Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:HYPSM will continue to be overly popular.

Schools with strong comp sci or business departments are next.

Schools that aggressively manage their admissions process to lower their fake admit rates and inflated yields are next (Chicago, Northeastern, etc.).

Schools that don’t fit any of the above will suffer.

Hoping something will stop this aggressive admissions management, which to me is making anxiety worse and is more pernicious than all the AA/legacy/etc. policies everyone complains about.

Should be PSM at this point. Yale lost the plot some years ago. Early apps to Harvard declined by 17 percent this year - and that's before all the recent controversies.

But yes, Princeton, Stanford, and MIT will remain at the top.

US News made things weird this year. They don't care about class size. They don't care about the academic qualifications of professors. They don't care about how long it takes a student to graduate. They very much care about federal Pell Grants, even though most good private schools offer enough financial aid so that students don't need Pell Grants.

So, US News is no longer a great metric.

I would say schools on the up are the southern schools - Duke, Vanderbilt, Rice. As well as the really good publics, particularly those with good STEM - Georgia Tech, Texas, Texas A&M. And Illinois, Purdue, Wisconsin. Also, Minnesota.

I get that trashing the Ivies is a favorite pastime on this forum, with Harvard and Yale taking the brunt of it. But I am just fascinated how people tend to give Princeton and Stanford (I know not an Ivy but part of HYPSM) a pass even though both of these schools engage in the very same policies, DEI engineering, etc, that Harvard and Yale get lambasted for.

Is that because Princeton and Stanford are not in the news as much as HY or do we conveniently give them a pass for another reason?

+1

Good point! I gather folks just don't know much about Princeton, probably because they're not in the news as much as H & Y. Stanford I just don't get because there's enough out in the public realm as to the nature of life there.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:HYPSM will continue to be overly popular.

Schools with strong comp sci or business departments are next.

Schools that aggressively manage their admissions process to lower their fake admit rates and inflated yields are next (Chicago, Northeastern, etc.).

Schools that don’t fit any of the above will suffer.

Hoping something will stop this aggressive admissions management, which to me is making anxiety worse and is more pernicious than all the AA/legacy/etc. policies everyone complains about.

Should be PSM at this point. Yale lost the plot some years ago. Early apps to Harvard declined by 17 percent this year - and that's before all the recent controversies.

But yes, Princeton, Stanford, and MIT will remain at the top.

US News made things weird this year. They don't care about class size. They don't care about the academic qualifications of professors. They don't care about how long it takes a student to graduate. They very much care about federal Pell Grants, even though most good private schools offer enough financial aid so that students don't need Pell Grants.

So, US News is no longer a great metric.

I would say schools on the up are the southern schools - Duke, Vanderbilt, Rice. As well as the really good publics, particularly those with good STEM - Georgia Tech, Texas, Texas A&M. And Illinois, Purdue, Wisconsin. Also, Minnesota.

I get that trashing the Ivies is a favorite pastime on this forum, with Harvard and Yale taking the brunt of it. But I am just fascinated how people tend to give Princeton and Stanford (I know not an Ivy but part of HYPSM) a pass even though both of these schools engage in the very same policies, DEI engineering, etc, that Harvard and Yale get lambasted for.

Is that because Princeton and Stanford are not in the news as much as HY or do we conveniently give them a pass for another reason?

+1

Princeton grad here and I 100% agree - Princeton is just as woke as Harvard and Yale.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:HYPSM will continue to be overly popular.

Schools with strong comp sci or business departments are next.

Schools that aggressively manage their admissions process to lower their fake admit rates and inflated yields are next (Chicago, Northeastern, etc.).

Schools that don’t fit any of the above will suffer.

Hoping something will stop this aggressive admissions management, which to me is making anxiety worse and is more pernicious than all the AA/legacy/etc. policies everyone complains about.

Should be PSM at this point. Yale lost the plot some years ago. Early apps to Harvard declined by 17 percent this year - and that's before all the recent controversies.

But yes, Princeton, Stanford, and MIT will remain at the top.

US News made things weird this year. They don't care about class size. They don't care about the academic qualifications of professors. They don't care about how long it takes a student to graduate. They very much care about federal Pell Grants, even though most good private schools offer enough financial aid so that students don't need Pell Grants.

So, US News is no longer a great metric.

I would say schools on the up are the southern schools - Duke, Vanderbilt, Rice. As well as the really good publics, particularly those with good STEM - Georgia Tech, Texas, Texas A&M. And Illinois, Purdue, Wisconsin. Also, Minnesota.

I get that trashing the Ivies is a favorite pastime on this forum, with Harvard and Yale taking the brunt of it. But I am just fascinated how people tend to give Princeton and Stanford (I know not an Ivy but part of HYPSM) a pass even though both of these schools engage in the very same policies, DEI engineering, etc, that Harvard and Yale get lambasted for.

Is that because Princeton and Stanford are not in the news as much as HY or do we conveniently give them a pass for another reason?

NP - I asked my kids do their own research and not be a slave to brand-name schools or to USN

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:HYPSM will continue to be overly popular.

Schools with strong comp sci or business departments are next.

Schools that aggressively manage their admissions process to lower their fake admit rates and inflated yields are next (Chicago, Northeastern, etc.).

Schools that don’t fit any of the above will suffer.

