<p>I don't want to sound arrogant or elitist, but this is a question that has really been nagging me. Hopkins was my #1 choice, and I was crushed when I was waitlisted. I had attended every regional admissions conference, bought the sweatshirts, and followed the Hopkins Interactive blog since my sophomore year. I had written my essay specifically for Hopkins and put my heart into it; its topic was the one that I recycled for the Ivies, not the other way around. And because I was valedictorian, student body president, and did research in cardiology, I thought I had a decent chance of getting in.</p>
<p>I never imagined Hopkins as a school to play "the game," but I was surprised when students at my school with much lower stats, less in-depth ECs, and lackluster essays were accepted. There may be something about them that I do not know, and this is a very small sampling size, so I may be generalizing to an unfair extent. But has anyone else experienced this at their school? I just want to know. </p>
<p>I still have a special place for Hopkins in my heart, but because of this I have moved on and will be attending Stanford in the fall...</p>
<p>go Stanford! I think they don’t have yield protection, but yield protection inclinations. I mean, very suspicious but no one can make sure. I know it will make people angry if I say this, but I still want to say: what the heck makes you think Stanford is inferior to JHU?(for BME JHU may be better, but not getting into JHU doesn’t mean you won’t get into a decent graduate medical school) there are all sorts of schools that are not inferior to JHU, in rankings, in research opportunities, in reputations and all that. In fact I’ll be quite content with Stanford offer If I were you. So just move on and join the magical community in Silicon Valley! :D</p>
<p>If Hopkins had yield protection, then they would have admitted you based on what you’re saying because you would have gone in a heartbeat. </p>
<p>It’s my inclination that Hopkins is very hard on science/pre-med students. Were you pre-med?</p>
<p>I think the thing with college admissions is that clearly the other students were good enough, just as you were because you were WL’d but when it came down to admitting, the admissions officers thought that you weren’t as unique in the applicant pool as the other candidates, independent of gpa/rank/sat/essays/EC’s/etc.</p>
<p>Maybe your state (east coast??) is more rare @ Stanford than Hopkins? I dunno. </p>
<p>It could be anything, or perhaps something that has nothing to do with you. <em>shrug</em> I wouldn’t take it to heart and I wouldn’t yell yield protection either. Just two different groups of people coming to different conclusions. </p>
<p>Best of luck @ Stanford. You’ll have blast!</p>
<p>I’m pretty sure Hopkins doesn’t care that much about their yield. If they did, there are ways for them to easily raise it above the somewhat midling/low rate of ~30-32% each year.</p>
<p>There could be plenty of reasons why you were not a clear-cut accept. As I’m not an admissions officer, I wouldn’t know exactly for you. But, given Hopkins’s stature, history, and just the bare bones statistics, I think their waitlisting you had NOTHING, I repeat, NOTHING to do with yield protection or any type of “tufts-syndrome.” If it makes you feel better, then go with that. Just know that thousands of extremely qualified students apply to Hopkins each year, and while your star might be bright, theirs might be brighter ;)</p>
<p>hmmm yeah idk I do know the admit rate was the lowest it’s ever been (20%)…but that’s only because this year there were the most applicants there have ever been lol
I don’t think that’s the case either. :)</p>
<p>Also, the Hopkins Insider Blog stated that the class of 2014 was the strongest in history, matching or surpassing the major stats from last year. So its not like ****-ass applicants were admitted over others.</p>
<p>I got in. And I would consider myself in any of the categories of “much lower stats, less in-depth ECs, and lackluster essays.” This is not to be arrogant either. Since JHU shares a lot of cross-admits with HYPMS (as in most people who got into JHU also got into HYPMS), I would say that they aren’t yield protecting. Premeds and BMEers often choose JHU and it’s extremely prestigious. JHU has no reason to yield protect. Like another poster said, if they were really yield protecting, their yield would be higher than 30%.</p>
<p>Sorry if I offended anyone. I was just looking for opinions - condescending replies are not necessary ;)</p>
<p>I wonder why any school of JHU’s caliber would be content with a 30% yield? If they truly were happy with that number, then…well, it’s not a very good sign of their willingness to address other mediocre issues.</p>
<p>I don’t think they are content with a 30% yield. But they aren’t going to lower their admissions standards just to have a higher yield. Either way, they have underestimated their yield for 2 years in a row, so it is improving.</p>
<p>I just think Hopkins isn’t going to play the WashU or Tufts game by filling their class in Early or off the waitlist with kids who are below what they expect but who are very interested. In my opinion, these schools sacrifice the quality of what they are looking for to fill the class early (or off the WL), placing the RD kids at a complete disadvantage. </p>
<p>Hopkins has an astronomically strong applicant pool (hence the lower (30%) yield) and they get amazing students out of the bunch. The difference is that Hopkins doesn’t play the game the other schools do. </p>
<p>According to the National Science Foundation (NSF), Johns Hopkins performed $1.68 billion in science, medical and engineering research in fiscal year 2008. NSF has ranked the university #1 among U.S. academic institutions in total science, medical and engineering Research and Development spending for the 30th year in a row, and it is among the most cited institutions in the world.[10]</p>
<p>They don’t need to play games. Hopkins is an incredible place… for the right kid.</p>
<p>Some people need to stop being so arrogant (bellaxtrixie).
Do you think Hopkins WANTS a lower yield? A lot of factors go into it and most of them are beyond Hopkins’s control. For example: location. Baltimore is not as bad as everyone thinks it is, but the point is: EVERYONE THINKS IT’S BAD. If Harvard were in Detroit, I’m willing to bet its yield rate would be a good 10% lower along with several other things in between.
That’s just ONE example of the many factors that can affect yield.
Also, Hopkins has been a prestigious and well-regarded school since its founding. It doesn’t play the game of waitlisting and twisting stats to hop up the rankings of prestige (like certain other schools) because it has been held in high regards for quite a while. And maybe Hopkins doesn’t care to spend millions of dollars trying to boost its yield so that it can spend that much more on its students? on financial aid? on faculty recruitment? On fixing buildings? </p>
<p>Anyways, don’t try to denigrate a school with more than a century’s worth of respect and prestige just because you didn’t get the big “accepted” package. You’re just one person, and I’m sorry if I’m being mean, but you’re not AS important as you think you are.</p>
<p>@ Hope - Shouldn’t investing money on improving student life, financial aid, faculty recruitment, and campus beatification improve yield though?</p>
<p>And Hopkins’ inherent value, even beyond its prestige, is inarguable. It is just suspicious that schools of the same “tier” - Duke, for example - are now relying on waitlists more, for whatever reason.</p>
:D</p>