<p>Sorry jonri, I didn’t mean it to be snarky or mean. It honestly makes sense to me that Yale would release detailed statistics of its science research among undergraduates. It’s trying hard to recruit more science students, which there’s no denying: sending likely letters to strong science students, inviting them for a special “science student weekend,” etc.</p>
<p>Stanford, like others, talks about its undergraduate research and is always sure to include its research funding total, but I haven’t seen detailed statistics like those that Yale has produced. Actually, I haven’t seen statistics that detailed for MIT, either. So it would make sense that Yale puts those stats out to attract more science students. Do they have such detailed statistics for the research that social science and humanities students do?</p>
<p>There are a lot of UG institutions where you can’t do research, but remember that the type of student looking at Yale, Stanford, MIT, etc. is probably going to expect there to be research. After all, these schools tout their undergraduate research. I don’t think the statistics are pointless–for Yale. It helps to show students that Yale’s undergrads do real science research. But for Stanford and MIT, which are well-known to be hardcore science schools, a mere discussion of undergraduate research (as they all do) is sufficient–science research is implied.</p>
<p>It’s all marketing. For example, Yale mentions that it has the world’s “most powerful stand-alone particle accelerator.” Stanford doesn’t mention it has the longest linear particle accelerator in the world. I’m pretty sure that Stanford doesn’t keep tabs on how many faculty have published with students. I’m not even sure it knows what % of its students have done research, given that there are so many ways to do it (MIT, by contrast, has its UROP which means compiling such statistics is easier). Again, all marketing.</p>
<p>Only Harvard and Princeton promise aid for families all the way upto 180k bracket though. So their applications shot up in 2006, 2007 timeframe when they adopted this policy. I have nt seen anyone else offer a comparable deal yet. Harvard attributes their application number increases solely to the aid package, even in the last announcement when they provided the number of applicants in January.</p>
<p>There are many reasons why not all kids apply to all HYPS. As an example, most brilliant kids in California will apply to Stanford as their first preference and add one or two of HYP. Some of these might only want the non-urban feel such as Princeton and only apply to Princeton out east. Others might say that Stanford is their non-urban school and apply to Harvard and Yale. Stanford engineering applicants might feel that Princeton is the only one they want to consider because of their top engineering compared to Harvard and Yale. Other Stanford applicants might only apply to the better name, Harvard, if they are going to apply to the east. Some Stanford applicants might feel that having Med, Law or Business Schools might be important for undergraduates and not apply to Princeton. Finally, some Stanford applicants might feel that Yale and Princeton are more undergraduate oriented than Harvard and not apply to Harvard.</p>
<p>At the end of the day, the single most brilliant students will apply to Princeton, enroll at Princeton and have the most incredible four years that a student can possibly have in college…ha!</p>
<p>I doubt you’re going to back down, no matter what anyone says. However, you are now making a completely different argument. Before you replied to Hunt, who expressed some misgivings about what rejection from an eating club might do to a kid’s feeling with “Huh?”–as if it just doesn’t happen. </p>
<p>Now you are arguing that the eating clubs are no different than the Secret Societies at Yale or the Final Clubs at Harvard. That’s a complete turnaround. </p>
<p>It is very different. While it certainly hurts a kid who dreams of getting into one of these organizations and is rejected, if he has friends who make it, they aren’t going to stop eating lunch and dinner with him. Moreover, MOST of the students at Harvard and Yale do NOT belong to them. </p>
<p>Think about what really happened to this kid. For two years, (s)he ate dinner with friends from this EC. And when (s)he wasn’t studying or eating meals, (s)he was spending tons of times on that EC. Kid agreed to live with someone else in the EC junior year. Upper classmen in the EC encouraged all the sophs to “bicker” for that club. The kid wanted to be in one particular club because that was the one everyone else in the EC belonged to. As Hanna says, after two years doing the EC, the kid certainly had friends who were juniors and seniors in that EC. </p>
