<p>Looking over the results from the college admissions this year at the most highly selective colleges, it seems to me that all the people who were accepted to the most “elite” universities were accepted to the majority of them, and those who weren’t weren’t accepted to any of them. I never saw students be accepted to all the selective schools (rather than be accepted to various assortments of them) until this year. </p>
<p>Some questions to reflect on:</p>
<li>Has it been like this in past years?</li>
<li>Do you think this will affect waitlists?<br></li>
</ol>
<p>Thanks. I’m interested in hearing all your opinions.</p>
<p>I know of someone who was accepted to all seven of the seven selective-to-highly selective schools she applied to last year. (I'm pretty sure that she is now a first-year student at Harvard.) </p>
<p>Waitlist calculations have been going on for years. Colleges know pretty well, year-by-year, what kind of "yield" they can expect. If they ever get surprised one year (as MIT did last year, having a higher yield from its admitted students than it expected), they can make an adjustment in the number of admitted students the following year (as MIT apparently did this year).</p>
<p>frecklybeckly, you are going to go to one of the best schools in the world. For many people, better than any IVY. I am not kidding. I don't know what nonsense is going on in Connecticut, but you will have a great time, and get a great education at a place known around the world.</p>
<p>So, why don't you give yourself a break and look at the positives and stop dwelling on the what ifs.</p>
<p>Which school you go to doesn't define you as a person. Anybody who thinks that is somebody to be avoided. They are too shallow to spend any time with. </p>
<p>What kind of person you are going to be, who you marry, how you are going to live your life, where you are going to live...these issues are so much more important than a bumpersticker on the back of a car.</p>
<p>And your bumper sticker is going to be pretty sweet.</p>
<p>Smith has had a problem with yield. It continues to go up (42%), and not predictably, and is now well higher than Swat (39%) and Amherst (34%), etc. No one got in off the waiting list last year, and they prayed for some folks to chicken out at the last minute. Housing was crunched. This year, I have heard apps. went up 20% or so. Combined with higher yields expected, it likely means that the percentage accepted went well down (which I personally don't think is necessarily a good thing). I'm sure they would prefer to go to the waiting list than have a housing crunch.</p>
<p>I saw that Yale put over 1000 applicants on the WL and admitted only 8 from it.
Northwestern a few years ago put 776 on the waitlist, accepted 330 from it; 102 eventually took up the offer. So it really depends how the waitlist is used. </p>
<p>But I agree with Dstark. I also predict that once you are at UMich, you will stop fretting about the what ifs and enjoy yourself there. The opportunities are just so many!</p>
<p>I feel for you Freckly, if all your life you've hoped to go to Yale, well, it's a hard dream to give up. One of my best friends is in the same boat. Her college counselor is not especially hopeful for the waitlist at ivies this year but is fighting for her so make sure your counselor is too.</p>
<p>Building on Mini's statement that the movement from the waiting lists are NOT predictable, here are a few numbers for Smith.</p>
<p>Despite that the applications numbers have remained very constant, except for the Class of 2007, acceptances from the waiting list have fluctuated from zero to 99. There is no real rhyme nor reason, especially when looking at the class of 2007: Smith accepted the highest number of applicants (1705), but a yield of 37% caused them to go to the WL for the first time in four years. </p>
<p>The adjustments made for the class of 2008 -higher admit rate- did indeed backfire as the enrollment jumped up by 10% from 2007. </p>
<p>There is, however, one great constant, and it is the number of ED admissions. The low number of ED applications does not help Smith's predicament in managing its RD admit rate. </p>
<p>Frecklybecky, I do agree that Michigan is a well-rated, fun school to attend. I think you will get a great education there. However, it it makes you feel better, just get above 3.7 in your first year, and you can probably transfer to most other schools. </p>
<p>Also, I know that you were focused on attending Yale,but you should read the comments in <a href="http://www.studentreviews.com%5B/url%5D">www.studentreviews.com</a> about Yale. the general theme is that Yale is very preoccupied with its graduate school and not as focused with its undergraduate school. Personally, if I could get into any college, it wouldn't be either Yale or Harvard ( although Harvard does have the panache that others don't). </p>
<p>Trust me, if you keep an open mind, you should love Univ of Michigan and wonder why you ever thought of going to Yale!</p>
<p>Well, back to your original point, I actually noticed the opposite. It seemed to me that many people were accepted at some/ rejected by others, and I was often baffled by the disparity. One of my favorite theories is that students' subconcious (or concious) preferences seep through in their applications, via their essays primarily, but also their recs, interviews and even the care they put into application preparation and this will result in an app that radiates a very subtle lack of enthusiasm which leads to rejection. </p>
<p>So, the only way to test your theory is to actually tabulate the data and see what the "hit ratios" are, keeping in mind that the sample population, participants in the CC forum, is a strangely skewed sample! :)</p>
<p>CC is certainly skewed and my high school is even more so, all high scoring with well thought out extras. No way did the same people get in everywhere. We have 1600 Intel winners who were rejected ED form HY or P and then got into the other 2 RD. We have a just amazing senior who only got into Stanford of the fabled 4. It is just all so random! The only one I know of who got into all 4 is a middle of the class guy who does stand up comedy. I'm told his app was off the charts funny.</p>
<p>becky: don't hope too much on wait list...One another problem the wait list will have is that they will pick kids to fill holes. Just send in your card and forget about it.</p>
<p>Becky -- I understand your disappointment. For most kids, this is the first time they have really faced a situation like this. But please listen to dstark! The best test of anyone's character is how they deal with disappointment. For what it's worth, I really thought Michigan would be a great school for my S -- but OOS tuition was too high. </p>
