<p>
</p>
<p>THat’s certainly true.</p>
<p>I wonder if what they really try to do is just get some general sort of geograhical diversity in each class, and sometimes that benefits smaller states, sometimes not. I can’t imagine getting a strict geographical balance is at the top of their hit list.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>bclintonk, if you had this in spreadsheet or summary form, this would be GREAT data to counter the usual “I think [insert college] is most prestigious!” because it is so evident that where students want to apply is based on what is most prestigious / considered best in THEIR state / part of the country.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Which, to the earlier point, says that if I’m choosing between 28 kids from Chicago’s North Shore and 2 kids from Idaho, and I have 15 spots, one year I might go 13 and 2, another year 14 and 1, and another year 15 and 0. Depends on to what extent I want to cleanse the palate, so to speak!!</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>That sounds about right to me. If you look at the map of geographic distribution of Princeton’s class of 2013, it looks like they only care about getting at least 1 from each state. Montana is the only state without any representation, but a bunch of states have just 1 (Alaska, Idaho, Kentucky, Nebraska, North Dakota, South Dakota, Rhode Island) or 2 (Maine, Wyoming) or 3 (Delaware, Iowa, Utah). They probably need to admit 2 or 3 to be confident of yielding 1; my bet is the 2 or 3 from Montana just went elsewhere, while they got a 100% yield from some of these states. If that’s how they do it, the admit rate from some states will be high (e.g., Wyoming, 2 of 11 who submitted SATs) but from most states will be as low or lower than from “overrepresented states.”</p>
<p>They also boast about the number of foreign countries represented. Same deal there. My guess is they don’t care all that much about genuine geographic diversity, certainly not in proportion to population; they just want to boast up the number of countries, and probably make sure that all the permanently occupied continents are represented.</p>
<p>I’m quite certain some smaller LACs don’t even try to get someone from each state in every class; they report on how many states are represented in the entire student body, so as long as they have that one Idahoan on campus and coming back next year, they don’t need to find one for next year’s class.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I’ve been surprised since we’ve been here at how few Minnesotans attend college in the northeast. Most, including most of the really smart and talented kids, are content to stay pretty close to home, either going to “the U” or maybe Carleton or Macalester, or possibly Grinnell. Those who venture out of Minnesota usually don’t get any farther than Madison, where they can attend the University of Wisconsin for in-state tuition rates, which makes it an extremely popular option. And beyond that, Northwestern is reasonably popular, the University of Chicago decidedly less so. A few head out to the West Coast; Stanford’s more popular than Harvard or Yale.</p>
<p>Among 2009 college-bound seniors, only 1,746 Minnesotans took any SAT II Subject Tests. You can assume that’s pretty much the universe of kids who are even thinking about elite private colleges, many of which require SAT IIs. Here’s the breakdown on where they sent their scores:</p>
<p>Northwestern 480 (12.9%)
Stanford 411 (11.1%)
Harvard 347 (9.4%)
Carleton 331 (8.9%)
Yale 307 (8.3%)
Princeton 262 (7.1%)
Cornell 253 (6.8%)
Dartmouth 218 (5.9%)
University of Chicago 199 (5.4%)
Columbia 194 (5.2%)
Brown 187 (5.0%)
Penn 158 (4.3%)</p>
<p>These are really quite small numbers relative to the size and sophistication of the population (at least in the Twin Cities metro, which is well over half the state). And we have a strong record of educational attainment at the primary and secondary school level, one of the strongest in the nation. And if Princeton’s any indication, Minnesotans don’t end up at these elite schools in large numbers, either, nor do they get any apparent favoritism in admissions. Princeton has only 9 Minnesotans in its class of 2013, representing just 3.4% of those who sent SAT score reports there. Of course, maybe more were admitted and ended up deciding to stay closer to home; it could be that the school’s yield rate declines with distance from the applicant’s home. Or it could be that some of those admitted opted for Stanford or Harvard (though you’d think Minnesotans might have some affinity for Princeton which, like Minnesota, claims F. Scott Fitzgerald as its favorite son). </p>
<p>Don’t have access to comparable numbers for Harvard, though.</p>
<p>The NYT had a chart a year or two back showing acceptance rates by state at various colleges. I wish I could find it again. I remember Wyoming had a 100% acceptance rate for the single student who applied to the colleges on the list. Anyway looking for it I found this:
from [Some</a> National Universities Look Locally for Students - The Choice Blog - NYTimes.com](<a href=“http://thechoice.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/01/25/national/]Some”>Some National Universities Look Locally for Students - The New York Times)</p>
<p>Admissions rates at top universities are sizably larger for minority students. No, it’s not the only reason her son didn’t get in, but it’s a fact that a lot of schools giver preference to minorities. [url=<a href=“http://www.jbhe.com/firstyearenrolls.html]JBHE[/url”>JBHE]JBHE[/url</a>]
Schools like mine will choose racial diversity over merit based admissions in many instances. If things were merit based, that woman wouldn’t have made such a comment.</p>
<p>Your link is fascinating but it’s also a mixed bag. The lift is by no means universal.</p>
<p>I’m doing this quickly but here’s what I note. I picked 5 points arbitrarily, so sue me.</p>
<p>No data: Columbia, Stanford, Duke, Yale, Dartmouth, Harvard, Pton</p>
<p>Schools where black acceptance rate is within 5 points of total acceptance rate:
UNC, Rice, JHU, Vanderbilt, UMich, Cornell</p>
<p>Schools where black acceptance rate is 5 or more points ABOVE total acceptance rate:
MIT, Penn, UVA, U Chicago, Brown, Gtown, Tufts, C Mellon, NU, Notre Dame
(particularly note: MIT and U Chicago)</p>
<p>Schools where black acceptance rate is 5 or more points LOWER than total acceptance rate:
Emory, Wake Forest, USC, WashU, UCLA, UCBerkeley</p>
<p>Black student yields are also given, but to interpret / understand that, it would need to be done in the context of total student yields, because an appreciably different black student yield would have implications for acceptance rates (that is, a lower black yield might mean a higher-than-expected acceptance rate to come out where the college wants to be).</p>
