<p>Yield tells me what a bunch of 18 yos think. Big whoops.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Where did you get that half price idea? according to PR, Tulane total cost is at 48,500, NYU is around 55,000 and just about any ives are at 55,000 as well, Tulane is a bit lower, not much more.</p>
<p>You ignored the comment about merit aid. The comment was specifically about the top students Tulane is trying to attract away from the Duke/Vandy/Wash U type schools. Tulane offers more merit aid than any other school in the top 50 that I know of. Upon acceptance, the better students are offered $25,000/yr, $22,000/yr, $20,000/yr, $15,000/yr or $7,500/yr (all number were what was offered the class entering this fall). A very large number of the awards are in that upper range. There is also a full tuition scholarship and other awards that require a separate application, but these offers are made with no other application required based on material presented for admission. Students that get the $25,000 award and some of those that get the $22,000 award are also offered a spot in the Honors Program. Therefore for these students, the COA is about half, assuming they don’t get merit scholarships from these other schools, many of which offer no merit scholarships or very few. These students are still eligible for need based FA from Tulane if they need it for the remainder of the cost.</p>
<p>While hoping this thread won’t become another focus on Tulane’s marketing strategy, we happened to have a discussion with DS over dinner last night, as he heads back to NOLA in a week or so. His initial journey had been much like what luckyme and fallenchemist described- enjoyed his visit and loved the financial incentives he has that were too good to turn down, and ultimately the real tipping point for him. That said, as he reflected back on this choice and this first two years of school, he did comment that he found the academics and courses he’s chosen to be more rigorous and challenging than he’d expected, and his last words were, as his eyes lit up a bit… “I get to go to school in New Orleans!”</p>
<p>Back to the original topic, I was also reading a thread in the Harvard forum about this article by Michelle Hernandez [Dr</a>. Michele Hernandez: Harvard Hampers Admissions at All Top Colleges](<a href=“HuffPost - Breaking News, U.S. and World News | HuffPost”>Harvard Hampers Admissions at All Top Colleges | HuffPost College) where she said
Do you agree? What about the impact of the common and universal app in the increasing # of applications being sent, and thus its impact on acceptance and yield numbers?</p>
<p>The commonapp seems to me something that was (is) a good idea in theory, and a horrible idea in execution – making the cost of applying to an incremental school so much less. I wonder who will be the first to blink and pull back <em>out</em> of the commonapp.</p>
<p>"Despite these daunting statistics, a handful of extraordinary applicants are now nearly overwhelmed by thick envelopes while many who are merely energetic, merely talented, and merely brilliant have been shut out from the most selective schools.
"</p>
<p>If that’s the case then that’s what it should be. Sounds like the very top schools are able to fill their student bodies with extraordinary students, and the merely brilliant go to somewhat less competitive schools. What’s the problem?</p>
<p>I think Hernandez could have worded that better. Sounds like she was talking about a “handful” of truly exceptional kids who get beaucoups acceptances. These schools consistently talk about the large number of students who would be qualified to attend their school, but that there simply isn’t room for all. Besides, if they only took the tippy top, they would lose that “putting the best class together” component of which they speak and seem to prize. Might possibly be a boring group. </p>
<p>Hernandez went on to say
</p>
<p>Agreed, jym. The subject of the Tulane strategy has been covered pretty completely. I am quite glad that your S feels Tulane was such a good choice for him. D feels the same so far, and I think this year is going to be even better for her in many ways.</p>
<p>As far as that article, wasn’t there a pretty lengthy thread on that not long ago? The reactions to her claims were pretty negative as I recall. I tend to agree with Northstarmom on this one. I think Hernandez is off base, on a few counts. First of all one cannot blame it all on Harvard. Someone that really wants Harvard simply takes their chances by forgoing ED at some other schools. It has been shown many times that while ED applicants get in at a higher rate, they also are more self-selectively better students. In any case if a student is truly qualified for Harvard but doesn’t happen to get in, they will get in many fine schools, likely including an Ivy or two. I think her premise that these students will be “shut out” because they took a chance on Harvard or another non-ED school is just wrong. After all, the Ivies are full and their stats are quite high, along with the rest of the top schools. How does that gibe with her premise?</p>
<p>Beyond that, we have a principle in this country called the free market. I know it is eroding quickly, but hopefully there is enough of it left for people to support that schools are free to, and should be encouraged to take whatever admissions strategy they desire. That’s just life if it doesn’t work out for a certain number of students because the decisions made by Harvard force them to make a choice of how to proceed. Harvard admission is not a right they have, stats notwithstanding. Hernandez practically makes it sound like it is. Her points are superficial and incomplete, IMO.</p>
<p>Now would it be simpler in many ways if every school agreed to the same rules and the same timetable? Probably, although there could be issues with that too. But I think that having these choices and the differences out there are beneficial on the whole. Harvard is rather unique, no question, but it really is not the problem, if there even is a problem.</p>
