<p>If I'm not mistaken, Harvard and Princeton didn't have early programs last year, but have reopened them up this year. Does anyone think this might have an impact on Yale's SCEA program? The people in the past who wanted to go to HYPS school had to pick either Yale or Stanford, and now that Harvard and Princeton have opened up, will SCEA enrollment plummet this year? If it does, will it change the acceptance rate, or will Yale just accept fewer students in early action?</p>
<p>If the Early App talent gets spread out, I think they will accept less students early. They only want to accept students they would definitely accept in the regular pool.</p>
<p>I would count on the number of Yale SCEA applications to go down and the number admitted to go down as well. I don’t see this having any significant effect on ones admissions chances although Yale may see an even higher yield amongst its SCEA admits. As always, candidates will be admitted SCEA who would clearly be admitted under RD and all the rest will be deferred or rejected.</p>
<p>I believe the goal will be, as before, to fill approximately half the entering class from the early pool and the early applicants initially deferred. </p>
<p>Thus the number admitted will remain essentially the same. Fewer “true” Harvard or Princeton applicants will be in the early applicant pool who simply applied early to Yale because it was a “no lose” option. </p>
<p>The fraction of the early admits who matriculate at Yale should rise, as the “true” Harvard and Princeton applicants have been excluded from the early applicant pool, and there will be fewer cross-admit losses from this group.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Very few applicants are “clear admits” to places like Yale.</p>
<p>I think it’s hard to say. What, for example, did Yale do last year with top early applicants who were Harvard or Princeton legacies? Did it accept them, in the hope of luring them away from the legacy school, or did it defer them, thinking they weren’t really that interested in Yale?</p>
<p>Interestingly, at my D’s school, which is a public school with an IB magnet, and has a lot of kids who apply to these schools, it appears that quite a few kids will be applying to Princeton early, and a couple to Yale–but the scuttlebutt hasn’t revealed anybody planning to apply to Harvard early. These may reshuffle, of course.</p>
<p>I doubt Yale is interested in “luring” students away from other top schools, unless the student is so brilliant as to be a shoo-in. They have plenty of applicants they’d love to admit. I doubt they even consider it.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>These are exactly the students that are accepted to Y (or H&P) in the EA round. And the reason they do so is to have extra time to woo these students who will likely get other acceptances to selective schools if they apply RD. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Yes, all of these schools have plenty of qualified candidates, but all they all also want to matriculate the strongest fr class possible.</p>
<p>They certainly do want to lure “hooked” students, because there aren’t enough of them to go around. I’m sure that’s at least part of why H and P brought back early action–they probably lost some cross-admits.</p>
<p>I don’t think it was so much “losing cross admits” as losing some desirable applicants who decided to settle for the “bird in the hand” after getting into Yale or Stanford early.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I wish that were true at my school. I know of 11 kids so far applying to Harvard EA, not including me.</p>
<p>It would seem smart to apply to Yale early if one’s orientation and strengths are more STEM related, and to apply to Harvard early if one’s strengths and orientation are more humanities related. Just to play the odds…</p>
<p>@yalemom15:
Am I to infer that your comment meanw that Yale has stronger humanities and Harvard has stronger STEM and to apply to the less popular side of the school as a strategy?</p>
<p>There is a moderate impact…</p>
<p>For one, just look at the pledge threads - last year in the first four days of the thread 48 people pledged to post stats, this year in the same period only 32 have pledged. I know this is not a secure indication, but there still is a 1/3 difference.</p>
<p>That doesn’t mean, however, that Yale will start filling up its class with mediocre applicants from its early action pool. But if the school’s policy still is to admit half of its entering class early, then, statistically, the chance of the strong candidates getting in now is higher.</p>
<p>What I am saying is - weak applicants won’t get in more easily because Yale has not scaled down its criteria, but stronger candidates will have better chances because the competition for one spot will be numerically smaller. :)</p>
<p>There is no way that Yale is going to admit the same percentage of the class through SCEA if the number of SCEA applicants declines (as would be expected). I do not think that “stronger” candidates will have any additional admissions chances if those numbers decline. It will be interesting to see the numbers across HYP less than two months from now.</p>
<p>My feeling is they will admit fewer EA because they will expect a higher yield and thus still be able to fill half their class. Also, my guess is the caliber needed to be admitted early will fall slightly but still be high. By that I mean as opposed to being deferred->accepted last year, the same candidate this year will just be accepted.</p>
<p>^^ I agree, i think they will admit less students. Cause they can now assume that the kids who apply Early are the ones who want to go to Yale in the first place. I am not sure about the deferred and accepted parts…but it will be interesting to see how this plays out! :)</p>
<p>My guess is that Yale would hold the line on the qualities of the students they admit during the EA round like last year without setting a set number of slots. It would make no sense for them to turn away outstanding students just because the overall EA application goes down. However, it would also make no sense for Yale to admit students with lower credentials during EA. Adcom people have been in this bussiness for many years and they knew what kind of students they want to admit ;-).</p>
<p>Don’t downplay the importance of anticipated yield as a factor in how many will be admitted from the early pool and from early pool applicants initially deferred. After all, the main reason (if not the only reason) for having an early admissions program is to goose the yield rate.</p>
<p>The only reason schools hang back from filling an even higher fraction of the class with early pool applicants is that studies show that the overall number of applicants is adversely affected when students gain the impression that few slots remain for those who apply in the “regular” round. I think the consensus is that taking more than half the class from the early pool is a “tipping point” after which “regular” application numbers are adversely affected.</p>
<p>I seriously doubt that the overall size of the applicant pool - assuming there is no substantial decline in the numbers - is a critical factor in determining how many are admitted early. The goal is to admit as many from this high-yield pool as possible without unduly depressing the size of the regular pool. </p>
<p>If the number of “true” Princeton or Harvard applicants in Yale’s early pool is now reduced because those schools have resumed their own early programs, then Yale will happily anticipate that continuing to fill virtually half the class from the early pool will help turn around small but steady declines in the overall yield rate in each of the last 5 years.</p>
<p>Cottonmather,</p>
<p>Your arguement makes sense in general but there is a caveat. The yield is inversely related with the quality of the applicants. If the yield is the primary concern, Ivy schools would all benefit from admitting mediocre students in the EA pool since the yield would be certainly above 80%, may even above 90%. For the students with top SAT scores (700 and above), the yield for Yale is under 60%. However, these group of applicants with the lowest yield actually constitute more than 80% of the admitted students. The reason for going after the low yield, high achieving students is the retention and graduation rates, which is as dear to the Adcom as the yield.</p>