@“45 Percenter” I agree that Penn must not be too happy about going from #4 to #9. I think Penn above all desires to ensure its consistent ranking in the top 10, i.e. doesn’t want to be in a position like Dartmouth, which some years is in the top 10 some others it is not. Now what place it has in the top 10 is less of a priority in my opinion, since it is widely known and understood that the relative positions within the top 10 do not have, for the most part, great significance and are not accurate reflections of the relative standings of the schools. For example Stanford is ranked at the same place as Columbia and Chicago and below Yale, which nowadays most would agree in rather inaccurate. Also most would argue that the different positions of Penn, Duke, Columbia, Chicago do not reflect any substantial relative differences between the schools, and do not change the widely held perception that these four schools are the next tier after HYPS. (I consider MIT, Caltech in a group of their own given their specialization and don’t compare them with the others).
What is significant for the perception/desirability/standing of a school is a constant presence in the top 10, and out of all the top 10 schools, Penn, Columbia, Chicago and Duke need the most to remain in the top 10, given that they are the weaker brands of the top 10, and thus stand to benefit the most from inclusion in that top group.
Penn is at a disadvantage in that its class is significantly larger than the other schools, so it is more difficult to drive down acceptance rate (although yield is around the same/ a bit higher than Columbia, Chicago). Hence the measures to optimize yield and acceptance rate.