Hoping something will stop this aggressive admissions management, which to me is making anxiety worse and is more pernicious than all the AA/legacy/etc. policies everyone complains about.

Should be PSM at this point. Yale lost the plot some years ago. Early apps to Harvard declined by 17 percent this year - and that's before all the recent controversies.

But yes, Princeton, Stanford, and MIT will remain at the top.

US News made things weird this year. They don't care about class size. They don't care about the academic qualifications of professors. They don't care about how long it takes a student to graduate. They very much care about federal Pell Grants, even though most good private schools offer enough financial aid so that students don't need Pell Grants.

So, US News is no longer a great metric.

I would say schools on the up are the southern schools - Duke, Vanderbilt, Rice. As well as the really good publics, particularly those with good STEM - Georgia Tech, Texas, Texas A&M. And Illinois, Purdue, Wisconsin. Also, Minnesota.

I get that trashing the Ivies is a favorite pastime on this forum, with Harvard and Yale taking the brunt of it. But I am just fascinated how people tend to give Princeton and Stanford (I know not an Ivy but part of HYPSM) a pass even though both of these schools engage in the very same policies, DEI engineering, etc, that Harvard and Yale get lambasted for.

Is that because Princeton and Stanford are not in the news as much as HY or do we conveniently give them a pass for another reason?

Anonymous wrote:HYPSM will continue to be overly popular.

Schools with strong comp sci or business departments are next.

Schools that aggressively manage their admissions process to lower their fake admit rates and inflated yields are next (Chicago, Northeastern, etc.).

Schools that don’t fit any of the above will suffer.

Hoping something will stop this aggressive admissions management, which to me is making anxiety worse and is more pernicious than all the AA/legacy/etc. policies everyone complains about.

Should be PSM at this point. Yale lost the plot some years ago. Early apps to Harvard declined by 17 percent this year - and that's before all the recent controversies.

But yes, Princeton, Stanford, and MIT will remain at the top.

US News made things weird this year. They don't care about class size. They don't care about the academic qualifications of professors. They don't care about how long it takes a student to graduate. They very much care about federal Pell Grants, even though most good private schools offer enough financial aid so that students don't need Pell Grants.

So, US News is no longer a great metric.

I would say schools on the up are the southern schools - Duke, Vanderbilt, Rice. As well as the really good publics, particularly those with good STEM - Georgia Tech, Texas, Texas A&M. And Illinois, Purdue, Wisconsin. Also, Minnesota.

Not bitter at all. I do think strong ED, EA, ED2, demonstrated interest etc etc to manipulate admission rd number and yield does work and as such more colleges will inevitably rely on it until something changes.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:HYPSM will continue to be overly popular.

Schools with strong comp sci or business departments are next.

Schools that aggressively manage their admissions process to lower their fake admit rates and inflated yields are next (Chicago, Northeastern, etc.).

Schools that don’t fit any of the above will suffer.

Hoping something will stop this aggressive admissions management, which to me is making anxiety worse and is more pernicious than all the AA/legacy/etc. policies everyone complains about.

How are these admission rates fake? X number apply, Y number are admitted. The Common Data Sets show the numbers. The majority of selective schools use Early Decision to bind students. By design, this will lower the acceptance rate in regular decision. What top 50 college does not do this? Even UVA a public does this. I don't get the hate. UChicago is without a doubt one of the best colleges in the country, if not the world.

Right around this time every year (ED season) is when a lot of people are feeling disappointed and a little (or very) angry

Anonymous wrote:Do flyers, easy applications, and waived fees deceive students about their odds of admission?

Gamesmanship doesn’t mean deception. But actually I would say that if you are bombarding kids you know you’d never admit with invitations to admit, that is deceptive. It’s also just really tacky. I honestly don’t understand why the school plays those games. It shouldn’t need to, and no peer schools use those shenanigans. And the school looks bad as a result.

Do flyers, easy applications, and waived fees deceive students about their odds of admission?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:gamesmanship

What's deceptive or illegal about what they do?

Gamesmanship doesn’t mean illegal, for one thing. It means they are using the system to manipulate the results. For instance for awhile they were boasting about their selectivity number. But they got that selectivity by blanketing kids who would never have an actual chance of admission with weekly flyers, an easy application, and waived application fees. They essentially drove up the number of applicants who never had a chance to increase their selectivity number.

I wonder if they realize just how terrible those weekly mailings make them look. I know a kid who would have been a serious contender for the school (now at Berkeley in CS) who refused to apply because he was so put off by the weekly begging letter. He called them the University of Phoenix Chicago.

Anonymous wrote:gamesmanship

What's deceptive or illegal about what they do?

Anonymous wrote:HYPSM will continue to be overly popular.

Schools with strong comp sci or business departments are next.

Schools that aggressively manage their admissions process to lower their fake admit rates and inflated yields are next (Chicago, Northeastern, etc.).

Schools that don’t fit any of the above will suffer.

Hoping something will stop this aggressive admissions management, which to me is making anxiety worse and is more pernicious than all the AA/legacy/etc. policies everyone complains about.

How are these admission rates fake? X number apply, Y number are admitted. The Common Data Sets show the numbers. The majority of selective schools use Early Decision to bind students. By design, this will lower the acceptance rate in regular decision. What top 50 college does not do this? Even UVA a public does this. I don't get the hate. UChicago is without a doubt one of the best colleges in the country, if not the world.