Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Institutions like Minerva, Curtis, Julliard, etc should have giant asterixis. They aren't really like the others. With a place like Minerva you may as well be comparing Stanford against tutelage under a tree with Socrates.

I've always kind of felt that way about STEM-focused schools like Cal Tech and military academies.

For an aspiring actor I imagine that getting into Julliard is the equivalent of an aspiring cosmologist getting into caltech.

Anonymous wrote:Institutions like Minerva, Curtis, Julliard, etc should have giant asterixis. They aren't really like the others. With a place like Minerva you may as well be comparing Stanford against tutelage under a tree with Socrates.

I've always kind of felt that way about STEM-focused schools like Cal Tech and military academies.

The problem with this methodology is that many Universities use waitlists to manipulate their acceptance rate and drive up their yield rate. Uchicago is notorious for this. Pomona accepted 62 from their waitlist out of 408 total enrolled, Cornell accepted 362 from their waitlist out 3500 enrolled. Such high numbers are a very likely indicator of manipulating waitlists for managing yield which makes using an acceptance metric in the formula troublesome. An alternative is to just use #enrolled divided by #applied. (This works well in comparing between schools that attract a similar academic profile of students).

---from reddit---
Number of applicants chasing each seat at T35 Universities and T4 LACs

Just like Airlines have to fill bums on seats, so too do Universities. No matter what games they play in managing yield (by manipulating number of admits to number waitlisted for example), the hard number is #applicants and #enrolled for the fixed number of seats they have.

So how many applicants chasing each seat at the top 35 universities and Top4 LACs in USNWR? (Data is from CDS, and is #Applicants divide by #Enrolled, and ranked from most number of applicants per seat to least). This is a glimpse of what applicants are chasing.

Caltech 74
Columbia 41
Harvard 37
Swarthmore 34
Stanford 32
Yale 32
Brown 30
MIT 30
Pomona 30
Duke 28
Vanderbilt 28
JHU 27
Rice 26
Amherst 26
Princeton 25
Northwestern 25
Dartmouth 24
Emory 23
Penn 23
UCLA 22
Williams 21
UCIrvine 21
USC 20
UCSanDiego 20
CarnegieM ellon 20
Cornell 19
UCBerkeley 19
UChicago 18
WashUinSL 18
Georgetown 17
NYU 16
UCDavis 14
Wellesley 14
GeorgiaTech 14
Notre Dame 14
UNCarolina 13
UVA 13
UMichigan 12
UofFlorida 10
UTAustin 7

Obviously this is University-wide data and does not reflect demand for specific majors like CS for example. CDS data is latest published by the University (most are 2023-24, some are 2022-23 and the rare one is 2021-22)

Just another example where selectivity is overrated.

Anonymous wrote:In a way, it's convenient that they list pretty much any school in existence. No liberal arts designations, military academies, public schools, private schools, niche schools. Just good, objective information for the consumer to do what they want with it

Except when the #13 most selective school is actually an Open Enrollment school. Other than that...it must be "good" information.

In a way, it's convenient that they list pretty much any school in existence. No liberal arts designations, military academies, public schools, private schools, niche schools. Just good, objective information for the consumer to do what they want with it

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Am I the only one who's never heard of Minerva? Or Stanbridge??

Stanbridge is a college dedicated to Nursing, PT and Occupational Therapy. They have 5 locations in Southern CA.

It is Open Enrollment. Nothing against that and seems like a great choice for those careers.

However, it is bizarre it is on this list.

It’s probably paid for by those two organizations or universities

Institutions like Minerva, Curtis, Julliard, etc should have giant asterixis. They aren't really like the others. With a place like Minerva you may as well be comparing Stanford against tutelage under a tree with Socrates.

Anonymous wrote:Am I the only one who's never heard of Minerva? Or Stanbridge??

Stanbridge is a college dedicated to Nursing, PT and Occupational Therapy. They have 5 locations in Southern CA.

It is Open Enrollment. Nothing against that and seems like a great choice for those careers.

However, it is bizarre it is on this list.

That actually is a pretty cool site.

What is it based on?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Where’s Emory?

Ranked 53, just ahead of Haverford and Bates. This list combines every type of college. SLAC, research university, specialty (Arts/Music), miitary academies, etc.

. Interesting…is Emory a school in decline?

Anonymous wrote:Where are all the NEU haters - #27

Maybe someday they'll realize that times, and schools, change!

Go Northeastern!

Let the haters hate.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's also a measure of who has ED.

Colby, for example, would not be yield more than ND if not for ED.

Schools with no ED (please them) get dinged in this.

2,3,4 and 5 don’t have ED.

I don’t think there’s any argument about top 8-10 schools.

But after that, it gets messier and ED or EDs hugely impact yield.

Anonymous wrote:The list is obviously bunk since it doesn't have UVA

UVA clocking in at 78. Just behind UNC.