<p>I personally don’t believe that one can even vaguely determine the “rank” of these top schools via cross-admit statistics. The choice depends wholly on the student - not necessarily on the academic excellence or fame of the school.</p>
<p>For instance, Harvard is famous and has a competitive atmosphere and competent professors - if a student wants the name and enjoys the atmosphere, then Harvard is it. Stanford is more artsy - and some people choose Stanford over Harvard because it’s slightly more laid back, it’s more encouraging of research opportunities, etc. MIT is rigorous but collaborative and much less cutthroat, so students wanting that sort of atmosphere would choose MIT. </p>
<p>These are, of course, stereotypes - but again, each school has a different feel to it, and the one with most admits isn’t necessarily the “best”. So…while looking at cross-admit stats is interesting, there really is no “truth” that comes out. Really.</p>
<p>I chose MIT over Harvard or Stanford because of the atmosphere, because people were amazingly nice and helpful, because of specific aspects of the curriculum. Somebody else who has different priorities might choose Harvard or Stanford over MIT - again, it’s not the quality of the school. It’s personal preference.</p>
<p>It is not about rankings, I would rank all of them number one. It is just personal taste where you are going. Your reason for choosing your school is supposedly a secret. I would say those data, if accurate, will be a reflection of “unsafe” selection, i.e., Stanford admitted 450 legacy and 400 first-year college students. Those two groups made up about 50% of 1600 projected students. The rest they probably will try to compete with the others. Other schools may do the same things. As I understand a lot of Early-Action kids from Stanford and Yale did not get into Harvard, where Harvard admitted a lot of Stanford/MIT/Yale EA rejected students ( I personally know 6 of them got into Harvard who were all rejected by YSM during the EA). The fact is that nobody knows how to play this new game, even among those schools. Otherwise, they would not have so many cross-admits. I have seen a lot of cross-admit between Harvard and Princeton, and it is also clearly reflected in our data.</p>
<p>“Emory doesnt have a great yield- around 28% doing some calculation for the Class of 2009. The thing is Emory gets a lot of applicants from both the Northeast and the South. If a kid from the Northeast gets into HYP, he’s going there over Emory automatically…the same can’t be said for Duke and to some extent Rice. Those two schools have a lot more kids attending there that turned down HYP than Emory. If a kid’s from the South, he’s gonna go to Duke cuz its better, Rice because most consider it to be better, or Vandy because Vandy actually has sports and campus spirit.
Yield Rates for Class of 2009:
Rice- 37%
Duke- 43%
Vanderbilt-32%
Harvard-78%
Yale-70%
Princeton-68%
Stanford-67%
MIT-67%”</p>
<p>fyi, the actual numbers for vanderbilt:
39% class '11
39% class '10
39% class '09</p>
<p>good try though. that is accounting for dropouts up to the 10th day of the start of the first semester, while most schools give the % before accounting for these dropouts.</p>
<p>Admitted to MIT and Princeton, attending Princeton…mostly because of financial aid reasons. Anecdotally, I’ve met lots of people who are going to HYP over MIT, but I do know a few who are turning down HYPS for MIT?</p>
<p>------ Harvard Yale Princeton Stanford MIT
admit …8…11…15…13…7
attend…4…5…5…3… 3</p>
<p>Okay, since both Harvard and Yale secured their yields, they may just try to get those cross-admits between them. So if you got in one of them and waitlist on the other, you could have a better chance.</p>
<p>I am taking people from waitlist now :-). I will search CC and put their names on the list. Please check it to see if your name is there before you post. And it is important that you have be cross-admitted by at least two schools. I will be biased on the schools I am choosing now, since we know the initial yields for those schools.</p>
<p>Added: Onsquared: Stanford/MIT -> Stanford</p>
<p>------ Harvard Yale Princeton Stanford MIT
admit …11…16…16…15…11
attend…5…8…3…4… 5</p>
<h2>Thanks</h2>
<p>affle
akybaky
amy CSI
bianca9790
bumped
charles
chili90
derailleurGears
Detroit S
diffy q
hikids
jkiddo24
jyber209
k4r3n2-for ?
lobgent
Miss Moorestown
Mr. Hari
Mr. Tiger
mysti
Onsquared
stupidkid
tifon
tlite
vaguy89
yanners</p>
<p>Waitlisted: Brown and Stanford. Stanford could not take me because of over enrollment. I am waiting for Brown’s decision.</p>
<p>Added: nhsharvard: Brown and Stanford waitlists
lalaloo6: Harvard + MIT</p>
<p>------ Harvard Yale Princeton Stanford MIT Brown
admit …12…16…16…15…12…0
attend…5…8…3…4… 6…0
waitlist…0…0…0…1…0…1</p>
<p>Thanks</p>
<h2>Thanks</h2>
<p>affle
akybaky
amy CSI
bianca9790
bumped
charles
chili90
derailleurGears
Detroit S
diffy q
hikids
jkiddo24
jyber209
k4r3n2-for ?
lalaloo6
lobgent
Miss Moorestown
Mr. Hari
Mr. Tiger
mysti
nhsharvard
Onsquared
stupidkid
tifon
tlite
vaguy89
yanners</p>
I would say those data, if accurate, will be a reflection of “unsafe” selection, i.e., Stanford admitted 450 legacy and 400 first-year college students. Those two groups made up about 50% of 1600 projected students. The rest they probably will try to compete with the others. Other schools may do the same things. As I understand a lot of Early-Action kids from Stanford and Yale did not get into Harvard, where Harvard admitted a lot of Stanford/MIT/Yale EA rejected students ( I personally know 6 of them got into Harvard who were all rejected by YSM during the EA). The fact is that nobody knows how to play this new game, even among those schools. Otherwise, they would not have so many cross-admits. I have seen a lot of cross-admit between Harvard and Princeton, and it is also clearly reflected in our data.</p>