<p>post in this thread</p>
<p>Stanford - 72.5%
Williams - 44.3%</p>
<p>bump .</p>
<p>Last year Williams yield was 42% and Stanford’s was 70%. But many schools reported record low admission rates. So in these two cases it could be that close to the same number of students accepted, so maybe both schools will still go to their wait lists.</p>
<p>How are you calculating yield? # of deposits / # admitted, or some other metric?</p>
<p>The only figures available now are interim yields. You can’t know the real yield until the waitlist season and “summer melt” are over and final enrollments are set.</p>
<p>Pea, I disagree about last year’s yield at Williams;</p>
<p>“As the last few deposits for the Class of 2014 trickle in, 533 of the 1202 admitted students have confirmed their intention to matriculate at Williams College next fall for a yield of 44.3 percent. The current yield figure 3.6 percentage points less than last year’s 47.9 percent, when the College yielded 550 students of the 1148 admits.”</p>
<p>Stanford - 72.5%
Williams - 44.3%
Harvard - >76%</p>
<p>For any students who feel that “yield” is a way to measure strength of a college, I’d like to spot something I just posted as a response in another thread.</p>
<p>Note: this has no relevance to HYPSM, but when comparing the yields of the rest of the the Ivies/UChicago, Duke, this is somewhat important to note.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>For the nth time, there are good reasons why the USNEWS dropped yield from the metrics used to compile its annual best college report. </p>
<p>The foremost reason is that this element is completely irrelevant (and utterly meaningless) to the audience of the magazine. Another reason is that it had become (yet another source) for outright manipulation by schools. With the elimination of yield, the favorite tool has become the (ab)use preliminary annoucements that mask a huge reliance on waiting lists, especially by schools that are desperately hoping to crack the sub 20% admit rate. </p>
<p>While yield statistics remain important for college administrators and enrollment specialists, it is NOT something that should offer the slightest interest to students and parents. Unless they decide to become involved in pompom waving and cheerleading for a school close to their heart. In doing so, they can join the ranks of the schools who love to brag about their yield.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Not really! The percentage of the class admitted via ED only tells a part of the story. One has also to measure the ED … admission rate. A school that does not receive more than 1,500 or 2,000 ED applications could not admit more than 600 or 700 student without lowering their standards. In this regard, Duke cannot be compared to Ivy League schools or Stanford, as it attracts a lot fewer students who make Duke their first choice.</p>
<p>^Columbia only received about 300 more ED applications than Duke.</p>
<p>xiggi, what in the world are you saying here?</p>
<p>are you telling the students and parents what should interest them instead of them deciding on their own?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Is that so? Wanna bet a few bucks? Before you accept, you might want to try … 2,942 minus 1,537. I think that it would be hard to make that difference to be around 300. </p>
<p>Duke: Class of 2013 Profile
Early Decision<br>
Arts & Sciences Engineering Total<br>
Applications 1,290 247 1,537<br>
Accepted 451 99 550<br>
% Accepted 35% 40% 36%
Enrolled 438 97 535 </p>
<p>Source: [Duke</a> University Admissions: Class of 2013 Profile](<a href=“http://www.admissions.duke.edu/jump/applying/who_2013profile.html]Duke”>http://www.admissions.duke.edu/jump/applying/who_2013profile.html)</p>
<p>**Columbia admitted Class of 2013. **
Early Decision<br>
College Fu Engineering Total<br>
Applications 2,441 501 2942<br>
Accepted 486 153 639 </p>
<p>From your own link!
[Admission</a> Statistics | Columbia University Office of Undergraduate Admissions](<a href=“http://www.studentaffairs.columbia.edu/admissions/applications/stats.php]Admission”>http://www.studentaffairs.columbia.edu/admissions/applications/stats.php)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Obvisouly, people can and do decide what interest them. My point is that the yield is not something that should present the slightest interest to students and parents, which is not the same thing. </p>
<p>Please do not hesitate to share why the yield percentage IS important to students and parents in the context of admissions. I am all ears!</p>
<p>ahh, but xiggi, you did NOT state “in the context of admission” when you first made the statement that </p>
<p>“… yield statistics …, it is NOT something that should offer the slightest interest to students and parents…”, did you?</p>
<p>oops</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I suppose for those of us in limbo (waitlistee), yields can give us an idea of what kind of shot we have at getting off</p>
<p>Care to read your own title … again? </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I doubt we were talking about bonds or the yield of a field of potatoes. And for what it’s worth, my sentence was, “While yield statistics remain important for college administrators and enrollment specialists, it is NOT something that should offer the slightest interest to students and parents.” Could the context be any clearer?</p>
<p>AMEN! XIGGI! This is a totallly irrelevant “statistic” and is used by the rankings obsessed to suggest they are somehow superior human beings because their school has a higher retention rate. NOT!</p>
<p>Good grief.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>This year schools reported a record number of applications. Why? My best guess was that rather than there being more people applying to schools there are the same number of people, (from previous years), applying to more schools. I think the schools weren’t sure what to make of it because the admission rates were at record lows but the wait lists are huge.</p>
<p>So I want to see what happens to the yields. I was thinking they should go down to reflect some sort of constancy in the number of people applying to college but I haven’t seen that yet.</p>
<p>Pea, I would agree with you here and it should be interesting what trend the yield takes…</p>
<p>so far we have 2+ and 1-</p>