Application numbers soar, admit rate drops

Ana Alvarez

Published: Sunday, May 30, 2010

As applications for Brown’s class of 2014 poured in, the Admissions Office overflowed with paper — literally. With a flood of application papers that exceeded the office’s capacity, Alumnae Hall had to be temporarily transformed into a holding area for the huge stacks of prospective talent.

The task facing the admissions office was, for Brown, unheard of. Once admissions officers had read through the over 30,000 applications — 20.6 percent more than the previous year — acceptance letters were sent to only 9.6 percent of applicants, making this Brown’s most selective freshman class to date.

Many of Brown’s peer institutions experienced similar surges. In the past three years or so, colleges everywhere have been reporting record-breaking application numbers. Every Ivy League school except Yale broke its record for most applications, though only Princeton approached Brown’s percentage surge. For the first time, a majority of Ivies posted single-digit acceptance rates.

According to Dean of Admission Jim Miller ’73, it took Brown 215 years to reach 10,000 applications. It took nearly a decade to double that total. And the last 10,000 applications have come in just the past two years. He partly attributes this recent rise in applicants to the economy, which he says has caused many prospective students and parents to partake in a “flight to quality” in education.

With job markets as fiercely competitive as ever, many parents may continue to view the Brown degree as a worthy investment — albeit a pricey one.

A notable aspect of the recent surge is not only the number of students, but where they come from. Thanks to recruitment efforts targeting first-generation and international students, the class of 2014 will include many more students from populations underrepresented at Brown, Miller says. Thirty-five percent of the accepted students this year qualify as students of color, the most ever, he said. Credit is due in large part to the implementation of a need-blind admissions process by President Ruth Simmons in 2002, Miller says.

Whether Brown will be able to convince these accepted students to actually matriculate is another story. Along with the steady rise in applications, the University has experienced a congruent decline in its yield rate, the measure of how many accepted students choose Brown over other options. This trend has not been entirely unique to Brown — as graduating seniors are applying to a larger number of schools, yield rates nationwide have decreased. Miller said he hopes Brown, with its increased selectivity and efforts toward building international visibility, can become more competitive with schools such as Harvard, Yale and Princeton.

An unfortunate by-product of a large pile of applications is a large pile of rejection letters. One can only wonder how many members of the class of 2010 would still stand a chance in today’s intensely competitive pool. But while high selectivity always leads to the regrettable rejection of hundreds of worthy students, Miller thinks because of the added attention to recruiting students from underrepresented backgrounds, the selection process allows the school to choose not only the most talented, but also the most diverse class possible.

Miller said he is hesitant to make predictions about future numbers, but he wouldn’t bet on a decline in applications. And since all applications will be processed electronically starting next year, there should be no need for the Admissions Office to take over Alumnae Hall again.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1323262&forum_id=1#15101330)

2. With widespread use of the WL thus far by some competitors - particularly Yale and Princeton - it is likely that Brown will suffer more "melt" than last year.

3. The yield rate will remain a little above or a little below 55% for the 3rd year running, even though the fraction taken from the high-yield ED pool is creeping up regularly.

4. The rise in "popularity" (ie, the rise in the number of applicants), is not dramatically different than numbers elsewhere - particularly when transitioning to the common admit form. (Look at Chicago, for example ... up 44% this year!) Brown (with all due respect) has benefitted from its long-term status as a "backup" to HYP, and has particularly benefitted as Harvard and Princeton dropped their early programs and had all their applicants applying "regular" - along with 10-15 applications to other schools - including Brown. Thus, as apps have risen, yield has dropped somewhat, bringing into question the true level of "popularity."

5. This is about the 25th anniversary of the year Brown, for the first time, led all the Ivies in applications, during the height of the "eurotrash"/JFK,Jr. era. Perhaps Emma is restoring some the cache Brown enjoyed then!

