<p>Does anyone here know the acceptance rate for those who didn't get in EA and thus were thrown into the RD pool? Is the rate lower since H has already reviewed you and might not be interested or is it higher since you showed enthusiasm for Harvard and are more likely to attend if accepted?</p>
<p>Some thoughts please.</p>
<p>Thank you.</p>
<p>I read last year's numbers and I believe that the rate was lower.</p>
<p>I've seen no indication that Harvard takes into account for admissions how enthusiastic students seem to be about Harvard. With the highest yield in the country, applicants' enthusiasm is not a factor in admissions.</p>
<p>Given Harvard's interest in maintaining that high yield, however, I would wager that there is an undeniable, though minimal and highly subjective, benefit to a tone of enthusiasm in an applicant's file. The statistics seem to show that EA application alone does not communicate that interest especially.</p>
<p>The only encouragement I can provide is my hope that if Harvard had two applicants for one slot who were exactly equal in every respect except their desire to attend, the applicant demonstrating greater sincere enthusiasm would be accepted.</p>
<p>" I would wager that there is an undeniable, though minimal and highly subjective, benefit to a tone of enthusiasm in an applicant's file. The statistics seem to show that EA application alone does not communicate that interest especially.</p>
<p>The only encouragement I can provide is my hope that if Harvard had two applicants for one slot who were exactly equal in every respect except their desire to attend, the applicant demonstrating greater sincere enthusiasm would be accepted."</p>
<p>I have seen absolutely no evidence that the above is true. First, the example is ridiculous. There are no 2 applicants who are exactly equal.</p>
<p>Second, virtually all Harvard applicants are very enthusiastic about Harvard. It is most people's clear first choice. The applicants who aren't enthusiastic about Harvard (an example would be students with absolutely no interest in Harvard who were forced to apply because of pushy parents) do not do good jobs on their applications or interviews.</p>
<p>The thoughtfulness and care that makes a good application or interview simply isn't there. They show up at the interview late and wearing clothes that it looks like they slept in. They answer questions as briefly as possible, preferably just by saying "yes" or "no." They frankly state that the only reason that they applied is because their parents wanted them to.</p>
<p>There will not be a decision needing to be made between applicants like this and other applicants. Applicants who haven't bothered to take time with their application or to answer questions in their interview simply aren't in the running. Meanwhile, thousands of other excellent, prepared applicants are.</p>
<p>Harvard has no problems maintaining its yield because it's most applicants' top choice. The new financial aid policies also make it a very attractive place for the low and lower income applicants, thus ending the financial attraction of Princeton.</p>
<p>Of course it's an unrealistic example, and I don't mean to suggest that enthusiasm plays a huge role. But I don't think you can discount the value of showing an interest in the school. People who genuinely don't want to attend, as you described, will submit poor applications, but people who just aren't enthusiastic can still do a very good job. Surely as an interviewer you've encountered someone who came to their interview on time and spoke in complete sentences, but preferred another school for whatever reason?</p>
<p>In an applicant pool of 20,000, I think you would find at least a few strong students for whom Harvard is <i>not</i> their top choice. Indeed, you noted its yield comes from it being "most applicants' top choice." I agree with that "most," but with a non-100% yield, it's clearly the case that there are a few students with solid applications and lackluster interest who get accepted.</p>
<p>As Harvard wants to reduce that figure, another applicant with similar credentials might get the nod over one who is also excellent and prepared but has not communicated any especial desire to attend.</p>
<p>I'm not suggesting this happens a lot, only that it's a good idea, if you have a passion to attend, to let that communicate sincerely.</p>
<p>In most years, the admit rate for EA deferreds is similar to - or only slightly below - the admit rate for RD applicants.</p>
<p>whatever the admit rate it is still ridiculously low</p>
<p>and nsm, I know of one student who is very well qualified but got into Yale EA and just applied to H to have bragging rights! I cannot stand these people!</p>
<p>
[quote]
Second, virtually all Harvard applicants are very enthusiastic about Harvard. It is most people's clear first choice. The applicants who aren't enthusiastic about Harvard (an example would be students with absolutely no interest in Harvard who were forced to apply because of pushy parents) do not do good jobs on their applications or interviews.
