The most prestigious college admissions discussion board in the world.
|
 |
 
|
HARVARD sees no change in admission yield for 2012
Poast new message in this thread
Date: May 8th, 2008 7:12 PM Author: Green incel Subject: 55% of class on finacial aid - up from 49%. College Sees No Change in Admissions Yield Despite elimination of early action, 78 percent of accepted students will attend
Published On Thursday, May 08, 2008 5:04 PM By LINGBO LI, Crimson Staff Writer
Harvard's yield for the Class of 2012 will remain about the same as last year—around 78 percent—even though the college admissions landscape has seen dramatic changes.
This year was Harvard's first since abandoning early admissions, and the incoming freshmen are the first admitted under the College's new financial aid policy, which drastically slashes costs for upper-middle-income families.
It was also the College's most competitive year yet, with an acceptance rate of only 7.1 percent of a record 27,462 applicants. To avoid overcrowding the freshman class and without the results of previous years to give an idea of what yield would be like in the wake of these changes, 110 fewer students were admitted.
The admissions office will be accepting anywhere from 150 to about 175 students off the waitlist starting tomorrow, with the bulk of waitlist decisions made by the end of this month. At this point, 55 percent of the confirmed members of the Class of 2012 will be on financial aid, up from 49 percent of the current freshman class.
Dean of Admissions and Financial Aid, William R. Fitzsimmons '67, who has seen over three decades of admitted classes, described this admissions cycle as the "most unusual and most unpredictable in my admissions career."
He pointed to overcrowding as a major source of stress in a tumultuous admissions season—in addition to changes in financial aid and early admission, the College announced it would not be accepting transfer students for the next two years, despite receiving over 1,300 applications for transfer admission.
Harvard's announcement of its generous new financial aid policy, under which families with incomes below $60,000 pay nothing and families making between $120,000 and $180,000 pay only ten percent, was promptly followed by expansions of financial aid at other schools, including a similar program at Yale. Other peer institutions also sweetened their aid packages by cutting loans and expanding funding.
"All the changes [at other schools] could well have rendered the financial aid factor a bit of a wash," Fitzsimmons said.
While Harvard and Princeton dropped early admissions this year, Yale and Stanford maintained their early programs. As a result, Fitzsimmons initially calculated that dropping early admissions would ding Harvard's yield by as much as seven points, an effect that ultimately did not take place. Last year's yield came in at 79.2 percent.
Still, he said that he expects to have lost more students in the cross-admit battle between Yale and Harvard this year, due to Yale's decision to keep its early action program. Yale's yield also remained unchanged, at 69 percent.
With any crisis of overbooking the freshman class averted, he said that the admissions office is breathing "an incredibly loud sigh of relief."
Fitzsimmons said that after "a lot of angst" and "a lot of difficult work," the class looks "spectacular."
And, he added, the admissions office will be able to "make a lot of people happy in the month of June." |
Date: May 8th, 2008 7:26 PM Author: Green incel If in fact there are 175 taken from the WL, that will mean a yield rate of about 78.5%, assuming a class of 1,665.
I do understand, however, that the Harvard numbers are a bit premature, and will be refined next week. |
|
Date: May 8th, 2008 8:33 PM Author: self-absorbed milk hairy legs Subject: Interesting spin you put on things notice how your thread for yale is entitled Yales yield is down a bit, when then yield at a comparable stage was only 0.5% lower than last year, which anyone would evaluate as "the same". But with a comparable drop by Harvard, year over year, the headline is H yield remains the same.
Also what do you think of this from the Harvard release, and I quote: "Still, he said that he expects to have lost more students in the cross-admit battle between Yale and Harvard this year" |
 |
Date: May 8th, 2008 9:01 PM Author: Green incel Subject: Here's what you seem to miss, repapa: The claimed Yale yield rate (69%) is essentially phony, since it assumes no waitlist admits ... even though they have already confessed they will be taking a minimum of 45! 67% is a hopeful final number, I'd say.
Harvard, on the other hand, plays it straight: the projected 78% yield rate INCLUDES a potential 175 from the waitlist!
