Why is Rose Hulman so easy to get into?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:For 2022, they accepted 77% applicants but only 19% of them enrolled.

For comparison, another engineering heavy college MI accepted only 4.7% but 77% of them enrolled.

*MIT

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Small school, skewed gender ratio, lackluster location. But the education is phenomenal.

There are quite a few small engineering/STEM schools that fit a similar profile. High acceptance rates but also very high ACT/SAT midranges, which means they aren't taking just anyone. The above poster who mentioned self-selection is correct.

This list of CS safety schools mentions some of the schools I'm talking about (as well as Rose). The most interesting one was Colorado School of Mines. I didn't realize that even that school accepts nearly 60% of applicants. I expected it to be a lot lower.

https://collegejaguar.com/the-9-best-safety-schools-for-computer-science/

Good list. Purdue is a glaring error though. Their CS program is direct admit and is very difficult to get into. Not a safety at all.

I just saw the list
Purdue is a safety for CS/Engineering?? LOL

I noticed that, too. List is pretty damn solid otherwise.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:it’s amazing to me that just because a college admits more than it rejects the DCUM assumption is that there is something fatally wrong with it.

If a college is good, more people would want to attend. That's the only reason why acceptance rate and yield rate are relevant.

Umm, no. People are not rational beings, especially with something as complex and multi-faceted as higher education. We are susceptible to marketing ploys and gimmicks and we create feedback loops. Certain things are in demand because a few people decided they were in demand, which makes them more in demand, which makes them more selective, which further drives demand and on and on. All of this happens without any change in quality between 2 institutions. That is how demand works. Perception.

Have you ever like a band that most people haven’t heard of? Have you ever liked a TV show that got poor ratings? Books that weren’t best sellers? I hope so; otherwise you’re the dullest person I know of.

Using what the masses like as your primary point of reference for discerning quality is lazy and just compounds the problem.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My child is interested in small engineering schools where undergrad is the main focus. Rose Hulman tops every list for that. But it accepts something like 70% of applications. Why isn't it more popular?

Being easy to get into doesn’t mean it’s easy to graduate from. Still engineering.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:it’s amazing to me that just because a college admits more than it rejects the DCUM assumption is that there is something fatally wrong with it.

If a college is good, more people would want to attend. That's the only reason why acceptance rate and yield rate are relevant.

Umm, no. People are not rational beings, especially with something as complex and multi-faceted as higher education. We are susceptible to marketing ploys and gimmicks and we create feedback loops. Certain things are in demand because la few people decided they were in demand, which makes them more in demand, which makes them more selective, which further drives demand and on and on. All of this happens without any change in quality between 2 institutions. That is how demand works. Perception.

Have you ever like a band that most people hiaven’t heard of? Have you ever liked a TV show that got poor ratings? Books that weren’t best sellers? I hope so; otherwise you’re the dullest person I know of.

Using what the masses like as your primary point of reference for discerning quality is lazy and just compounds the problem.

Blah Blah Blah you sound like a communist.
American college system is especially like free market and law of supply and demand well prevails.

If a school looks attractive to general public for reasons, demad goes up. Acceptance rate goes down. Yield goes up.

You sound like communist party saying general public is dumb and irrational . We figured it out all and we should be in control of everything.
Nope. Free market knows better.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:it’s amazing to me that just because a college admits more than it rejects the DCUM assumption is that there is something fatally wrong with it.

If a college is good, more people would want to attend. That's the only reason why acceptance rate and yield rate are relevant.

Umm, no. People are not rational beings, especially with something as complex and multi-faceted as higher education. We are susceptible to marketing ploys and gimmicks and we create feedback loops. Certain things are in demand because la few people decided they were in demand, which makes them more in demand, which makes them more selective, which further drives demand and on and on. All of this happens without any change in quality between 2 institutions. That is how demand works. Perception.

Have you ever like a band that most people hiaven’t heard of? Have you ever liked a TV show that got poor ratings? Books that weren’t best sellers? I hope so; otherwise you’re the dullest person I know of.

Using what the masses like as your primary point of reference for discerning quality is lazy and just compounds the problem.

Blah Blah Blah you sound like a communist.
American college system is especially like free market and law of supply and demand well prevails.

If a school looks attractive to general public for reasons, demad goes up. Acceptance rate goes down. Yield goes up.

You sound like communist party saying general public is dumb and irrational . We figured it out all and we should be in control of everything.
Nope. Free market knows better.

The “free market” system you mention depends on the colleges to submit honest data though. So families can get bamboozled by schools that are willing to cheat as Columbia has done.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:it’s amazing to me that just because a college admits more than it rejects the DCUM assumption is that there is something fatally wrong with it.

If a college is good, more people would want to attend. That's the only reason why acceptance rate and yield rate are relevant.

Umm, no. People are not rational beings, especially with something as complex and multi-faceted as higher education. We are susceptible to marketing ploys and gimmicks and we create feedback loops. Certain things are in demand because la few people decided they were in demand, which makes them more in demand, which makes them more selective, which further drives demand and on and on. All of this happens without any change in quality between 2 institutions. That is how demand works. Perception.

