<p>From the NY Times, the answer to the question we've all asked:</p>
<p>The last big shoe to drop this admissions season will be the colleges’ admission yields — which, for the benefit of our lay readership, is the percentage of applicants accepted by an institution who, in turn, accept that offer.</p>
<p>While typically tracked closely by the institutions themselves, those figures could have even more importance this year, as an indicator of how deep a toll the economic crisis has exacted on applicants’ final college choices.</p>
<p>My colleagues Tamar Lewin and Rebecca R. Ruiz and I have been polling some colleges and universities in the days since May 1, which is the deadline that many set for receiving deposits. While it is too early to draw firm conclusions about this year’s results, a handful of colleges and universities — including Harvard, Yale, Wesleyan and the University of Virginia, among others — have told us that their yields this year have not varied substantially from last year’s.</p>
<p>The yield numbers cited are very deceptive. The key term is the percentage of students that are receiving direct financial aid and how much. The only schools reporting are schools with huge endowments and financial aid budgets. These schools traditionally provide better aid than other schools and the difference may be even greater than usual. This would tip more students in their direction, not away.</p>
<p>I would suggest that we wait to see what all the other schools report.</p>
<p>Its not only a finaid issues. If, as I suspect, kids increased the number of schools they applied to, it won’t impact the colleges named above as much. So I think we need to hear from more schools.</p>
<p>More interesting than that the yield at Harvard has held steady is the report that yield at Connecticut College and Whitman is about the same as last year. As others have said, it is not surprising that yields have remained high at schools that meed full demonstrated need (or more, as at Harvard). More interesting will be the yield at schools that do not have the endowment resources to meet full demonstrated need.</p>
<p>Also, it will be interesting to look at what’s happening with families who don’t have demonstrated need. Will their children continue to go to expensive privates at the same rate, or will those families decide public school looks pretty darn good?</p>
<p>Based on limited samples, Smith seemed to send out acceptances with much less FA then competing schools, and is now on the NACAC list of schools with space available.</p>
<p>example female public school computer science applicant - with a bad case of senioritis and one AP Family income around $60K</p>
<p>RPI - accepted with lots of FA
Smith accepted no fin aid
U mass - accepted with some FA but not accepted to Comm college, Umass’s honors program. </p>
<p>(interesting that UMass is turning down Honors college applicants that are getting into Smith and RPI. HMMMM)</p>
<p>The article is interesting, these schools offered more FA to get their same yield. Also Th HYPS meet full need. So I think it will be good to know if full pays are going to these institiutions or the publics.
My D’s school called over 800 incoming freshman to make them aware that this is a big price tag, are you sure you want to come here, because we don’t give full need and we don’t want you dropping out after you realize you can’t afford us.</p>
<p>Next year’s applicants care. If a school can’t turn its accepted applicants into freshmen, it’ll have to accept more students. If a student is interested in a school whose yield is dropping, she’ll know she has a better chance. A dropping yield turns a reach into a match and a match into a safety.</p>
<p>Except for the fact that next year’s applicants will respond with more applications. Among all admissions statistics, yield remains the one that should interest students and families the least.</p>
<p>Actually, none of them have sent in deposits. Harvard doesn’t do deposits. You just tell them that you will enroll and they take your word for it.</p>
<p>^Wouldn’t that make their reported yield higher than their actual yield? They could get some people saying they’ll come immediately after acceptance but ultimately decide to go someplace else.</p>
<p>I don’t know, how many people do you think would really enroll at Harvard and then change their minds becuase they haven’t placed a deposit? I doubt it’s a substantial number.</p>
<p>Yield per se is not particularly interesting for next years applicants. But as Cardinal Fang points out, if a sharp drop in yield this year means that acceptance rates will go up next year, that is very interesting. Especially if this is true for some schools (2nd tier) and not for the Ivys and tippy-top LACs. At least, that is what I expect to see. We won’t know for sure until the common data sets come out, probably next fall.</p>
<p>I think one reason that some people are intrigued by yield stats is because they offer the (false) impression that they’re a proxy for prestige and for which schools are hot and which are not. This is wrong headed for dozens of reasons, but since there’s an undeniable general correlation btw. yield and perceived prestige, I think that this idea is out there.</p>
<p>I am very impressed with the enrollment management of some of the schools cited – coming within 2 - 5 students of the desired numbers for an incoming class! Amazing!</p>
<p>The NYT article mainly refers to well known top level privates and
some of the better publics. That yield remains stable at these places,
at least for this year, is no surprise. A careful examination of Ed acceptance
rates, stats for admits, and waitlist acceptees may reveal a very
carefully managed admissions cycle. We’ll have to wait to see those
stats and the yield stats for lesser known privates before drawing any
conclusions about yield. The article is a little premature</p>