----------------
As for the cross-admit factor, Harvard may lose "more" but their fraction of total admits may be just as high or higher. despite Yale's retention of the early admissions crutch.
A larger proportion of Yale's cross admit losses than ever may be to Harvard. |
|
Date: May 8th, 2008 9:21 PM Author: Adventurous Preventive Strike A person I know: Got in Yale early, going to Stanford and wait at Harvard. Cases like that are many. Harvard avoided enough cross-admits with Yale, especially the early admits. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=811014&forum_id=1#9757018) |
|
Date: May 8th, 2008 9:39 PM Author: Green incel My information is that the cross admit group was the largest in recent history, despite Yale's (and Stanford's) heavy reliance on early admits. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=811014&forum_id=1#9757093) |
|
Date: May 8th, 2008 9:42 PM Author: Adventurous Preventive Strike It is interesting to see Princeton's yield. My predication is less than 60% (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=811014&forum_id=1#9757104) |
|
Date: May 8th, 2008 9:44 PM Author: Green incel I think it will be higher. 61-62%. They spent big bucks in financial aid. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=811014&forum_id=1#9757114) |
|
Date: May 8th, 2008 9:52 PM Author: Adventurous Preventive Strike Four people I know crossed w/ HYPSM, none of them goes to Princeton. Also the poll I did at the college discussion site shows the cross-admit yield is only 1/6. This may translate into about 58%. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=811014&forum_id=1#9757142) |
|
Date: May 8th, 2008 9:57 PM Author: Green incel Too small sample, I think! (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=811014&forum_id=1#9757162) |
|
Date: May 8th, 2008 10:03 PM Author: Adventurous Preventive Strike Harvard's (75%) and Yale's (70%) are roughly matched with the real numbers. That makes me scared with the predication for Princeton based on that. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=811014&forum_id=1#9757177) |
|
Date: May 8th, 2008 10:12 PM Author: Green incel Subject: Except those aren't the numbers ... It is Harvard's 76% and Yale's early-admissions-assisted 67.7%, vs a Princeton number that should (I am guessing) be no lower than 60%. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=811014&forum_id=1#9757205) |
|
Date: May 9th, 2008 4:12 PM Author: self-absorbed milk hairy legs Subject: You seem to have lost your bearings on this issue Yales initial yield is 68.9. Its yield will only go up as it takes sure bets from the waitlist. Harvard's 78% projected yield includes the 175 or so it will take from the waitlist. Without that, its yield is 76%. So the relevant numbers are 69 vs 76, which will become 70 vs 78 post waitlist. Princeton's yield will be unlikely to exceed 60% and its initial yield appears to be in the high 50%.
Keep in mind Yale had over 5000 early applicants to choose from, so it is highly surprising it took 850 or 888 or whatever the number was. All these people evidenced a preference for yale, but not one was required to go there. Yale apparently did very well vs Harvard in the cross admit battle judging from the Harvard press release saying that such was the case. As for Princeton, Yale always win the cross admit battle decisively. |
|
Date: May 9th, 2008 4:33 PM Author: Stubborn Location since none of the doomsday scenarios seemed to have played out, do you think yale might be more likely to drop early admissions?
then we could actually have an apples to apples, true HY(P) cross admit battle for the first time in modern history. |
|
Date: May 9th, 2008 4:36 PM Author: Green incel Here's what you continue to miss: The claimed yield for Yale assumes no waitlist admits, and full attainment of the class size target. Both numbers are fictional currently. The 65 or so waitlist admits will not increase the yield but lower it, as they will be needed, apparently, to hit the target of 1320.
Do you understand that? |
|
Date: May 9th, 2008 4:37 PM Author: Stubborn Location if thats true thats some idiotic reporting (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=811014&forum_id=1#9760589) |
|
Date: May 9th, 2008 4:46 PM Author: Stubborn Location i know im doing something wrong but...
1,286 enrolled/1,892 admitted = 67.9% yield
after taking about 50 from waitlist...