Have you ever like a band that most people hiaven’t heard of? Have you ever liked a TV show that got poor ratings? Books that weren’t best sellers? I hope so; otherwise you’re the dullest person I know of.

Using what the masses like as your primary point of reference for discerning quality is lazy and just compounds the problem.

Blah Blah Blah you sound like a communist.
American college system is especially like free market and law of supply and demand well prevails.

If a school looks attractive to general public for reasons, demad goes up. Acceptance rate goes down. Yield goes up.

You sound like communist party saying general public is dumb and irrational . We figured it out all and we should be in control of everything.
Nope. Free market knows better.

The “free market” system you mention depends on the colleges to submit honest data though. So families can get bamboozled by schools that are willing to cheat as Columbia has done.

Caveat emptor. Plenty of ways to judge the value of a college without relying on U.S. News rankings or common data sets. It's on you if you get "bamboozled."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:it’s amazing to me that just because a college admits more than it rejects the DCUM assumption is that there is something fatally wrong with it.

If a college is good, more people would want to attend. That's the only reason why acceptance rate and yield rate are relevant.

Umm, no. People are not rational beings, especially with something as complex and multi-faceted as higher education. We are susceptible to marketing ploys and gimmicks and we create feedback loops. Certain things are in demand because la few people decided they were in demand, which makes them more in demand, which makes them more selective, which further drives demand and on and on. All of this happens without any change in quality between 2 institutions. That is how demand works. Perception.

Have you ever like a band that most people hiaven’t heard of? Have you ever liked a TV show that got poor ratings? Books that weren’t best sellers? I hope so; otherwise you’re the dullest person I know of.

Using what the masses like as your primary point of reference for discerning quality is lazy and just compounds the problem.

Blah Blah Blah you sound like a communist.
American college system is especially like free market and law of supply and demand well prevails.

If a school looks attractive to general public for reasons, demad goes up. Acceptance rate goes down. Yield goes up.

You sound like communist party saying general public is dumb and irrational . We figured it out all and we should be in control of everything.
Nope. Free market knows better.

NP: you just sound nutty. Communist? Seriously? That just makes you sound alt right.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:it’s amazing to me that just because a college admits more than it rejects the DCUM assumption is that there is something fatally wrong with it.

If a college is good, more people would want to attend. That's the only reason why acceptance rate and yield rate are relevant.

Umm, no. People are not rational beings, especially with something as complex and multi-faceted as higher education. We are susceptible to marketing ploys and gimmicks and we create feedback loops. Certain things are in demand because la few people decided they were in demand, which makes them more in demand, which makes them more selective, which further drives demand and on and on. All of this happens without any change in quality between 2 institutions. That is how demand works. Perception.

Have you ever like a band that most people hiaven’t heard of? Have you ever liked a TV show that got poor ratings? Books that weren’t best sellers? I hope so; otherwise you’re the dullest person I know of.

Using what the masses like as your primary point of reference for discerning quality is lazy and just compounds the problem.

Blah Blah Blah you sound like a communist.
American college system is especially like free market and law of supply and demand well prevails.

If a school looks attractive to general public for reasons, demad goes up. Acceptance rate goes down. Yield goes up.

You sound like communist party saying general public is dumb and irrational . We figured it out all and we should be in control of everything.
Nope. Free market knows better.

The “free market” system you mention depends on the colleges to submit honest data though. So families can get bamboozled by schools that are willing to cheat as Columbia has done.

Caveat emptor. Plenty of ways to judge the value of a college without relying on U.S. News rankings or common data sets. It's on you if you get "bamboozled."

No time to judge 2500+ 4 year colleges without references

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:No idea. A great school though and i work with a lot of grads from there and they are top notch.

by a lot you mean the 6 people that went there? It's a small school located in the middle of nowhere.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No idea. A great school though and i work with a lot of grads from there and they are top notch.

by a lot you mean the 6 people that went there? It's a small school located in the middle of nowhere.

So is Williams. Jesus Christ.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:it’s amazing to me that just because a college admits more than it rejects the DCUM assumption is that there is something fatally wrong with it.

If a college is good, more people would want to attend. That's the only reason why acceptance rate and yield rate are relevant.

Umm, no. People are not rational beings, especially with something as complex and multi-faceted as higher education. We are susceptible to marketing ploys and gimmicks and we create feedback loops. Certain things are in demand because la few people decided they were in demand, which makes them more in demand, which makes them more selective, which further drives demand and on and on. All of this happens without any change in quality between 2 institutions. That is how demand works. Perception.

Have you ever like a band that most people hiaven’t heard of? Have you ever liked a TV show that got poor ratings? Books that weren’t best sellers? I hope so; otherwise you’re the dullest person I know of.

Using what the masses like as your primary point of reference for discerning quality is lazy and just compounds the problem.

Blah Blah Blah you sound like a communist.
American college system is especially like free market and law of supply and demand well prevails.

