<p>Admissions Rates (2008):</p>
<p>Columbia: 10%
Dartmouth: 13.5%
Brown: 13.7%
Penn: 16.9%</p>
<p>Cornell: 20.7%
Duke: 22.4%
Rice: 23.0%</p>
<p>Vanderbilt 25.3%
Emory 26.6%</p>
<p>Admissions Rates (2010)</p>
<p>Columbia: 9.16%
Brown: 9.30%
Dartmouth: 11.53%
Penn: 14.22%
Duke: 14.86%</p>
<p>Vanderbilt: 16.3%
Cornell: 18.40%
Rice: 20%</p>
<p>Emory: 28.58%</p>
<p>What’s the story? Duke clearly belongs in the same grouping as the non-HYP ivies. All the ivies are on the way up, but Cornell still is at the back. Vanderbilt and Rice are on the way up. Emory is on the way down. Any comparison between REV and the Ivies can really only be made with Cornell, and really only with Rice and Vandy.</p>
<p>I made the edit.</p>
<p>Emory’s relatively high acceptance rate is due to the school’s reluctance to spam prospective students with emails urging them to apply. Unlike Wash U. and U. Penn, Emory decides to let interested students apply rather than mass mailing every student to lower their acceptance rate. Its a classic example of what happens when you don’t play the rankings “game”. An unfortunate consequence is some people think it is due to decreasing educational quality. I’ve never thought acceptance rate was a good indicator of the quality of colleges. The easiest example to use is U. Chicago which, only two or three years ago, had an acceptance rate around 30%. Maybe even more. This year the acceptance rate fell significantly to less than 20%. Did U. Chicago, in the last two years, suddenly get a lot better as an academic institution? Ofcourse not. I suspect the administration made an effort to make high school students aware of U. Chicago’s presence. Emory, for better or for worse, does not do that, which explains its higher acceptance rate when compared to its peers.</p>
<p>^ Chicago switched to the Common App. I receive plenty of spam mail from Emory as do my peers.</p>
<p>Yeah, I definitely received Emory spam</p>
<p>
Penn does NOT “mass mail every student.” In fact, Penn is relatively stingy with its mailings to prospective students, including those who have actually requested information!</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I think it’s a futile search. Since you’re the one who’s so interested, why don’t you come up with the answer.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Haven’t I already explained the various variables that might skew one’s indebtedness?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Vandy’s getting considerably more difficult to get into because for the Class of 2010, the acceptance rate was 33% and in a matter of 4 years, the acceptance rate has been more than cut in half.</p>
<p>Buddy,
You beat me to the Acceptance Rate which I had planned to post. Thanks. </p>
<p>Anyway, I think acceptance rate is a relevant data point, but only one. There is a heckuva lot more to consider than just that. </p>
<p>We both know of the hordes of students who apply to all Ivies and thereby drive the ARs down. Maybe you’ll interpret that as discounting the low Ivy Acceptance Rate, but I think it’s pretty clear all of these colleges would fall into the Most Selective category. I’m not sure where one should draw the line and say that the differences are meaningul, but the gaps in Acceptance Rate don’t look that great to me. And again I am not overly fixated on one data point.</p>
<p>No question that Vanderbilt has become significantly more prominent on the radar screens of top high schoolers across America. This has dropped their Acceptance Rate, but I don’t think that there is much difference in what they’re enrolling vis-a-vis the other REVD schools nor vs the non-HYP Ivies. </p>
<p>Data to follow…</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>no, you gave your example of storage which while a random factor which made a difference to you, does not bias certain colleges over others.</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>Pointless bickering on CC? I don’t think that has ever happened before.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>confidentialcoll: Man, you’re crazy stubborn. Reread post #47 and just acknowledge that avg. indebtedness between schools is not an apples-to-apples comparison. Snap, end of argument.</p>
<p>^I can’t prove that average indebtedness is apples to apples because you cannot do that for any metric. Here’s what you suggested to make it apples to oranges:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>average indebtedness accounts for wealth of student body and financial aid should account for housing policy and travel expenses. If you need to take on debt because your university does not guarantee housing or is not accounting for travel in cost to attend, then your financial aid is less favorable. After housing, food and tuition are accounted for, cost of living is really low and comparable across universities</p>
<p>finally you did not explain how any of these factors unfairly favors certain universities over others. You need to show how given the same cost of attendance, which includes the factors you listed, one student body might be more likely to take on debt than another and I don’t think you’ll be able to explain that. </p>
<p>Average indebtedness is almost an ideal way to judge what a student body was forced to pay beyond their means to attend a college. And that’s the point of financial aid: to make the cost of attendance as close as possible to be within someone’s means.</p>
<p>Two words: variable costs</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>So the cost of living in NYC (NYU) is comparable to that of say Dallas (SMU), which is comparable to that of College Station (Texas A&M)? Wow, did not know that. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Really or are you just making that up hoping I wouldn’t call you out on it? I ask because it seems like this would’ve been a fantastic response about two pages ago.</p>
<p>*I’m done with the bickering. Let’s just agree to disagree.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>the cost of living at NYU if food and housing are paid for is actually very low would be something like $600-2000 a year, you’re paying for stuff like cell phone plans, movie tickets, and transportation around the city, perhaps eating out and alcohol once in a while. All of which is cheap and doesn’t vary much by location, you’d spend a similar amount at SMU or UT. NYC is considered crazy expensive because rent is extremely expensive (which FA should cover) and because you can easily blow up a lot of money in one evening if you wanted to (not necessary while in college). Day to day living expenses like public transportation and groceries are not much more expensive than anywhere else in the US.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>as I explained before: if a student body is poorer in college X than in college Y and college X does not have higher financial aid to compensate, then college X is doing a worse job with financial aid. I’m not judging financial aid as the total amount given out by a school (and one shouldn’t), but rather by how well a school is able to bring the cost of attendance within students’ means. This is why debt is an indicator of worse financial aid. College Y might not give out a huge amount of money in absolute terms, but if its students are graduating with little debt (from being rich), then it has accomplished it’s job in meeting the students’ need.</p>
<p>Has anybody mentioned the Revealed Preference Study? (I have not read this thread.)</p>
<p>Among students admitted to both Rice and Cornell, 82% choose Cornell.
Among students admitted to both Duke and Cornell, 81% choose Cornell.
Among students admitted to both Vanderbilt and Cornell, 100% choose Cornell.
Emory is off the chart but, presumably, 100% choose Cornell.</p>
<p>Prospective students seem to perceive a clear difference.</p>
<p><a href=“http://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/papers/1287.pdf[/url]”>http://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/papers/1287.pdf</a></p>
<p>What page is the cross-admit chart on?</p>
<p>yea right, 100% of the students who get into both Cornell over Vandy and Cornell over Emory. Let us assume that the study means 95%+… It would still probably be wrong. What about people who receive a more generous financial package from Emory and Vandy… what about people who prefer the South? What about people who don’t believe one or two spots in rankings make a huge difference? What about the non perstige-whores? What about people who care about fit? I know that the Ivy brand works in Cornell’s favour but to say 100% of the students choose Cornell over Vandy and Emory is insane. Look on the Emory Sub forum… one poster commented that he knows “several” students who got into Cornell but chose Emory.</p>
<p>^That study was published in 2004. This thread is attempting to show a narrowing gap between REVD and the lower Ivies. Thus, of course a study from 6 years ago is invalid.</p>