<p>Many kids I know have had sporadic results. The thing to do now is focus on what's good about your choice, and convey that enthusiasm to everyone you know. I don't mean for you to fake it, but at some point it will become a genuine emotion for you. It's a little like unrequited love -- if you spend all your time thinking about what might have been, you'll miss out on the wonderful things to come. I think you are a twin, right? So won't it be nice to have your own experiences that are unique to you?</p>
<p>Maybe it would help to think of it this way. You are planning a trip to Italy --everyone you know is going to Italy, and you've spent time poring over the guide books, and even learned some of the language. But you just found out that you are going to France instead! At first you may be disappointed -- after all, all your hopes were pinned on Italy. But won't it be nice when you are finished with your trip to compare notes with those who went to different places? I hope this doesn't seem like a platitude to you, but please don't waste any more of your talent thinking about what might have been. A girl like you has many options in life, and I'll just bet that you know how to make the best of your opportunities -- just as you have so far!</p>
<p>I've only read one of the replies and I just wanted to clarify that this is NOT about my disappointment, nor is it about my dwelling on my waitlist at Yale or any of the other schools to which I've been waitlisted. I thought it was an interesting general topic that the parents would like to discuss. I'm sorry if I again came across as morose about the situation - I can assure you that I am exceedingly excited now about Michigan.</p>
<p>Thanks for the clarification. I'm happy you are feeling good about UMich. </p>
<p>You have given us something to think about. Perhaps others can investigate the waitlists. The stats I used about Yale and Northwestern were culled from the Common Data Set.
They seem to use their waitlists differently. In the case of Yale, it may mean that putting someone on the waitlist is to placate the applicant's family. There is no other way of interpreting a waitlist of over 1,000 applicants and only admitting 8 from the list. In the case of Northwestern, the waitlist seems to have been for real.</p>
<p>To return to your original question about an impression that applicants ccepted in to one elite college seem to be accepted at many: I doubt that it's much different this year from previous years. Yield changes very little from year to year at these schools; if they were all accepting the same kids, it would inevitably plummet.</p>
<p>By the way, I didn't sense any untoward dissappointment in your o.p., but you should understand that there are many parents on this board who are very fond of you (anyone who heard your angelic singing is sure to be), and we all hope very much that you are feeling great about the outstanding school you are (maybe) heading to.</p>
<p>Becky,
I actually had a similiar reaction to the parents RD list... there are many kids who appears to have hit the jackpot with their acceptances at the same time there appear to be kids who are thrilled to have gotten the 1 big admission ticket (Stanford OR Princeton OR Penn) so I was intrigued by it also..... you live with one of the big jackpot winners, not that he didn't work hard for it...anyway, I believe that Yale decided to cut back on acceptances and opt for a larger wait list and intends to use their waitlist this year. Last year the wait list acceptances were much fewer and far between and I suspect there may in fact be movement this year. Continue to update the admissions office with NEW awards or accomplishments, keep the updates short and to the point, continue to emphasize you will attend if accepted.....and in the interim, become increasingly familiar with Michigan.....I love the analogy about a trip to Italy that is now going to France instead. Still foreign, still an adventure, all new to you.....<br>
Isn't it great that all these 'rents are so fond of you that they read into the post and were all working hard at filling and stacking sand bags around you to protect you? Lots of folks fond of you!!</p>
<p>Actually, while I have no information as to whether Freckly's observation is correct, I do have an observation of my own. If the highly selective colleges all use roughly the same selection criteria (SATs, grades, class rank, strength of course work, + looking for some sort of standout EC or accomplishment) ... then as the competition becomes more intense and the schools become even more selective, the range of choice among applicants may diminish. What I am saying is that statistically there are going to be less students who score above 1500 on the SATs than the overall number of students who score above 1450, so the higher the bar is set, the smaller the shared pool of potential admits. </p>
<p>This may seem counter-intuitive as the overall number of applicants increase, but a significant number of applicants simply are not of the caliber that will win admission. </p>
<p>I doubt that any college is using a single factor like the SAT score as an absolute cut off -- but they are probably all refining their internal scoring systems and setting an overall higher threshhold for the applications. Also, the high degree of competition, coupled with the abandonment of binding ED by some of the Ivies, will tend to encourage more high-end students to hedge their bets by applying to more top schools. So to the college, it looks like they have more applicants overall, including more high end ones -- justifying their setting a very high bar. But in the end, there is more overlap -- and of course the very fact of applying to multiple schools increases the chances for a high end student to be admitted at multiple schools. I mean, whereas a few years ago that student might have applied to 2 Ivies, it is now more likely that the student will apply to 4 or 5.</p>
<p>I wonder how much the statistics would be different if there were a universal limit of # of schools kids could apply to. My son took considerable risk in applying to 3 schools of the 8 he could apply to which had very, very low admissions rates (as it turns out, some of the schools he thought were less risky also ended up with very low admissions rates this year)... He felt fortunate to come away with 1 admission, 1 wait list and 1 rejection of the 3 highest reach schools.. Below that he is batting 100%...Both are a welcome, slight suprise!</p>
<p>No matter how many schools you get into, you can only go to 1 so it really only matters that you like that 1!</p>