If a school looks attractive to general public for reasons, demad goes up. Acceptance rate goes down. Yield goes up.

You sound like communist party saying general public is dumb and irrational . We figured it out all and we should be in control of everything.
Nope. Free market knows better.

Ah, ad hominem attack, the last refuge for the one on the losing side of an argument. That’s basically the adult equivalent of “Your Mama!”

As for invoking the “free market”, you might as well have invoked the Tooth Fairy. They are about equally real. There is nothing natural about your so-called “law of supply and demand”. They are wholly human constructs, unlike actual natural laws like Newton’s mechanical laws. Just because one college can get away with charging more than another one does not necessarily mean it is better. Education is not a perfectly competitive market. Informational asymmetries abound in admissions, the product and the price. The rules of the education marketplace are not immutable. Invoking the “free market” prevents us from examining the playing field and whose interests the current rules serve. Hint, it’s the most selective colleges who want to perpetuate the sub 5 or 10% acceptance rates to give them the air of exclusivity. The scarcity is false though. Lots or world class universities from other countries are 4-5x the size of most of the Ivies.

Any exercise that attempts to rank order universities is folly. They are just not susceptible to that and the property of transitivity does not apply.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:it’s amazing to me that just because a college admits more than it rejects the DCUM assumption is that there is something fatally wrong with it.

If a college is good, more people would want to attend. That's the only reason why acceptance rate and yield rate are relevant.

Umm, no. People are not rational beings, especially with something as complex and multi-faceted as higher education. We are susceptible to marketing ploys and gimmicks and we create feedback loops. Certain things are in demand because la few people decided they were in demand, which makes them more in demand, which makes them more selective, which further drives demand and on and on. All of this happens without any change in quality between 2 institutions. That is how demand works. Perception.

Have you ever like a band that most people hiaven’t heard of? Have you ever liked a TV show that got poor ratings? Books that weren’t best sellers? I hope so; otherwise you’re the dullest person I know of.

Using what the masses like as your primary point of reference for discerning quality is lazy and just compounds the problem.

Blah Blah Blah you sound like a communist.
American college system is especially like free market and law of supply and demand well prevails.

If a school looks attractive to general public for reasons, demad goes up. Acceptance rate goes down. Yield goes up.

You sound like communist party saying general public is dumb and irrational . We figured it out all and we should be in control of everything.
Nope. Free market knows better.

Ah, ad hominem attack, the last refuge for the one on the losing side of an argument. That’s basically the adult equivalent of “Your Mama!”

As for invoking the “free market”, you might as well have invoked the Tooth Fairy. They are about equally real. There is nothing natural about your so-called “law of supply and demand”. They are wholly human constructs, unlike actual natural laws like Newton’s mechanical laws. Just because one college can get away with charging more than another one does not necessarily mean it is better. Education is not a perfectly competitive market. Informational asymmetries abound in admissions, the product and the price. The rules of the education marketplace are not immutable. Invoking the “free market” prevents us from examining the playing field and whose interests the current rules serve. Hint, it’s the most selective colleges who want to perpetuate the sub 5 or 10% acceptance rates to give them the air of exclusivity. The scarcity is false though. Lots or world class universities from other countries are 4-5x the size of most of the Ivies.

Any exercise that attempts to rank order universities is folly. They are just not susceptible to that and the property of transitivity does not apply.

yea right you figuired it all out while others are clueless and irratiolnal.

Foreign countries have a more controlled model with much less number of colleges, and in many countries in Europe, they decide which 50% of kids will go to colleges and the rest go to trades schools in middle school. Of course social science is not as exact science as physical sciences. Sure there are stupid people make dumb decisions and go bankrupt in the free market.
The US model is more on the free market side with 4000 colleges, and supply and demand generally applies.

I'm for a more controlled system getting rid of a bunch of mediocre schools.

[Anonymous]

I notice that this hasn't been active for a year or so but have a kid who is looking for a mechanical engineering program. he visited his brother at Williams and loved the vibe of small place with engaged students, and our search led us to Rose Hulman. We are on the west coast (but when we were looking at schools for our older son i found this board really helpful so am checking it out again, thank you all), and no one here has heard of Williams or RH, but if the education is first rate and the reputation is strong with employers that seems to be the most important thing. Unfortunately the discussion here devolved into something bitter and unhelpful, but if anyone has anything elucidating to add other than what has been stated already about the seeming disconnect between reputation and admissions (location, self-selection, name recognition, gender disparity - which is indeed a concern for my son), please follow up thanks. we know nothing about RH other than what we find on its web site. Note son visited Trinity which is also small and has engineering but they dont really have specialized degrees (eg mechanical engineering) and it was clear the emphasis is still liberal arts rather than science/engineering. Swat is the same, but i dont think he could get in anyway. So he is looking at Purdue, GA Tech, the usual engineering suspects, but preferring something smaller RH may be a nice fit for him. Thank you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Never heard of it. Probably super specialized

+1

-female engineer