[/quote]
I disagree with this. If Harvard was every applicant's first choice, its yield would be 100% instead of 80%.
That means 20% of the students who Harvard wants, don't want Harvard back. </p>
<p>For many great students, Harvard is not their "clear first choice" and for whatever reason, they choose not to enroll. I, for example, chose Princeton over Harvard, and many of my peers choose to attend schools of similar calibre to Harvard like Yale or Princeton (be it for the student body, college atmosphere, undergraduate focus) or they may choose a school that is more distinguished in their preferred field of study (eg the engineering enthusiast who prefers to attend MIT instead of Harvard). To that extent, and in answer to the OP's question, I beleive that if you show enthusiasm for Harvard (and it doesn't necesarily have to be through applying EA) then you become a more appealing candidate. The question is: does Harvard care?</p>
<p>well put gianievve, i completely agree =P</p>
<p>And also NSM, take it easy on the Harvard boosting--many kids also fall into the prestige trap once admitted into Harvard plus other schools and simply pick Harvard because it has the best name on the list.</p>
<p>". If Harvard was every applicant's first choice, its yield would be 100% instead of 80%.
That means 20% of the students who Harvard wants, don't want Harvard back. "</p>
<p>I said that it's "most" student's first choice. It goes without saying that if it has an 80% yield, 20% of the students choose to go elsewhere. In some of those cases, however, Harvard still was their first choice, but they chose other colleges because of merit aid. I know one student who did that. She loved Harvard, but didn't feel comfortable turning down a full ride and other major perks from a top 25 university.</p>
<p>There is the historic fact that Harvard takes a huge fraction of the common admits relative to its leading "competitors" - Stanford, Yale, Princeton and MIT - in many cases in excess of 80%</p>
<p>Indeed, the greatest concern has to do with top students who are lost to schools other than the Ivies which award such students full-rides or substantial "merit aid" packages. </p>
<p>The Ivies are barred from awarding aid except on the basis of financial need, and find it hard to compete with "merit aid" or "athletic scholarship" awards to students who do not qualify for need-based aid. Half or more of Harvard's "losses" fit in this category. The applicants might well have preferred Harvard, but could not turn down a full-ride to Duke, UVa, Florida, Texas, etc etc.</p>
<p>Then again, the fact that the ivies dont give merit aid is one of the reasons I am applying. Aid money should go to those that truly need it, and I think one of the most appealing things about Harvard is its financial aid policies.</p>
<p>Northstarmom - "They show up at the interview... wearing clothes that it looks like they slept in"</p>
<p>I understand that looking at least casual when being interviewed for Harvard is highly recommended, but are you seriously gonna tell me that you would mark down a very enthusiastic, charming, intelligent, amazing student just because he or she attended the interview, as you put it, "[in the clothes] they slept in." Are you serious? - that is pretty darn rediculous if you ask me. If people based their thoughts about a person based no what he or she looks like, then I guess Albert Eistein would never have gained acclaim as a scientist - I mean, that crazy hair...</p>
<p>Not all people who can't afford really good clothes or just dress differently aren't qualified for Harvard. Maybe I'm alone in this world on this issue, but I don't care if a person has 18 piercings and tattoos and wears what society deams as "abnormal" clothing - if he or she is a truly amazing person (and student in this case) then I'd accept him or her in a heartbeat. I hope you would as well.</p>
<p>Ya i didn't really like the tone of NSM's post either.</p>
<p>Some ivies do provide merit aid. They don't call it merit aid. They call it "special awards" like Cornell Commitment or UPenn Ben Franklin Scholars, etc.</p>
<p>the abcdefghijklm gibberish name guy is bylerly. you can tell by the style and of course eloquece of the writing. Maybe i'm wrong, i dunno, i just heard that byerly has many names, and i'm sort of assuming this is one of them. Please correct me if I'm wrong alphabet person.</p>
<p>i dont think its byerly--cuz byerly is usually overly pro harvard whereas asadadsbads guy was making a case that harvard doesnt have as great of a yield as NSM and byerly were suggesting.</p>
<p>yea, yer right, never really read the post. However, bylerly does have many names. Interesting old guy. lol</p>