<p>Well, yield is a major reason as to why Princeton is maintaining its ED policy. Also, it has no problem with attracting applicants to apply early because, according to the revealed preference rankings, Princeton follows some type of strategic admissions, so it doesn't share as many cross-admits with HYS. Because of this, prospective applicants don't have to worry about being "stuck" at Princeton if they get in ED.</p>
<p>Princeton clings to ED because ED was the key to its earlier rise in yield rate - a rise that has stalled for a variety of reasons, including the difficulty of taking more than 50% of the class via ED.</p>
<p>Here are projected RD yield rates for the Class or 2009: H-71%; Prin-52%; Y-57.1%; S-55.7%.</p>
<p>Princeton needs ED, it fears, because it now loses most cross-admits to its chief rivals. I think it should, nevertheless, shift to SCEA at least, since the early yield rate would not suffer much (as HYS have shown) while the number of early applicants would rise substantially, facilitating "diversity" efforts.</p>
<p>But isn't the loss of cross-admits in RD due in part to exactly that, that Princeton is the only HYPS place left with ED? So all the kids who want Princeton first and foremost, not as a default from HYS, have already been accepted in ED? Whereas kids applying to HYS may still be making "strategic" applications due to legacies etc., coach recruting? Don't get me wrong, I did say in part.</p>
<p>No. The recent, sharp decline in the RD yield rate at Princeton is due, in my opinion, to a vastly different approach taken by Rapelye vs the Hargadon era.</p>
<p>As studies have shown, Freddie tended to avoid some of the very top candiates who he thought would opt for Harvard, Stanford, or, in some cases, Yale. The "Princeton type" - in shorthand.</p>
<p>Rapelye, to her credit, is no longer playing this game, and is going head to head for the top applicants. Not surprisingly. this has had an adverse affect on the yield rate - at least in the short run.</p>
<p>She will be under pressure if this results in the loss of many key recruits for Coach Tierney, et al, but the pending increase in class size should make it possible to have both apples and oranges - or ballet dancers and halfbacks, as it were.</p>
<pre><code> .
</code></pre>
<p>But how do you know this is the reason? Back in my day Princeton did go after the HY people. The Hargadon era was not long enough, IMO, to undo years and years and years of highly intellectual tradition. Do you really believe that the Princeton yield at RD is in no way due to ED vs EA at the other places?</p>
<p>I'm reluctant to rile you,Alumother, on the matter of your alma mater's track record in such matters, lest I be subjected to another series of indignant PMs.</p>
<p>I'll leave further response to the questions you raise to others.</p>
<p>It's a completely agenda-free question on my part. I always wonder where you get your information as it seems to be so comprehensive. So I just wondered where you got this info.</p>
<p>As long as you keep your answers to objective data and avoid making comments about me and particularly my daughter, I'm unlikely send to PMs. They are called personal messages for good reason. The question of EA/RD/ED is not a personal matter to me.</p>
<p>ALUMOTHER: sFORD TRYING CREATE SMOKE HERE. tHEY GET 12000 APPLICANTS FROM ca WITH MORE THAN 90% YIELD. sO THEY OVERADMIT ivy TYPES AT 20-30% RATE. tHEIR YIELD IS STILL 25% OR SO. avg YIELD LOOKS GOOFY AROUNF 50% OR SO BECUASE OF FOOLD ca APPLICANTS WITH 90% YIELD. iT IMPORTANT TO ASSOCIATE IT SELF WITH hyp NOT OTHERWIES. tHERE 50 TOP PREP SCHOOLS WILLONH TO FEED 40% ivy. tHEY HAVE ASUPPLY OF ABOUT 5000 KIDS READY TO GO IVY ANTTIME. sFORD MAY GET AROUND 100 OR SO OF THESE BY ADMITTING CLOST 500. ivy GET 10-15% FROM weST ANY HOW, THEY DO NOT HAVE TO FIGHT FOR IT. it STANFORD WHICH VERY LOW YIELD AMONG TOP pREP OF eAST. sEE MY TABLE ESTIMATE. i WOULD BET REALITY IS CLOSE TO WHAT i ESTIMATED. rEAL sTANFORD FIGHT IS ucb, cALTCH AND Mit NOT hyp. BUT uc pALO aLTO WONT ADMIT IT. IT IS STORY WITH WEAK FOUNDATION.</p>
<p>id attribute princeton's relatively lower yield (very minute if you look at it), to princeton's relative isolation. harvard has a nice urban feel. Y and S have a suburban feel, but still are close enough to urban areas that the city is accessible. from princeton it takes an hour to reach philly or new york. while thats not the "middle-of-nowhere" its not close enough for an impromptu weekend trip.</p>
<p>EDIT:
baba turn off ur caps lock. the trolling is annoying, what do you have against stanford? it was my #1 choice, and i would have taken it over HYP. (boohoo, im settling for my #2: Princeton)</p>
<p>proves my point.</p>
<p>settling cuz i was REJECTED from stanford, fool.</p>
<p>I can't buy your rationalization for yield differences based on location, because for the Class of 2006, at the end of the Hargadon era, Princeton's yield rate was 73.4% compared with Yale's 64.6%, and its RD yield was 59% compared to Yale's 52%. </p>
<p>Now, for the Class of 2009, Princeton's yield rate will be 67.6% and its RD yield a little under 52%, while Yale's yield will be a little over 71%, and its RD yield 57.1%.</p>
<p>As things go, this was not a "miniscule" but an absolutely astounding flip-flop.</p>
<p>Yale benefitted greatly by switching to SCEA and doubling the size of its early pool. Last year, it filled a record fraction of its class from the high yield early pool and from favorably disposed EA deferreds.</p>
<p>Princeton continued to fill a high fraction of the class via ED, despite a large drop in apps as marginal applicants flocked to the fashionable and newsworthy SCEA programs. But in addition to the drop in both ED and RD apps, Rapelye was also now admitting people RD who Hargadon had traditionally bypassed.</p>
<p>This year, Princeton's app total pretty much recovered from the previous year's decline - thanks to a switch to the common app and online apps - but the yield rate remained static. This tells me, very simply, that Rapelye has substantially remade the admissions operation to her specifications (and in accordance with her boss' wishes.) </p>
<p>It may be argued, I suppose, that Princeton has, in effect, intentionally surrendered the yield edge it "won" through Hargadon's "enrollment management" techniques, and that {Princeton's spot in the yield rate "pecking order" is more "normal."</p>
<p>baba you really need to get a life. this is really getting sad</p>
<p>differences of yield between YPS are very small. class sizes are small enough that error is large enough from year to year.</p>
<p>yeah ur almighty harvard is leaps and bounds ahead with respect to yield. yay for them.</p>
<p>any idiots know how many CA/West applicants in CA pool of 19000. I would say around 140000. GET the number before you open your trap.</p>
<p>Hey Anonymous I got rejected from my #1 choice Stanford and am settling with my #3 choice Yale. Stanford rejects unite!</p>
<p>I didn't know that 140,000 west coast applicants apply to Stanford from a pool of 19,000. Must be that West Coast magic.</p>
<p>did i ever argue with that? but now that you say it, theres no way stanford could accept 90% of CA applicants. its not a UC, and not even UCLA or Berkeley accept that many CA applicants.</p>
<p>stanford accepts 10% of 12000 of CA applicants. But their yield is around 90%. That leads to a fugure like 950 CA enrolling at Sford.</p>
<p>makes sense. flying across the country is expensive. theyve been demonstrated to show "tufts syndrome" for east coast applicants likely to get into HYPM because their yield is affected by travel costs.</p>