<ol>
<li><p>Yale defers FAR too many applicants. It may serve some purpose of Yale's admissions office, but it's a disservice to the applicant pool, especially when other early-action options are foreclosed. (This is why Stanford defers many fewer REA applicants.)</p></li>
<li><p>Very high stats don't have the impact they perhaps once did in top colleges' admissions decisions. Many applicants who have them fervently hope otherwise, but the results speak for themselves. Great stats are always a good thing, but rarely a sufficient one now.</p></li>
</ol>
<p>Best wishes to all and, as others have observed, you're all going to get into great colleges in the spring--take a look at the threads from previous years and you'll feel much better when you see the evidence of this.</p>
<p>I would agree with you on the deferral rate - especially since those who are deferred have roughly the same acceptance rate in the RD round as the other RD applicants. It seems, solely in my opinion, that since they are only accepting roughly 8% of the applicants they defer, there must be a portion of those that they know they will not be accepting in April. </p>
<p>This is only my speculation but speaking as a deferred SCEA Yale legacy applicant, I feel as though Yale could reduce their deferral rate and would be doing a great service to not only those who are deferred and then accepted but also those who are deferred and subsequently rejected. </p>
<p>With a smaller pool of deferrals, those applicants who are deferred during SCEA would know they are truly the “borderline” candidates and could adjust their expectations accordingly. For the large amount of applicants who are deferred and then rejected, it seems as though it is a cruel process. Certainly Yale has some inclination in the group of 2,952 SCEA deferrals as to who they might admit and who they will not. It seems absurd to me that there are nearly 3 thousand applicants that the Yale admissions board cannot decide on. </p>
<p>The bottom line is that, in my opinion, Yale should only defer those candidates that they truly cannot decide on without seeing the entire applicant pool.</p>
<p>^^Precisely my point, jaime. Deferred status loses much of its meaning when it’s accorded to something like half of the early applicant pool, given the ultimate dispositions in RD. Since deferring a huge percentage of applicants doesn’t give meaningful feedback to deferrees, it just isn’t the right way to handle early action. (It kind of reminds me of the situation at Penn during last year’s early round, when the head of admissions there basically said they wound up deferring a giant number of early applicants simply because they couldn’t get around to reviewing them in time.)</p>
<p>jaime, your result was one of the ones that really surprised me. I wonder if it could have anything to do with the fact that equestrian is only a club sport at Yale? Are there other schools where it is a varsity sport? Even though you’re a legacy, they might wonder if you’d enroll.</p>
<p>Agreed, zenkoan. In addition, I wonder if it is in the interest of Yale to defer so many qualified applicants. If Yale defers an outstanding applicant only to accept them in the spring, it is my inclination to believe that an applicant would be more inclined to go to a school that accepted them right off the bat. Unless Yale is clearly and in all circumstances the applicant’s first choice, it is off-putting to be deferred from a school. It sends the message that the school is not particularly compelled to accept that student. Deferring a large amount of applications does not seem to be a way to harbor interest in the school in the qualified applicants that they defer. </p>
<p>Hunt - It came as a shock to my teachers and counselors as well, though it appears there are a large number of surprising deferrals this year.<br>
Perhaps it does have to do with the club status. Equestrian is a varsity sport at Brown, but no other Ivies and few other top schools. As enthusiastic as I would be to compete for a school, the majority of my focus would be competing for the United States. An outstanding equestrian team would not entice me to a school, since I will continue to be competing in international competitions. In fact, being deferred from Yale has only reduced my chances of enrolling, especially in light of my other acceptances/likely letters.</p>
<p>The only important lesson imo: The college admissions game is just absurd. It makes very little sense. if you want to go to a school, you should apply.</p>
<p>Deferrals very often mean that they simply did not have time to read all the applications.</p>
<p>As for Yale’s incredibly high deferral rate - maybe they spend too much time on each application, maybe they don’t delegate their time well enough… who knows.</p>
<p>I certainly agree. Before today, Yale was probably my second choice, but after being deferred, even if I were accepted in the spring, there are at least 2 or 3 more schools I would choose over Yale now</p>
<p>gahsicles, I would submit that a college that requires its early applicants to forgo virtually all other early action opportunities is implicitly promising to devote sufficient time to each early application to make an informed, meaningful decision. While I can envision an exception in rare cases of huge, unforeseen increases of early applications, that certainly wasn’t Yale’s case this year; early apps actually dropped a small bit. I think many deferred applicants will find this situation very off-putting, as jaime suggests.</p>
This is the thing–there is hardly anybody that Yale wants so bad that they can’t take the risk of letting them get away, with the possible exception of a few athletes. And Yale also knows that it will be able to enroll the vast majority of its RD admits–Yale has a very high yield. I have to say that it’s mysterious to me what Yale is trying to accomplish with its EA admits–sometimes it seems that it is trying to show the love to some desirable students who might go elsewhere, but that doesn’t seen to be the case for some of them. I would say, finally, that you shouldn’t try to read too much into being deferred. It doesn’t really tell you that much about your chances in RD, and it doesn’t tell you all that much about your chances at other selective schools (although it at least suggests that you’re in the ballpark). The best approach is to simply consider Yale along with all your other RD schools.</p>
<p>If you were rejected SCEA, I do think it makes sense to take another look at your RD list, to make sure that you have a good range of schools, including matches and safeties. Don’t just apply to Harvard, Stanford, and Princeton.</p>
<p>^^ I personally chose Yale SCEA because I wanted to have a great early acceptance if at all possible and did not want to be bound by an ED program. With those things in mind, I had Stanford/Yale REA/SCEA, MIT and Chicago to choose from. Out of those, Yale was my favorite so I applied there early. Yale definitely isn’t my top choice and I’ll be anxiously (much less so than before today) waiting for my RD decisions come April.</p>
<p>^ agreed. but I still don’t regret applying to Yale SCEA. It was my first choice that offered early action, and just my first choice in general.</p>
<p>There is a very interesting philosophical question between the way that Stanford and Yale manage EA. Both accept about 1/8th of their applicants. But Stanford rejects about 80% of the remainder, while Yale defers about 80% of the remainder.</p>
<p>Which school is doing better by their applicants? My nephew was rejected by Stanford EA; my son deferred by Yale EA. It will take me some time to figure out who got the more humane answer. It may be the nephew-- he can move on with certainty. It may be the son–he has another chance. Interesting to ponder.</p>
<p>Theory: Though some might disagree, I believe Yale truly did expereince “Tufts Syndrome” this year for early action. </p>
<p>Most of these students would also probably get into Harvard, Stanford, Princeton etc. Which have similar yield rates, and might choose those schools instead.</p>