Class of 2011 yield to reach record high of 67%

Colleges and Universities A-Z University of Pennsylvania
61

<p>Quote:
"sheldon0789, your claims aren't really based on current information.</p>

<p>All the Ivies use ED to fill over 30% of their incoming classes.</p>

<p>Here's a few specifics from the 2011 class:</p>

<p>Yale - ~47% filled via ED assuming 100% yield
Penn - ~49%
Princeton - ~48%
Harvard - 47%
Columbia - 45%</p>

<p>MIT - ~40%</p>

<p>for references, please see: <a href="http://www.hernandezcollegeconsultin...tatistics.html%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.hernandezcollegeconsultin...tatistics.html&lt;/a&gt;"&lt;/p>

<p>red&blue, are you serious?</p>

<p>NEWSFLASH! Harvard, Yale, MIT, and Stanford all have NONBINDING early acceptance programs. As any well-informed, intelligent person who knows anything about the admission practices currently used by American institutions of higher education can tell you, this is very different from the BINDING early decisions handed out by the other schools you list.</p>

<p>Yes, HYSM may give out a fair number of spots to students in the early round, and yes, a majority of those students tend to enroll (around 90% for Stanford SCEA, I believe), but they do not compromise standards of admission in order to maintain high yield, which schools like Penn do. Also, the fact that HYSM allow their early admits to apply to other schools gives those seeking financial aid a TREMENDOUS advantage if they are lucky enough to receive additional acceptances. During the month of April, these top institutions fight each other tooth and nail through the power of the purse. Savvy students can play financial aid offices off one another, and the schools themselves are all too willing to sweeten the deal. </p>

<p>So once again, I'll reiterate my point. You cannot directly compare Penn's yield numbers, as some in this thread have done, to those of HYSM, for the simple fact that half of Penn's entering class is legally required to attend following their acceptance.</p>

62

<p>

Only becuase they've made their choice earlier in the process and voluntarily sought to be so "legally required". To completely discount that earlier--and perhaps more strongly felt/expressed--preference is also misleading.</p>

63

<p>I almost applied to Stanford SCEA because I could and still not be required to go.</p>

64

<p>Sheldon, your posts are becoming rather petty and childish. The net effect of any of the "early" programs is to allow the students to show a strong preference for, and be reviewed early for, their top choice for college. It's a benefit for both parties - reduced uncertainty for both sides. Whether it's legally binding or not is essentially irrelevant- will Columbia or Dartmouth prosecute a student because he/she decides not to accept their ED offer and go to Princeton; I think not. You're splitting hairs for what ultimately amounts to a meaningless item. </p>

<p>Either way, early programs on the whole do influence application processes and yields. And regular decision yields (i.e., w/o the full impact of the early programs) do reflect a certain pecking order/prestige factor among undergrad students. That order is roughly H Y S M Pr Pe B D Cu Co Ch Du. That's not academic quality mind you, simply a reflection of who's hot right now. I think that's what really bugs you here - this new universe doesn't fit with your conception of how things should be. LOL</p>

<p>Re compromising standards.....dude you're dreamin. If Penn's (and Columbia, Duke, Cornell, Brown, Chicago, etc.) rising SATs, increasingly diverse and global student bodies and more accomplished freshmen represent "lowering standards" in your book, you should burn that book. All the top schools are getting top students. HYSPM get more than their fair share, but not becase of SCEA or EA or any other non-binding program. It's becase those schools are the VERY pinnacle of American higher ed. They as a group have the best reputations, strongest faculties, wealthiest endowments and unrivalled connections in the business/political/intellectual worlds. That's why smart kids choose them first. And although I don't place much credence in the Revealed Preference study, it bears that fact out. Those schools are collectively the top, and students matriculate to them based on that fact. ED/EA/SCEA doesnt have a D*MN thing to do with it. To claim otherwise make you look like a clown.</p>

<p>Re financial aid, the Ivy's (as part of the DoJ agreement from the late 80s) (1) do not to collude on financial aid and thereby shaft applicants re $$$ and (2) are as a group nowhere near as generous as their multibillion dollar endowments would allow. The "tremendous advantage" re fin aid you claim via RD processes is ludicrous; unless you show me mutliple sets of data where students in RD get nearly full rides from one Ivy after negotiating their fin aid offer your point is full of *****. More likely, a non-Ivy like Duke, Rice etc will get aggressive to get top students from the Ivies by offering huge packages. I suspect, the $$$ competition is not in the Ivies, it's from outside that group. If that's the case and students are shopping that far, they shouldn't apply ED anyway.</p>