools "just to see what happens." MIT might be the exception, as engineering schools typically don't get many unqualified applicants, but it does get a few from girls who think they might just get in because they're girls.
I really would argue that 6 of the Ivies share a very similar applicant pool. HYP, Columbia, Dartmouth, and Brown.
Cornell and Penn are probably the least similar. Cornell is simply much larger than the others and attracts more regular students who are using it as a big reach rather than the type that aims for Ivies. Penn is in a similar situation, although they get a lot of the regular Ivy pool as well, and also the pool that applies because of its social reputation.</p>
<p>"If anything, Penn would be the least prestigious of all the Ivies."</p>
<p>Care to explain?</p>
<p>Penn has the highest yield after HYPMS. It has similar SATs as the other lower ivies and much HIGHER than Cornell.</p>
<p>I don't agree that Penn is the least prestigious of the Ivies...that is certainly Cornell, by a wide margin.</p>
<p>However, Penn's extremely high yield relative to its perceived prestige is due to a few factors.
1. Penn openly considers "strong interest in the school" a major criterion in admissions. No other Ivy does. This means that they're accepting people that are much more likely to attend.
2. Yield moves with USNews. Penn has been high on USNews the last few years, thus a higher yield. If Penn has a few years low on USNews (as it will at some point...everyone but HYP moves around considerably), yield will fall.
3. Penn is known as the social Ivy. This attacts accepted students and increases yield, but it has nothing to do with prestige.
4.
[quote]
nother reason why you can't look at yield: cross admits.</p>
<p>For example, Penn's yield rate may be slightly higher than Columbia's, but Columbia's students are most likely admitted to HYP at a greater rate than Penns, and therefore have more of an incentive not to enroll at C. However, there's no statistical evidence of this, but in general, you can see why yield rates cannot be directly compared.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>guys, do you realize what you sound like and what you're arguing about?</p>
<p>this is about the 20th "prestige" / "school X is better than columbia!" type thread. Its tone is civil so far, but really, is anyone going to convince anyone else of anything here?</p>
<p>Let it die.</p>
<p>Yield is the only stat Penn wins among Dartmouth, Brown, Columbia etc. Columbiahopeful (lol hilariously tragic name) mentions it in every post. It helps that Penn notoriously yield manages.</p>
<p>Slipper - grow up. </p>
<p>Penn "yield manages" no more than any other school. If you make that claim based on use of ED, Penn admitted 48% of its incoming freshman via ED and Columbia was at 45%. All the Ivies who use ED were above 30%. You can say that if it makes your ego feel better, but you have no legs to stand on.</p>
<p>At least S Snack makes a foolish claim (Columbia cares less about SAT scores than the other top schools) and then immediately states that it's a foolish claim. He at least gets points for honesty.</p>
<p>The fact is that Penn gets more students who really want to be there and has schools which no Ivy can compete with (Nursing and Wharton). Engineering is top ranked for the superhot majors now - bioengineering and materials engineering/nanotech. Re arts and sciences, which is 2/3 of Penn's student body, the school is quite competitive -- hence the overall and the RD yields.</p>
<p>The ugly truth is that Columbia just isn't as competitive as many of you think it is. The school gets creamed in competition for the best students, hence it's yield rate (overall and ED). </p>
<p>And its students' stats are in-line with its peers (Duke, Penn, Chicago, etc.) Sorry to say, but HYSMP are not peers to Columbia, they are superior.</p>