<p>thanks, I was just wondering because my application status changed on the Tulane site to decision pending</p>
<p>Tulane has some really odd mathematics working with its acceptances and yield, doesn’t it? If Princeton Review website is correct, Tulane accepts only 26% of applicants but then only 15% of thos accepted choose to enroll. That must make it extremely difficult for the Tulane Admissions Dept to put together a class.</p>
<p>My daughter has been accepted–good news–and we’ll have to see what college she chooses to attend.</p>
<p>KY Crusader 75: I agree. It’s the same for all colleges, but more so for those with low matriculation percentages. If 20% of those who Tulane accepted chose to attend, rather than the 15% you mentioned, their Freshman class would have shot up 25%. Even with good modeling and forecasting, I bet some people in admissions have rough nights.</p>
<p>If there is an indication the yield may be greater than earlier predicted, then the use of the wait list becomes more likely. Accept fewer, if the yield is lower, then admit those who have accepted wait list positions.</p>
<p>Agree with the above. Also, didn’t mean to mislead about deferred and waitlisting. I was just trying to say that things do firm up some before May 1, even before April 1 to a large degree. That’s what I get for posting while running through airports, like now!</p>
<p>I was deferred and ended up getting in last week (I was regularly checking online)</p>
<p>Congrats mongoose - Do you think you’ll go? I wonder if this means decisions on EA deferreds are starting to come in. Any other deferreds hearing?</p>
<p>Great news mongoose8p, congrats!!!</p>
<p>Yep, great news, mongoose!</p>
<p>Very nice. I love when that happens.</p>
<p>@hgebs</p>
<p>It all depends on what USC says in the next couple weeks… if that doesn’t work out I’m probably heading to New Orleans… but for now I’ll keep praying</p>
<p>Interesting. S2 has already decided against USC. It was once his first choice. Unless something rather awful happens when we visit, it will be Tulane.</p>
<p>Mongoose, how did you hear? Through a status check online or via email?</p>
<p>He said he kept checking online. I am pretty sure they don’t send out e-mails.</p>
<p>Anyone have suggestions for how to increase yield? Persobally, my thought is to stop, or be much more selective with the free easy/fast application. If there is even a small application fee, it might weed out those who really don’t plan to attend and claim they just throw in the application for the heck of it. Might decrease the total # of apps but the current process causes more work for the adcomms with no LT benefit on yield. Also, this year they had 44k applications. If they charged a $20 app fee, that would net them $880,000 in $$ that could be used to hire more staff, put towards scholarships, dorm repair, whatever. Sorry to beat this drum again… just wondering…</p>
<p>Surely for many schools, the free application strategy is geared to generating more applications to enable the school to post a lower acceptance rates for the people who follow such measures.</p>
<p>jym: best way all schools increase yield is to institute an ED policy; yea, charging for apps wouldn’t hurt either though…</p>
<p>Agreed. And apparently whatever U of Chicago did this year led to a volumnous increas in applications (and with the # of essays they require, there must me some tired eyes up there!) . Still, TU needs, IMO to work more aggressibely on its yield. Wondered what peopel thought might help. Don’t want it to get the “Tufts Syndrome” reputation.</p>
<p>Sometimes schools defer because they think you are gaming them and not really serious about attending. You have to convey your serious application and your level of interest. Not saying that is what happened here. Admissions is a complex process and people get deferred for strange reasons, sometimes for reasons having nothing to do with stats and scores.</p>
<p>Chicago went to the Common App for the first time, that is why they saw such a huge increase.</p>
<p>Well, I also wouldn’t mind if Tulane started charging, but let me play devil’s advocate. First, they wouldn’t make $880,000 since the number of apps would drop. By how much is impossible to say. Still, they would obviously get some revenue.</p>
<p>Second, they want to fill 1400-1600 slots, with (I think) 1500 being the real target. At least that is the number until they increase dorm capacity. With that in mind, they are successfully doing just that. So why does it matter what the yield is? Even if one is concerned about USNWR rankings (which I think is a bad way to make policy) the weighting of the “yield” in those ranking calculations is low enough it wouldn’t make that much difference, I think.</p>
<p>Third, the academic goal to to keep improving the quality of the incoming classes. The free app/high rate seems to be accomplishing that. Apprently (and we have heard this anecdote many times here on CC) students that otherwise wouldn’t have given Tulane a second thought start looking into it once they apply and especially if they get some scholarship money early in the process. Then some of these top students visit, become enamored with Tulane and matriculate. I think that represents the core strategic thinking in implementing the free app in the first place.</p>
<p>My impression based on the complaints sometimes lodged here as well as pictures I have seen is that Tulane didn’t expect such a huge increase the last 3 years, and they are still using a somewhat “creaky” system to process everything rather than having modernized it into a more efficient process. This is an area they should really improve if they are going to keep the free app.</p>
<p>It would be interesting to charge $20 for a year and see what happens. But it wouldn’t bother me at all if they left it like it is, as long as they are convinced it is in the best interest of the university.</p>