1320 enrolled/1,942 admitted = 67.9% Yield
care to edit, elaborate, expand? |
|
Date: May 9th, 2008 7:31 PM Author: Very tactful canary dog poop principal's office if they take 50 (and assuming some crafty choosing such that yield = 100) then 1336 will enroll which is about 69% yield you also have to factor in that 25 students are taking a year off, so even though they accepted, they aren't enrolling and shouldn't be counted in the app number, thus the real app number is lower. I assume there will be some summer melt and then it might come back to 68%. Whatever the case, Yale's yield is to go up by taking off the waitlist. Harvard, by underadmitting, got to boast the lowest admit rate ever and then will goose its yield in the end by taking 175 off the waitlist (which by the way will raise the admit rate considerably). Great PR maneuver by Fitzimmons, allows him to configure the stats to show that Harvard didn't need EA, which is true, but H's yield suffered as a result if you do the real math.
Here's salted wounds solid proof: 1286/(1892-25) = 68.9 , the 25 being those who are taking a year off and are removed from the equation.
If you add 45 WL admits with a 100% yield rate
(1286+45)/(1892-25+45) = 1331/1912 = 69.6
If Yale used Harvard's formula to determine its yield it would've come out to that figure.
Harvard, by refusing to release the # of admitted students, seems to be indicating that the WL admits are already included in the yield projection - better yield for better press, as was done with the admit rate. As of now, if H must go to the WL for 175 students, it's a fair assumption that they have about 1660-175= 1485 students at this point. Out of the 1948 initial admits, this would bring the current admit rate to 1485/1948 = 76.2%, the methodological equivalent to Y's 68.9%.
Harvard does not have 1948*.78 students matriculating at this point, because adding 175 to that would mean having a frosh class of about 1695, clearly overshooting. |
|
Date: May 9th, 2008 8:29 PM Author: Green incel Subject: Let me remind you, yet AGAIN ......! You CANNOT "remove from the equation" 25 admits who do not matriculate. For the sake of argument, you could deal with this issue by adding in the returning people (lets say, another 25) who took the year off LAST year ..... BUT!!!! if you do so, you must count them as admits THIS year. Consider... matriculants do not appear out of thin air, but must be ADMITS at some point!! (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=811014&forum_id=1#9761406) |
|
Date: May 9th, 2008 11:11 PM Author: charismatic cuckold selfie You cannot? It's common practice. I distinctly remember reading about the appropriate equation to used and it involves removing deferred matriculating students from the equation.
What is the appropriate alternative? To count them as admitted students? Then the yield rate would go up.
Either way, there doesn't seem to be any evidence that H and Y are behaving DIFFERENTLY in this case, and the effects of any numbers manipulation in this range (which I do not believe is happening) would pale in comparision to H's exploits. |
|
Date: May 10th, 2008 12:02 AM Author: Green incel Yale is unique in trying to play it both ways and claiming a phony yield rate in the process.
NO other school that I know of (1) claims that people who do not matriculate count as part of the yield, on the one hand, and (2) include returning deferees in the matriculating class without counting them as admits!
It is tricks like this that inflate Yale's current yield rate edge over Princeton.
Furthermore, Yale notoriously inflates its app numbers (and thus understates its true "admit rate") by counting as completed applications those phantom applications which were withdrawn or are incomplete. (Almost a WUStL-like approach!) This year Stanford "got religion" and stopped this shady practice, designed, frankly, to influence the US News rankings.
See: http://www.stanforddaily.com/article/2008/1/31/applicationStatisticsExamined |
|
Date: May 10th, 2008 12:36 AM Author: Very tactful canary dog poop principal's office odd that you don't provide proof and that the article you cite actually contradicts you:
"Other universities use different methods to count applications, but those that rely on the Common Application, such as Harvard and Yale, receive counts based solely on completed applications."
so, you're quoting an article that doesn't support your assertions about yale at all, nice one. |
|
Date: May 10th, 2008 2:55 PM Author: Green incel That statement is nonsensical and incorrect, and was tossed out as an additional rationale for Stanford's discontinuing the questionable practice that Yale still maintains.
Stanford felt the need to rationalize its decline in apps this year.
