Welcome to College Confidential!

The leading college-bound community on the web

Sign Up For Free

Join for FREE, and start talking with other members, weighing in on community polls, and more.

Also, by registering and logging in you'll see fewer ads and pesky welcome messages (like this one!)

As a CC member, you can:

Stanford or Harvard/Yale/Princeton/MIT, or Others?

ewhoewho Posts: 1,154Registered User Senior Member
edited August 2011 in Stanford University
It is probably good time for me to provide some information about where to go if you are accepted by Stanford and its peer schools. Below, I summarized the data from Stanford Minutes Report from last year. Certain information is difficult to obtain because the report provided only partial or incomplete data so that getting the information became a difficult PIE problem. I can assure you that the problem is as difficult as the problem #10 on the AIME test, because I can get that question right, but not this one.

And I don’t think that you can find this info anywhere. I tried to be unbiased as possible as I can since I am obviously biased toward Stanford. But, even this is the case, you should still get something you need.

For Class of 2014, Stanford accepted 2340 students totally, 40 students were accepted from the waitlist. Its yield was 71.6%, which means there were 664 students were accepted but they did not matriculate.

For those 2340 students accepted:

398 students were also accepted by Harvard;
359 accepted by Yale;
430 accepted by Princeton;
304 accepted by MIT;
630 accepted by UC Berkeley

For those cross-admits:

For those 398 Stanford/Harvard cross-admits, 212 enrolled at Harvard, 130 enrolled at Stanford , and 186 enrolled at somewhere else. Direct head-to-head competition: Harvard/Stanford=212:130, or 38% went to Stanford and 62% went to Harvard.

For those 359 Stanford/Yale cross-admits, 106 enrolled at Stanford, 106 enrolled at Yale, 253 enrolled at somewhere else. Direct head-to-head competition: Stanford/Yale=106:106, or 50% went to Stanford and 50% went or Yale.

For those 430 Stanford/Princeton cross-admits, 158 enrolled at Stanford, 93 enrolled at Princeton, 337 enrolled at somewhere else. Direct head-to-head competition: Stanford/Princeton=158:93, or 63% went to Stanford and 37% went or Princeton.

For those 304 Stanford/MIT cross-admits, 129 enrolled at Stanford, 86 enrolled at MIT, 218 enrolled at somewhere else. Direct head-to-head competition: Stanford/MIT=129:86, or 60% went to Stanford and 40% went or MIT.

In summary, for those 2340 admits, Stanford admitted 1020 HYPSM cross-admits, Stanford enrolled 523 and lost 497 students to HYPM, its HYPSM cross-admits yield was 51%.

Other schools

There were 664-497 = 167 admits went to schools other than HYPSM. None of schools other than HYPM did Stanford lose more than 13 students per school – those schools including ALL other ivies, Chicage, Caltech, Duke, Rice, UCB etc, for all the reasons that could be.

Hopefully this helps for you decision making process.
Post edited by ewho on
«13

Replies to: Stanford or Harvard/Yale/Princeton/MIT, or Others?

  • ewhoewho Posts: 1,154Registered User Senior Member
    For those cross-admits:

    For those 398 Stanford/Harvard cross-admits, 212 enrolled at Harvard, 130 enrolled at Stanford , and 186 enrolled at somewhere else. Direct head-to-head competition: Harvard/Stanford=212:130, or 38% went to Stanford and 62% went to Harvard.

    For those 359 Stanford/Yale cross-admits, 106 enrolled at Stanford, 106 enrolled at Yale, 253 enrolled at somewhere else. Direct head-to-head competition: Stanford/Yale=106:106, or 50% went to Stanford and 50% went or Yale.

    For those 430 Stanford/Princeton cross-admits, 158 enrolled at Stanford, 93 enrolled at Princeton, 337 enrolled at somewhere else. Direct head-to-head competition: Stanford/Princeton=158:93, or 63% went to Stanford and 37% went or Princeton.

