OM f*&*&g G--this is like a middle school argument about who's the best wide receiver. Nu uhhh. Uh huhhh!

You're all wrong; the hulk would kick spiderman's butt.

thanks for the entertainment!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The top schools are all competing for the same top students. The Ivy League usually wins, with yields in the 55-75% range. Washington U's yield is much lower, like 35% or so. Kids from the DMV might get a slight edge at Washington U for geographical diversity, but like all top 15 schools, Washington U is a reach for just about everybody.

Please stop trying to make a school with a 33% admissions rate sound like as much of a "reach" as schools with 8-20% admissions rates. It would have been a safety for me, and it's a target for many others now. It's in St. Louis, people, not Palo Alto or Boston.

You need to obtain the facts before opining.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The top schools are all competing for the same top students. The Ivy League usually wins, with yields in the 55-75% range. Washington U's yield is much lower, like 35% or so. Kids from the DMV might get a slight edge at Washington U for geographical diversity, but like all top 15 schools, Washington U is a reach for just about everybody.

Please stop trying to make a school with a 33% admissions rate sound like as much of a "reach" as schools with 8-20% admissions rates. It would have been a safety for me, and it's a target for many others now. It's in St. Louis, people, not Palo Alto or Boston.

Washington U's acceptance rate for the class of 2016 was 15.6%.

Anonymous wrote:The top schools are all competing for the same top students. The Ivy League usually wins, with yields in the 55-75% range. Washington U's yield is much lower, like 35% or so. Kids from the DMV might get a slight edge at Washington U for geographical diversity, but like all top 15 schools, Washington U is a reach for just about everybody.

Please stop trying to make a school with a 33% admissions rate sound like as much of a "reach" as schools with 8-20% admissions rates. It would have been a safety for me, and it's a target for many others now. It's in St. Louis, people, not Palo Alto or Boston.

The top schools are all competing for the same top students. The Ivy League usually wins, with yields in the 55-75% range. Washington U's yield is much lower, like 35% or so. Kids from the DMV might get a slight edge at Washington U for geographical diversity, but like all top 15 schools, Washington U is a reach for just about everybody.

While I agree that it's not competitive with the top Ivies and that there are lots of smart kids around here, we'll have to agree to disagree that it's a target for many.

Anonymous wrote:Middle 50% of SAT scores for math and reading at Wash U are higher than middle 50% at Brown and Penn. If you consider Brown and Penn targets for many area kids, then yes, Wash U would be a target.

Yes. If you're sure you'll hit the bulls-eye, it's a safety. If you don't have the credentials to put you squarely in the running, it's a reach. Otherwise, it's a target in my book.

And, while some rejected at Wash U may get into Cornell or Penn, it's not as competitive as the Ivies, so even fairer to treat as a target for many kids in this area. Lots of smart kids around here.

Middle 50% at Harvard is 690/790 reading and 700/800 math. Middle 50% Wash U is 690/760 reading and 710/780 math. No doubt Harvard requires that you're an Olympic athlete, Westinghouse or Intel award winner or that you've had your symphony performed by a major orchestra or that you have another hook. Wash U stats do not suggest that they are a target school for any except those who are competitive at the top (not the middle or lower) Ivies and therefore not a target school for "many area kids" as a previous poster suggested.

^^^I have no affiliation to Wash U. Just a believer in fact vs reputation or legend.

Middle 50% of SAT scores for math and reading at Wash U are higher than middle 50% at Brown and Penn. If you consider Brown and Penn targets for many area kids, then yes, Wash U would be a target.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

No. There are safeties, targets and reaches. The Ivys and any of the top 15 or so schools are reaches for almost everyone.

Got it. Would still view Washington U. as a target for many area kids.

You are entitled to your opinion. The facts suggest otherwise.

Washington U may have copied some of the Ivy League architecture, but it's not Princeton. Sorry.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

No. There are safeties, targets and reaches. The Ivys and any of the top 15 or so schools are reaches for almost everyone.

Got it. Would still view Washington U. as a target for many area kids.

You are entitled to your opinion. The facts suggest otherwise.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is not an exploitation. This is a reference to an AP story about the tragedy.

So explain the point. The value of a LAC education is that assistant professors can better screen psychos? The guy didn't do this when enrolled at UC-Riverside.

No, the point is unrelated to the tragedy itself--it is in reference to the nature of the professor-student relationship at LACs vs. large universities. The point is that at a liberal arts college, professors overwhelmingly know their students--obviously some better than others. This article was referring to a TA (who is supposed to be even more aware of the students as the classes are usually divided into smaller groups) who didn't even know his/her student!

Anonymous wrote:This is not an exploitation. This is a reference to an AP story about the tragedy.

So explain the point. The value of a LAC education is that assistant professors can better screen psychos? The guy didn't do this when enrolled at UC-Riverside.

This is not an exploitation. This is a reference to an AP story about the tragedy.