<p>I have seen observable differences in personal qualities among the grads of H, Y, and P that I have known. It seems improbable that they were all developed in college.</p>
<p>Right, re post #700, I understand that the colleges don’t act collectively–that would probably be a “combination in restraint of free trade” if they did. Oxford and Cambridge get around this issue, because students are only permitted to apply to one of them.</p>
<p>If you think that the admissions are all holistic, and that’s all there is to be said, does that mean that you think that H, Y, and P are essentially taking the same holistic view and want the same qualities; but that since the judgments are subjective, you get some unpredictable differences in outcomes? On the other hand, if the differences in admissions split along predictable lines, I would find that interesting, as presumably would people applying in the future (and their parents).</p>
<p>I have no personal interest in this, since everyone in (my generation + 1) in my extended family is in college, dropped out, graduated, or not going. So I am not looking for a magic formula, nor do I expect to gain anything. But I am actually quite curious about possible differences. </p>
<p>Perhaps the difference in our thoughts on this question is related to differences in Myers-Briggs categories? I have mentioned on another thread, where this came up, that I am INFP. </p>
<p>Back to the issue of differences in what admissions is seeking: To people who live in some areas of the country, the differences might be obvious (assuming that there are differences). To people in my area, where a limited number of students go to the Ivies each year, the differences are not obvious. I am not sure that generalizing from the grads I know is valid, although there are more of them than there are accepted students whom I know in (my generation + 1).</p>