6. A question about Andover: I know that Brown had more admits and than any other Ivy this year, but are you sure that it had more APPLICANTS than Harvard? I doubt it. Harvard generally is tops in applicants there, although not always tops in admits.

http://phillipian.net/article/9694

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1323262&forum_id=1#15106594)

The Phillipian article was poorly written, in my opinion. It was not clear the extent of the number of applicants to Brown. This is in stark contrast to St. Paul's, since they have printed in the past the number of applicants and matriculants. I suspect, though, that the number of applications from Andover to Brown was high, because it usually is. I also suspect, in keeping with Brown's 20.6% applicant surge, that it was a situation where more applicants than usual from Andover applied to Brown, and more were accepted.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1323262&forum_id=1#15107411)

I think Brown still loses cross admits to Princeton, whose total apps rose by virtually the same number this year.

http://college.mychances.net/tools/college-choice-matrix.php?list%5B%5D=342&list%5B%5D=544&list%5B%5D=3&list%5B%5D=1737&list%5B%5D=1519&list%5B%5D=165&list%5B%5D=1034&list%5B%5D=319&list%5B%5D=361&list%5B%5D=762

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1323262&forum_id=1#15107561)

Speaking of Yale, you have absolutely no concrete info on the extent to which it is resorting to its waitlist. If you want to cite the anecdotal info on CC as a credible source, then you also must accept that Y wins the battle of cross admits against H, because for 3 consecutive years Yale has won out over H on CC. I doubt you are willing to do that though. It is a virtual certainty that H will take more off the waitlist than Y, just as it has for the classes of 12 and 13.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1323262&forum_id=1#15107779)

Both Yale and Princeton waited until "round 1" of early admissions had been made before releasing "preliminary" yield numbers.

We do not yet know whether Harvard's overall projection was accurate, or whether the "round 2" waitlist admits to Yale and Princeton (to make up for "melt" losses and those who defer a year) will lower the respective yield rates, and if so, by how much.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1323262&forum_id=1#15112751)

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1323262&forum_id=1#15147062)

I have reason to believe that Brown's current overlap pool with Princeton is higher than it has ever been, due (I suspect) to Princeton's casting away of the ED crutch.

The "revealed-preference-like" redo is based, I believe, on 2009 data. As we know, such formulas, while interesting, are nevertheless not always reflective of "real" numbers; ie, for 1999, when the RP "formula" had Harvard beating Yale 65-35%, the actual ratio was 83-17% in favor of Harvard by the candid admission of a high-ranking Yale official.

http://college.mychances.net/tools/college-choice-matrix.php?list%5B%5D=342&list%5B%5D=544&list%5B%5D=3&list%5B%5D=1737&list%5B%5D=1519&list%5B%5D=165&list%5B%5D=1034&list%5B%5D=319&list%5B%5D=361&list%5B%5D=762

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1323262&forum_id=1#15108664)

Concerning brown, the chanceme numbers are not representative of the world at large but simply of a narrow subset that frequents that website. No one in his right mind would say that georgetown could split with or even narrolwly beat brown. Nor would Penn decisively beat brown, as that website would suggest.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1323262&forum_id=1#15109044)

Yale will have an edge over Princeton - thanks, again to the early admissions crutch - but Stanford will probably have a clear cross-admit advantage over old Eli this year.

By the way, it appears that Yale's SCEA yield rate was 77% las year. (742 admits, 574 matriculants) so that the RD yield rate was 60% - including deferred SCEA applicants.

http://collegesearch.collegeboard.com/search/CollegeDetail.jsp?collegeId=4123&profileId=1

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1323262&forum_id=1#15109169)

For we love our college dear,

And wherever we may go,

We are ready with a cheer,

And the people always say,

That you can't outshine Brown men,

With their Rah! Rah! Rah! and their Ki! Yi! Yi!

And their B-R-O-W-N.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1323262&forum_id=1#15111760)

Possible explanation eventhough H has a higher overall yield- H shies away from the kind of high energy east coast/west coast kids whom Yale does well with and goes after the type of kids who, while very smart and academically talented (with great numbers), are less likely to gain admission to Yale. And maybe they accept more from the midwest and "heartland" than do the other big 4. There is plenty of speculation on CC threads to this effect.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1323262&forum_id=1#15137588)

See: http://harvard.listserv.org/

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=1323262&forum_id=1#15509564)