Is WPI Clipping the top as well as the bottom?

This years freshman class was quite large so I’m assuming they had a good yield and it worked.

They reportedly underestimated yield and were over-enrolled! A number of upperclassmen who had requested dorm housing were asked to find other living arrangements because they needed the dorm space for the “extra” freshmen.

If WPI’s goal was to increase yield, it worked very well. Return rate on admitted students was 22% in 2017. The return rate in 2018 jumped to 27%. Also note that the average GPA for the class of '22 reached a record, unweighted high on a 4 point scale of 3.89.

It is possible that genuine interest in a University’s program may contribute to the students’ high graduation rate? Are the students at Stanford & company highly motivated to be there? Does this pride and interest contribute to their positive attitude?

As already pointed out by ucbalumnus, the “level of applicant interest” is listed as a consideration in section C7 of WPI’s CDS.

Another complicating factor often not discussed is the balancing of the FA budget in a community of limited funds. The vast majority of universities and colleges have limited funds on a per capita basis. It would be good to assist those students who need the FA to make possible their participation in the university/college they truly want to attend. These FA offers need to be presented out front at the time of admission. Institutions need to make educated budgetary guesses. This is the chief argument against “merit” money at institutions which have strong enough applicant pools.

(For the math heads, remember that larger data sets improve the accuracy of your result. It may make budgetary life easier at very large universities)

Belonging to a team with shared interests may actually contribute to the success of the group!

Please note, I am not part of the WPI admissions office. However, I can see many reasons for universities to prefer spirited team participants in the educational process.

WPI '67