<p>And then kid got rejected. So, for the next year, the kid’s roommate went off to eat with the others in the EC at the eating club and the kid was left alone for meals. Kid tried to make some friends with others who weren’t in eating clubs, but the truth is that the kid I’m talking about was a bit of a partier. Good student and I don’t mean extreme partier but nonetheless exactly the kind of kid who would want to be in an eating club. Kid just didn’t fit in with most of those who opted against joining–many of whom were non-drinkers, which certainly doesn’t describe this kid. Moreover, these kids had formed their own friendships for two years. It was hard to be a junior who was suddenly left in the lurch. </p>
<p>The kid had applied and enrolled in Princeton PRIMARILY because of its strength in the EC involved. It was the kid’s passion, so kid didn’t want to quit the EC.</p>
<p>hey phanta, is there any part to the “ha!” comment at the end of my statement that showed that it was intended as a joke that you did not understand?</p>
<p>in the meantime, we will see what will happen to yields at HYPSM once Harvard and Princeton introduce SCEA this coming year, won’t we?</p>
<p>regarding Stanford, here are the average Cross-Admit percentages with HYPM for the 2002-10 period, a 9 year period which includes 4 years of Harvard and Princeton not using any Early Acton/Admissions:</p>
<p>jonri, and the reason this Princeton Eating Club experience is any different than a Stanford Frat experience for a kid playing sports whereby many of his fellow teamates get admitted to a Frat but he doesn’t is because of what?</p>
<p>^ why look at the past 10 years for the average cross-admits? Why not look at the past 20 years? 30 years? Wouldn’t that give you more accuracy? :rolleyes:</p>
<p>Here’s the class of 2014 cross-admit info for Stanford (and previous years are similar):</p>
<p>hlh, this year we seem to be seing more Yale/Pomona decisions and I imagine that Princeton Engineering would have a fair share of cross admits with Caltech and lose some of those …</p>
<p>phanta, that is right, you are the one that has been insisting that the historical cross admt rates only a few years back, which include periods where Harvard and Princeton were using the ED’s, should not be considered when comparing cross admits for HYPMS for the periods when H and P again add the SCEA. This is particularly alarming in view of the fact that the cross amit rates between these five schools have girated all over the place:</p>
<p>as an example, within four years the Stanford/Yale cross-admit rates go from 49/51 to 30/70 two years later and then back to 49/51 two years later.</p>
<p>you have any idea how ridiculous what you are saying sounds?</p>
<p>the very first data that should be reviewed for future HYPSM cross admits once Harvard and Princeton begin the SCEA is what were the cross admits for HYPMS when those two schools used Early Decision/Action.</p>
<p>phanta, frankly your desire to support your child’s school, Stanford, goes beyond any reasonableness, including the presentation of a substancial amount of false and misleading posted messages.</p>
<p>phanta, here you go again with the deceptive, false and misleading statements as the one bolded above.</p>
<p>Stanford/Harvard in 2010 was 38/62 - it has changed as much as 25/75 in the past</p>
<p>Stanford/Yale in 2010 is 50/50 - it has changed as much as 30/70 in the past</p>
<p>Stanford/MIT in 2010 is 60/40 - it has has changed as much as 33/67 in the past</p>
<p>Stanford/Princteon in 2010 is 63/37 - it has changed as much as 49/51 in the past</p>
<p>so there have been changes of as much as 13 to 27 percentage points from the 2010 figures in the past, all of which would be considered significant changes - completely and utterly negating your comment that the previous years have been similar to the 2010 figures.</p>
<p>japanoko, I would suggest to you that your efforts to sell Princeton may be counterproductive.</p>
<p>But on the question of why apps to H and S are more than Y and P, my theory is that there are a lot of students who decide to include one “super-reach” among their applications–and that it’s not surprising that H and S would be the beneficiaries of that, based on which end of the country you are from. (I wonder whether Duke might be the lone “super-reach” for a lot of kids in the South).</p>
![http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_jdI0Wl7_OvQ/TLhTOCSeRBI/AAAAAAAAAG0/eH9OEZt6i8g/s1600/HYPSM_cross-admits_2002-2010.bmp[/url]](http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_jdI0Wl7_OvQ/TLhTOCSeRBI/AAAAAAAAAG0/eH9OEZt6i8g/s1600/HYPSM_cross-admits_2002-2010.bmp%5B/url%5D){kind=link}