    For those 304 Stanford/MIT cross-admits, 129 enrolled at Stanford, 86 enrolled at MIT, 218 enrolled at somewhere else. Direct head-to-head competition: Stanford/MIT=129:86, or 60% went to Stanford and 40% went or MIT.

    In summary, for those 2340 admits, Stanford admitted 1020 HYPSM cross-admits, Stanford enrolled 523 and lost 497 students to HYPM, its HYPSM cross-admits yield was 51%.

    I need to correct some of the statements : ""enrolled somewhere else" includes whose to Stanford in my original script. Let me post this part again to exclude whose who went to Stanford:

    For those cross-admits:

    For those 398 Stanford/Harvard cross-admits, 212 enrolled at Harvard, 130 enrolled at Stanford , and 56 enrolled at somewhere else. Direct head-to-head competition: Harvard/Stanford=212:130, or 38% went to Stanford and 62% went to Harvard.

    For those 359 Stanford/Yale cross-admits, 106 enrolled at Stanford, 106 enrolled at Yale, 147 enrolled at somewhere else. Direct head-to-head competition: Stanford/Yale=106:106, or 50% went to Stanford and 50% went or Yale.

    For those 430 Stanford/Princeton cross-admits, 158 enrolled at Stanford, 93 enrolled at Princeton, 179 enrolled at somewhere else. Direct head-to-head competition: Stanford/Princeton=158:93, or 63% went to Stanford and 37% went or Princeton.

    For those 304 Stanford/MIT cross-admits, 129 enrolled at Stanford, 86 enrolled at MIT, 89 enrolled at somewhere else. Direct head-to-head competition: Stanford/MIT=129:86, or 60% went to Stanford and 40% went or MIT.

    In summary, for those 2340 admits, Stanford admitted 1020 HYPSM cross-admits, Stanford enrolled 523 and lost 497 students to HYPM, its HYPSM cross-admits yield was 51%.
  • zenkoanzenkoan Posts: 1,118Registered User Senior Member
    ewho, though that is interesting information in the abstract, I don't really see how that kind of data bears on the highly-individualized process of selecting the optimum college for a particular student. Unless we could somehow know the factors that went into each decision and the salient characteristics and personal preferences of each student making those decisions, this kind of collective data can't do much other than reinforce a "herd" mentality, can it?
  • ewhoewho Posts: 1,154Registered User Senior Member
    It is more FYI than what-to-do.
  • texaspgtexaspg Posts: 13,367Super Moderator Senior Member
    ewho -great information. Out of curiousity, how are you able to compile this list (are you a stanford adcom?)
  • ewhoewho Posts: 1,154Registered User Senior Member
    They will enroll 50 more students this year, which is a great news for you. I would venture to guess that they will accept some students from the waitlist, if they have lower yield:

    Last year, they enrolled about 1675, so this year, it should be 1675+50=1725. If the yield is the same as last year's, they should accept 1725/71.6%= 2409. The normal yield for past few years is around 70%, which means they should accept 1725/70% = 2464, or 30 to 40 students from the waitlist.

    Harvard accepted about 2114 last year and 2158 this year. They took about 100 from the waitlist last year.
  • ewhoewho Posts: 1,154Registered User Senior Member
    are you a stanford adcom?
    No, I am just an ordinary parent of a Stanford student.
  • ewhoewho Posts: 1,154Registered User Senior Member
    though that is interesting information in the abstract...
    It is actually not interesting information but highly guarded secret. When they released some pieces of the above information, they might have thought that nobody could put them back together.

    These data should be used to clarify certain misconceptions:

    1.) The often accused lower SAT standards. About a third of Stanford could end up with one of the HYPM. Remember there are five schools in HYPSM.

    2.) Columbia passed Stanford in USNWR ranking this year, but it is comfortable to know that less than 13 cross-admits actually went to Columbia. It seems not a concern to Stanford.

    etc.