<p>Several argued that Hernandez’s vested interest in Harvard’s change in their admissions process may have hurt her bottom line, those clients or potential clients who have the grades and the $$$$$ to accept an ED acceptances without concern about the cost. While surely she still has plenty of customers, I think there is merit to that argument.</p>
<p>I have no vested interest in Hernandez or H or college counseling and I said the exact same thing back when we had a running thread the days H&P announced their change in policy.</p>
<p>Both Hernandez and NSM are correct. Harvard did what Harvard thought was best for Harvard. Ditto Princeton. The fact that there are repercussions downstream is not their concern, nor should it be.</p>
<p>Tulane University is a fabulous school. A lot of non southerners apply there and then when admitted they don’t attend because of money, or they get nervous about New Orleans etc. I have a kid who did an amazing fellowship in New Orleans and came away enthralled with the city, and Tulane. </p>
<p>To call Tulane a safety is laughable. Its very prestigious. Perhaps for those with noses in the air about Vanderbilt or Duke or the Ivy League. But nobody should ever consider Tulane a 'last choice" school, in my opinion. </p>
<p>It may or may not be your cup of tea for whatever reason. Fine. But its an outstanding academic school and the experience in New Orleans is an added plus giving students a wonderful perspective on life, helping others and the amazing cultural melange that New Orleans and the Deep South provide.</p>
<p>Appreciate the kind words, ghostbuster. Of course I feel much the same. Safety, though, is an entirely relative term. If someone has a 3.8 UW GPA and 700, 700, 700 on the SAT’s, they have a very high probability of getting into Tulane, assuming all else is normal. If that person asked me for advice, I would feel comfortable telling them Tulane is a school they are very likely to get into (I prefer “likely” to “safety”), while a U Chicago or Duke would be at least somewhat of a reach. There is no denying some schools have higher thresholds for admission than others.</p>
<p>At the risk of offending my good friends who are great fans of Tulane, I seriously doubt that Hernandez had Tulane or similar ranked schools in mind when she made the comments quoted above. As far as hurting her bottom line, I’d wager that an admission world without ED or REA would make her services even more valuable to her typical clientele, as admissions would be more difficult. </p>
<p>And, fwiw, there is NOTHING demeaning or insulting in being labeled a safety. For instance, in Texas, thousands and thousands of students can call the University of Texas or Texas A$M their safety … simply because they know they will be accepted automatically. Many who are worried about the final rankings that might kill their chances to gain an automatic admission will reply to the no-fee, pre-filled application from Tulane and consider the school a different type safety. </p>
<p>Last but not least, nobody should be offended by the fact that many students who are admitted at Tulane never considered HAVING to attend. That is how most everyone feels about the schools they rank as safeties. If also happens that the safeties in the selective world of CC are reaches and high matches for the overwhelming percentage of students in the nation.</p>
<p>xig,
was trying to get the conversation offa poor Tulane and back onto the original topic about the admissions data when I posted the quote from Hernandez. Am still postulating about the changes in admissions caused by things like schools that no longer offer ED, those that no longer offer EA, no-loan programs for low-middle income families, and the increased use of the common and universal app on the changing trends in admissions… Your thoughts??</p>
<p>
</p>
<ol>
<li>More applications from qualified applicants, but also many times more from unqualified applicants who are lulled by the ease of filling the common application.</li>
<li>Many schools appear to be a lot more selective than they truly are</li>
<li>Most commentators have yet to understand that yield has nothing to do with the number of applications</li>
<li>I have not changed my mind about how great NOLA is. I do, however, have to admit that is has become a fertile terrain for school reform</li>
</ol>
<p>Yes, they were completely separate issues. No one was offended in the least, in fact it is Tulane’s strategy to get rejected 5 out of 6 times, as I think you said. I think “we” can stand it. I was simply pointing out how the term safety is so completely relative. Tulane a good example for that, as many schools would be. One student could be 99.5% sure they will get into Tulane, another 99.5% sure they won’t. That’s all.</p>
<p>xiggi, can you expand on #4? I don’t understand the “have to admit” part. Aren’t both parts of your comment positive?</p>
<p>For my son and I Tulane is by far and away our second favorite school ever. He was accepted in the fall and was offered a great scholarship. So when the rejections started to come in for the tougher schools it was bad, but probably not nearly as bad as it would have been without knowing he ccould go to Tulane. By April 1 he was accepted at three of the more prestigious - I won’t say better - schools. The final vote was Rice 2 (My son and I) and Tulane 1 (my wife) so he’ll be starting at Rice next week. But I have nothing bad to say about Rice, especially their admisisons office. If he hadn’t been accepted at Rice we’d be very excited about him stating Tulane now.</p>
<p>Great choices, birdrock!</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>FC, oh that was a reference to the past and a bit of an insider joke for Jym. To clarify things, you should know that I have been one of the harshest and unapologetic critics of the city of New Orleans before, during, and after Katrina.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Haha, Jym … I wonder why. ;)</p>
<p>^^ You know me too well, xig.</p>
<p>I have a few friends whose kids are doing Teach for America in NOLA. Maybe they’ll get that school system fixed yet.</p>