Check out past issues of the Yale ASC newsletter - to which I assume you have access - where the confidential, REAL app numbers are reported - netting out the withdrawns and the incompletes. |
|
Date: May 9th, 2008 5:19 PM Author: Disrespectful whorehouse 175 from the waitlist? what the shit? why so many? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=811014&forum_id=1#9760733) |
|
Date: May 9th, 2008 8:37 PM Author: Green incel 1. The abolition of early admission, and the explosion of RD applications to 27,462, created uncertainty;
2. They were deathly afraid of overenrolling, as last year, because of a housing crunch;
3. In order to provide a margin of error, they admitted on the basis of an assumed 85% yield to insure they would under-enroll rather than over-enroll, thus assuring substantial use of the waitlist. I think the final number off the WL will be more like 200, meaning an admit rate of around 7.8%. |
|
Date: May 9th, 2008 10:19 PM Author: charismatic cuckold selfie Do you really think an 85% yield was a reasonable assumption? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=811014&forum_id=1#9761874) |
|
Date: May 9th, 2008 7:35 PM Author: Very tactful canary dog poop principal's office Why does Harvard not release the number of admitted students? Hiding something? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=811014&forum_id=1#9761193) |
|
Date: May 9th, 2008 8:31 PM Author: Green incel Subject: My take: They really were not ready to release info this week, since that stuff is ordinarily released on or about the 17th since time immemorial. They seem to have been pressed for an early snapshot by the NY Times writer who was doing a roundup story. I think the final WL total will be more like 200. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=811014&forum_id=1#9761423) |
|
Date: May 9th, 2008 10:46 PM Author: charismatic cuckold selfie So they reported the yield statistic but cannot report on its components? Not sure that I buy it.
If they had released the current number of "matriculants, as all other schools did, then anyone could've done the math (matriculating students / applicants) and figured out that Harvard's reported yield doesn't quite match up. |
|
Date: May 9th, 2008 11:52 PM Author: Green incel Subject: Bottom line: In the end, Harvard's yield rate will be hugely higher than Yale's, as usual, even though Yale held onto the yield-enhancing early admissions crutch and admitted 885 early for a class of 1320!
Kudo's to Princeton for risking the yield hit that President Levin was afraid to risk. |
|
Date: May 10th, 2008 7:38 AM Author: charismatic cuckold selfie Alternatively, the bottom line is that if you look at the actual yield numbers sans the strategic reporting methodlogies, Harvard's yield decreased significantly more than Yale's, and even the Harvard dean of admissions acknowledged that this year more students shunned Harvard for Yale.
That Harvard's yield was already higher is not news or even interesting. The possibility of a trend/change a bit more so.
Regarding your praise of Princeton, hasn't it been shown that they systematically reject qualified candidates they think they'll lose in a cross-admit battle?
That to me seems to invalidate the yield figure more than any attempt to actively woo the best candidates, whether it be EA, "likely" letters, etc. |
|
Date: May 10th, 2008 3:04 PM Author: Green incel I will say this in Princeton's favor: it has not only stopped the Hargadon era strategic, Tufts Syndrome-style admissions (leading to a yield drop from 74% to a more Yale-like 68%) but it has gone a step further - dropping the early admissions yield-protection scheme.
President Levin of Yale, ironically, abandoned his previously proclaimed principles to hang onto the early admissions crutch - openly hoping to "steal" a few apps from Harvard and Princeton and protect his yield. |
|
Date: May 9th, 2008 8:03 PM Author: boyish stage Will they have free will in 2112? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=811014&forum_id=1#9761291) |
|
Date: May 10th, 2008 8:22 AM Author: charismatic cuckold selfie Subject: Princeton Yield? Princeton Yield?
If they're taking 80 from WL to fill a class of ~1250 it means they must have about 1170 students matriculating at this point, out of 1976 admitted. This results in a yield of about 59.2%, which might find a way of getting reported as >60%.
Conclusion: Unlike EA, ED is a huge yield crutch. |
|
Date: May 13th, 2008 8:22 AM Author: Green incel 86 off the WL so far at Princeton. The final number may exceed 100, I' guess. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=811014&forum_id=1#9776592) |