    I am sure we can draw a lot of conclusions.
  • WV2011WV2011 Posts: 19Registered User New Member
    Thanks for the info, Ewho. Just curious, where did you find these cross-admit data?
  • quilllquilll Posts: 370Registered User Member
    Aren't a lot of those students the same students? Surely many of the cross admits were admitted to three or more of the schools, so that a student choosing between Harvard and Stanford who went elsewhere could have gone to Princeton and therefore been counted more than once in your analysis. Not that I really care, but how many actual people are we talking about? At least 630, presumably, but surely quite a few less than 1020. Or am I missing something?
  • texaspgtexaspg Posts: 13,367Super Moderator Senior Member
    Quoting the original post - there were 664 students were accepted but they did not matriculate.

    There were 664-497 = 167 admits went to schools other than HYPSM. None of schools other than HYPM did Stanford lose more than 13 students per school – those schools including ALL other ivies, Chicage, Caltech, Duke, Rice, UCB etc, for all the reasons that could be.

    In summary, for those 2340 admits, Stanford admitted 1020 HYPSM cross-admits, Stanford enrolled 523 and lost 497 students to HYPM, its HYPSM cross-admits yield was 51%.

    So it is essentially a pie chart where there are probably about a 100 who got into all 4?
  • phantasmagoricphantasmagoric Posts: 2,200Registered User Senior Member
    Great post, ewho. You're right that it's highly guarded secret. I ran across something online that showed the cross-admit %s of Stanford vs. each of HYPM for the past 10 years, compiled by the admissions office. It said "CONFIDENTIAL" on it, but somehow it got out.

    If anyone can find it, do post it. I remember that Stanford was the only one to beat three of the four--always beating Princeton, usually MIT, sometimes Yale... and coming damn close with Harvard. :)
  • ewhoewho Posts: 1,154Registered User Senior Member
    am I missing something?
    Yes, you are.
    So it is essentially a pie chart where there are probably about a 100 who got into all 4?
    That is something I could not find out from the original report. It is a difficult PIE problem, where not enough information was given -- all the overlapping of the cross-admits of 2 and 3 schools were not given. I don't think they knew either.
    If anyone can find it, do post it.
    You have it here with much detailed explanation.
  • phantasmagoricphantasmagoric Posts: 2,200Registered User Senior Member
    ^ no, it was a historical table. It had the % who choose Stanford over each of HYPM for each year of the past 10 years, and showed how Stanford seems to go in a cycle with HYPM. For example, around a few years, Stanford didn't do very well against most of them (the only year that Princeton beat Stanford, by like 1%), but it did really well before that, and has been doing really well after.
  • MidwestPopMidwestPop Posts: 208Registered User Junior Member
    Interest thread. My D has been admitted to Stanford and to Yale. Our family discussions have centered on them being "equal" schools and your data certain reflects that with 106 choosing Stanford and 106 choosing Yale! Sure doesn't get much more "equal" than that! We'll be visiting both schools this months so hopefully one of them will really stand out in D's eyes or it will be a tough decision on April 30th!
  • phantasmagoricphantasmagoric Posts: 2,200Registered User Senior Member
    here's the cross-admit chart I talked about (from 2002-2010, so 9 years, not 10):

    http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_jdI0Wl7_OvQ/TLhTOCSeRBI/AAAAAAAAAG0/eH9OEZt6i8g/s1600/HYPSM_cross-admits_2002-2010.bmp

    Stanford usually takes the majority from Princeton and MIT, usually lost by a small margin to Yale but has recently tied, and usually loses to Harvard but not by too much. A few years ago, Stanford seemed to do really well, and won against all but Harvard, where it drew 43%. But it was getting close to or above 60% for the others.

    2006 was an odd year, when it did the worst and lost to all except for Princeton, funnily enough, which it still beat it by a few percent. Turns out the only year that Stanford lost to Princeton (49%) wasn't that year, as I had thought, but two years later. So the conclusion? It's all really unpredictable.
«13
Sign In or Register to comment.