<p>But certainly none of these black acceptance rates remotedly approach done deals or sure things.</p>
<p>Boy, one could make quite a study out of all these numbers, pizzagirl. I wonder if there is a correlation between the geographic areas (i.e. black population in those areas) and the numbers? I’m thinking especially in terms of the attitude or perception that a particular group has towards a school.</p>
<p>Right. For example, per a quick wikipedia, the Atlanta metro area is 30% black. The Phila metro area is 20% black. Thinking of Emory and Penn as a matched set of schools for the sake of argument here, what are the implications for what the % of blacks “should” be at each school? That assumes that blacks apply to each school in proportion with the local population. But the black middle class in Atlanta is in a very different situation from the black middle class in Phila. Does Penn need to over-accepting blacks to compensate for this (per the chart above), whereas Emory can under-accept them? But Penn also draws from a more densely-populated urban area in the eastern seaboard. How does that affect the pool that each draws from? And what about the areas that each school offers – what if (theoretically) black students just aren’t as interested in some of the programs offered at a given school? It’s quite difficult even to come up with a rubric to develop some sort of normative level or goal, if that is a goal in the first place.</p>
<p>University of Michigan declined to provide the data to JBHE, so (in this regard at least) they should be grouped with HYPS, Duke, Columbia, and Dartmouth.</p>
<p>Regarding the discussion of sent scores on the previous page, I’d be careful in assuming that a high percentage of those end up in completed applications. No doubt there are kids who take advantage of free score reports, those who end up applying ED elsewhere, and those who just simply can’t face another supplement. Or just plain change their minds.</p>
<p>Sure, and we’ve already talked about the fact that there may be ACT senders that we are missing entirely.</p>
<p>Pizzagirl…I think you have put your finger on a critical statistic…minority yields. As the mother of a minority student he came back from some diversity weekend or recruitment events and he could tell you where high achieving minority kids already were keen to attend and thus, there was unlikely to be a boost for minority status. </p>
<p>WashU for example…most of the kids going to the diversity weekend were already talking early decision, etc and that they would pick WashU over almost any school with the exception, perhaps, of ivy league where parental pressure may overcome student preference. That school seems to be beloved by minority kids (hispanic and black)…really like the atmosphere, the education, etc. Minority kids from our area were really worried about getting admitted, getting aid, etc. because they knew they were competing against thousands of great students, minority and white/asian many of whom had WashU as a first choice and there was little or any boost from minority status.</p>
<p>On the other hand, Carnegie Mellon, bent over backward to recruit but I felt there was a lot of concern amongst visiting HS minority students and their parents about the environment --I have no idea what this is based on,…perhaps none of us hadmet a CMU minority aluma/us but I have met quite a few from WashU…it takes years (and many happy minority alumni) to build a reputation as a place that minorities feel welcome and yields will reflect this so schools will have to have higher admissions to get the yields they want…CMU also admits more girls to get the demographics how they would like them…</p>
<p>
That’s not true. Certain minority groups have preference because they are underrepresented (Blacks, Hispanics, Native Americans, etc) Other minority groups have lower acceptance rates because they are overrepresented - an Asian or South Asian (Indian) kid applying to Harvard wouldn’t have an advantage over a White applicant - some would argue they would have it even harder. So for that woman to say her White son didn’t get in because they took an Indian kid instead is stupid. It doesn’t surprise me; I hear people say similar things in real life and on CC.
I think you should have. By letting such an ignorant comment go you made it seem as though you - a Black American and Harvard alum - were ok with it. I’m not saying you should by any means lecture her or be rude either of course.</p>
<p>Well, and then that also gets to financial aid policies. If the set of black applicants is of lower income (in the aggregate sense) than the set of white applicants, then yields may be lower if the black families are less likely to be able to afford the college. It would be interesting to see whether EFC’s are perceived differently in different communities – that is, for a given family making $x who is told their EFC is $y, to what extent is that seen as doable with tremendous sacrifice vs just not doable / forget about it.</p>
<p>
So, to some extent, a low minority enrollment is self-perpetuating. Potential students may feel like they would not fit in, or would not be accepted so why bother. Not everyone wants to be the pioneer, or to deal with being in such a small minority. </p>
<p>Interesting point about the finances, Pizzagirl. Especially people who have struggled to get where they are (as opposed to being say middle class from birth) may be much more conservative about what they feel comfortable committing to.</p>
<p>
Except that Indians are not URMs, they are the opposite - overrepresented minorities, as are East Asian Americans. I wonder what this woman would have said if an Asian or Indian parent had said to her, “Oh, my kid didn’t get into <em>Elite college</em> because another rich White kid took his spot…” Which may even be accurate in some cases, but is still unforgivably rude to say. </p>
<p>Bonus points if the woman is an alum of the college being discussed :)</p>
<p>“an appreciably different black student yield would have implications for acceptance rates (that is, a lower black yield might mean a higher-than-expected acceptance rate to come out where the college wants to be).”</p>
<p>I can only speak for Harvard, but black student yield IS appreciably lower at Harvard than overall yield…if I recall correctly, close to ten points lower. Black admitted students are heavily recruited not only by YPSMC, but by Howard/Spelman/Morehouse as well. They have even more options to choose from than the typical H admit.</p>