<p>mm,
Fair question on U Penn. I didn’t put them into the top tier due to their very high reliance on ED admits (50%+ of the class) which boosts their yield considerably. </p>
<p>As for U Michigan OOS, I’d probably be more inclined to drop a few down from Tier 3 (Emory, UVA). </p>
<p>Re not including IS numbers, I am trying to compare in situations where there are legitimate cross admits among the public at large and where factors such as location and cost are not so dominant. Obviously the IS yields are higher (funny fact is that U Nebraska has the highest yield among all state Us).</p>
Penn takes CLOSE to 50% of its class ED (for the Class of 2012, it was 46.9%), NOT OVER 50%, just to set the record straight.</p>
<p>Incidentally, when Princeton’s yield was 68% (putting it in your Tier 1, above), it also took a very similar percentage (roughly 45%) of its class through ED. Of course, now that it no longer uses ED, Princeton’s yield (59%, as pointed out above) is actually lower than Penn’s (63%). Again, just to set the record straight. :)</p>
<p>StevenSeagal, I am quite certain average people have heard of Michigan and Northwestern. Even the athletically-inclined has heard of these schools (hello, football?). If Michigan was so obscure, Obama wouldn’t have hired Michigan alumni in his advising positions.</p>
<p>can you drop the yield percentages from the private Universities as well? over 30% of Cornell are NYS residents, and probably over half are from the tristate area. The same is true for many private Universities. Of course you don’t really ever make sense, I’m just trying to point out that you are cheating, as usual, to the other people reading.</p>
<p>45,
In my book 47% is close to 50%. Anyway, I just have a hard time putting U Penn in the same group as HYPSM. Chalk it up to historical prejudice if you like (as I remember the days when U Penn was pretty clearly the bottom of the Ivies). Sorry. </p>
<p>UCB,
I’m guessing at the OOS yields for the UCs and U North Carolina. U Virginia’s and U Michigan’s are known and confirmed at 30% and 28%. </p>
<p>For the UCs, I guessed theirs was a bit lower given the lower absolute yield vis-a-vis the known schools. Granted, it’s tough to guesstimate as the OOS number of students is materially lower than at U Virginia and U Michigan. Do you know if the UCs provide a breakout of OOS and IS yield data?</p>
<p>kb,
If you don’t think that the OOS and IS difference in cost is material, then we very clearly disagree (and you must have a lot more money than the average state resident of these states). Here is how they compare based on Tuition and Fees for OOS and IS students:</p>
<p>OOS T&F , IS T&F , State U</p>
<p>$29,540 , $8,932 , UC Berkeley
$29,600 , $9,300 , U Virginia
$26,102 , $7,034 , UCLA
$32,401 , $11,111 , U Michigan
$22,294 , $5,396 , U North Carolina</p>
<p>ucb,
Those are the overall yield figures for UCB and UCLA. What is the breakdown for OOS yield and what is the breakdown for IS yield?</p>
I remember those days, too (you and I are the same age :)). I also remember that not long ago, it was just HYP without the S. As you so often like to point out, things do change.</p>
<p>hawk, of course now you can selectively forget about financial aid. your rankings don’t make sense to anyone who’s ever taken an intro statistics class, although this one at least has some basis to it, you at least have a methodology, better than “what i think employers think about hiring at xxx school even though i never went to any of these schools”</p>
<p>Hawkette, many private universities have large in-state populations. 55% of Rice students are in-staters. 50% of Stanford students are in-staters. 40% of Cornell are in-staters. The fact is, at most universities, private or public, ovder 50% of students will come from within a 400 mile radius. I am not suggesting that private universities with large in-state student populations should be treated as public universities because cost of attendance is, as you point out, discounted for in-staters at public universities. However, as in most instances, it is impossble to draw an educated conclusion by comparing statistics between public and private universities. That is my main issue with using statistics to determine institutional quality, and that is why most educated people have a problem with rankings that depend too heavily on statistical data, such as the USNWR. I don’t need to remind you of what Gerhard Casper said regarding ranking universities statistically. It is not possible to draw SAT results, Faculty and Financial resources comparisons between public and privates because those institutions measure, weigh and report data very differently. Any comparison of data between public universities and private universities will result in an apple to orange comparison.</p>
<p>That does seem like it would be a good barometer for “prestige”, which is not necessarily the same thing as academic quality.</p>
<p>Two schools that get a sharp bump up by yield are Notre Dame and Georgetown, compared to rankings driven by quality metrics such SATS, faculty compensation and awards, citation density, class sizes, or percentage of grads who earn Ph.D.s. By some of these other measures, Notre Dame and GT would be in lower tiers, certainly below Hopkins, Chicago, Duke, CalTech.</p>
<p>I wonder if it’s a coincidence that they are both Catholic schools. ND’s student body is 85% Catholic; GU’s is 58% Catholic. If you want to go to one of the best Catholic universities, one of these would be an obvious choice.</p>
<p>Hawkeye, my answer was an estimate but I knew it was more than 40 percent (hence I said “up to 50%”). As Alexandre stated earlier, many private institutions pull students from local regions within a 400-mile radius.</p>