How does Tufts syndrome play into the calibur of students accepted ED?

Applying to College
1

<p>I'm a senior in high school and I recently applied early decision to the Tufts school of engineering, and I was curious if the classic "tufts syndrome" makes the pool of applicants to Tufts committing to early decision any less competitive. I know that students in the RD pool are sometimes dismissed by the admissions office as students applying to Tufts as a safety school and unlikely to attend, but since everyone in the Ed pool is committed the admissions office doesn't make the distinction. I couldn't find anywhere if the overall stats were lower for ED applicant than RD applicants, so I was wondering if anyone could fill me in.</p>

<p>Thanks</p>

2

<p>according to a quantitative rating system that evaluates “head to head” student acceptance situations between schools… last year [2010] Tufts was ranked #27 among all national universities and liberal arts schools. </p>

<p><a href="http://college./college-rankings.php?thisYear=2010&thisCategory=ALL%5B/url%5D">http://college./college-rankings.php?thisYear=2010&thisCategory=ALL</a></p>

<br>

<br>

<p><a href="http://www./blog/2009/07/10/new-college-rankings/%5B/url%5D">http://www./blog/2009/07/10/new-college-rankings/</a></p>

<p>An explanation of the rating system by “**************” is below. </p>

<p>We have implemented the MyChances College Rankings based on revealed student preference. In this system, the college admissions process is treated like a chess tournament. The colleges play matches (which occur when 2 colleges admit the same student). In each match, there is a winner (the college that the student ends up attending) and a loser. The winner gains points; the loser forfeits them. When a high-ranked school beats a low ranked school, the high-ranked school gains few points, and the low-ranked school loses few points. If a low-ranked school beats a high-ranked opponent, it gains more points than if it beat an equally-matched opponent. After playing many games, the colleges that students prefer rise naturally to the top of the rankings.</p>

<p>Does the method of revealed student preference meet the 3 criteria outlined above? I believe it does.</p>

<p>Consider point #1 (gaming the system). Imagine that MIT wanted to beat out Harvard by trying hard to avoid admitting any students that they thought would be admitted to Harvard. They would end up succeeding in a model based on acceptance rate and yield (since their yield would likely increase), but their actual student body would be less qualified. In the revealed preference model, however, they would be less successful. They would not compete head-to-head with Harvard, so would ‘win’ more. But they would be winning against weaker ‘opponents’, earning fewer points for each victory.</p>

<p>For point #2 (relevance), the idea of revealed preference is that it aggregates the sum total of what matters to students – whatever those factors might be. It is likely that students behave rationally (by attending the school that they find most desirable). So long as other students share similar values, then revealed preference rankings will work well in explaining, and even guiding, their decisions.</p>

<p>For point #3 (stability), the tournament style system is simple and straightforward. It is responsive to changes in student preference over time. It does not rely on aggregations of various statistical factors, or college faculty survey results; nor does it depend upon arbitrary weighting of those factors.</p>

<p>The details of the procedure that we use to generate the rankings, and our use of chess-style Elo points, will be explained in a later post. For an academic treatment of a similar college ranking system, I recommend the working paper, “A Revealed Preference Ranking of U.S. Colleges and Universities,” 2005, by Christopher Avery, Mark Glickman, Caroline Hoxby, and Andrew Metrick (free link).</p>

3

<p>Two years ago the valedictorian of my school was waitlisted at Tufts. My SAT score is ~2300 and it’s on my reach list. I don’t think Tufts is really a safety for anyone anymore, though it might be a fairly safe bet for people with really awesome stats and who are really interesting.</p>

<p>A few years ago when Tufts was less selective this may have been the case, but it’s not too relevant anymore. There are a lot of others schools that seem to practice “Tufts syndrome” a lot more. What Tufts does do is consider “fit” and expressed interest in their decision, so they may pick an applicant with lower stats who is a better match for their school over a “better” applicant who would be better off going somewhere else. This is moreso to ensure that the students that end up matriculating will be successful and happy (and not transfer out) than to project yeild. Many private colleges, especially LAC’s and small universities like Tufts, take this sort of thing very seriously.</p>

<p>Obviously, there would be no need for “Tufts syndrome” in the ED pool anyway because the yeild rate is garunteed to be close to 100%. Will they take students with lower stats to fill more of their class from ED? Of course, but it also creates some real benefit for the applicants as well in that more students get into the school that is truly their first choice. I am applying RD, and it wouldn’t make me terribly upset if someone who applied ED with lower stats got in over me because he/she was clearly more committed. I certainly think yeild protection is a questionable practice, but it’s not to the benefit of the school or the student community if they admit a class that is unified solely by high academic preformance in high school and not, at the very least, a love of their future alma mater.</p>

<p>Also, I think that the ranking tuftsfan has showed us uses a far superior method to the US News’ way of determining rankings. However, their sample set is too small (limited to people who use the website) so there is not enough data for some schools and because it was recently implemented it is not yet stable. The assumption that all students share common interests is also a little weak. Carleton and Duke are both excellent schools, but they would not draw the same kind of student at all. Overall though, it is much more objective.</p>