<p>How reliable is the admissions data that is released to us?</p>
<p>I find it hard to believe that every school has a yield of >50% knowing that most kids apply to many schools and many kids receive more than 1 acceptance. The very high yields reported by the top boarding schools leads me to believe that either 1) there is sharing of information amongst the schools or 2) schools are under reporting the number of kids that were accepted but decided to go elsewhere (and instead classifying them as "rejections," to make their numbers look better and thus have their school appear more competitive).</p>
<p>How can all of these schools have such a high yield?</p>
<p>Are there any good boarding schools reporting a yield of <30%?</p>
<p>Well. Some kids apply to one, two, or three, especially if they are applying from “feeder schools,” or if they can stay at their current school. </p>
<p>Students attending “pre-preps” work with school counselors who know the admissions offices at prep high schools. I have the impression that these counselors skillfully try to find a place for every child applying. It works something like the process Shamus Khan outlined for <em>college</em> placement: <a href=“http://shamuskhan.files.■■■■■■■■■■■■■/2013/11/gettingin.pdf[/url]”>http://shamuskhan.files.■■■■■■■■■■■■■/2013/11/gettingin.pdf</a>. Information is shared, but not between schools. I believe the school counselors serve to manage the placement of their students to the next level.</p>
<p>So a strong student from a pre-prep might apply to one school, get in, attend. That drives up yield. </p>
<p>Schools also have a good feeling for where they sit in the pecking order. Some schools are very sensitive to whether or not they think they’ll yield a student. If you look at the result threads from past years, you’ll see quite a few threads in which a student was accepted by one school; few students seem to be able to choose from many schools. (Remember that the results threads are self-reported information.)</p>
<p>You must factor in that financial aid funds are limited; many more students apply who need financial aid than schools could take. The full pay students are more likely to apply to fewer schools, and to have someone advising them who can reassure schools as to their level of interest. </p>
<p>OK. I can believe the statistics reported and perhaps I am overestimating the number of schools applied and accepted to. But, are we operating on the honor system? I can imagine that an admissions office might be tempted to not include legacy students in the admission rates and consider these separately. Or perhaps when going through the wait-list, a student that would be admitted that declines the offer might not be counted as an eventual acceptance, thereby artificially inflating the yield. Just saying…How do we know the true number of applicants and the true number of acceptances? I think that there are many opportunities to game the system to create an impression of selectivity. </p>
<p>I think that a lot of kids applying to Exeter also applied to Andover and some got into both. There are a lot of kids that apply to many schools for the purpose of weighing different FA packages. </p>
<p>The issue is not that important because, in the end, an individual’s acceptance or rejection speaks for itself and parents/kids can be pleasantly surprised. Just seems like a lot of people on this site are pleasantly surprised and the stats don’t match up (by a lot).</p>
<p>CC is a very small, self-selecting sample. Not sure you can derive anything meaningful on this topic from the results posted here, certainly nothing that will shed any light on the integrity of how schools report yield.</p>
<p>At least for colleges, legacies are more likely to yield. I don’t know if it holds true for prep schools. I’d assume accepted students with significant FA are more likely to yield. A certain amount of insight comes from the application, I’d think. Day students are more likely to yield, as most parents would prefer to have their kids home. If the teachers get to send their kids to the school, they’ll usually attend, unless the parents prefer the local public, or there are specific reasons to choose another school. And they know the history of applications from their feeder schools. For example, I would expect Pike students to be very likely to accept Andover’s offer. So for many students, they may have choices, but the admissions people can predict quite a lot. They may use waitlists for kids they’d love to have, but feel are unlikely to get. Colleges have been accused of using waitlists to keep admissions rates low.</p>
<p>This site isn’t a representative sample. And many posters disappear on March 10th.</p>
<p>Here’s a question for the OP…why does the yield matter to you at this point in the process (if I understand correctly, your family is in search/application mode)? Does a higher yield make a school more appealing to you/your kid? Sort of an implied endorsement that if people who get in go, it must be good/better than other schools?</p>
<p>From what I understand, Thacher (in California) has the highest yield of any school that gets mentioned here. 70%+…maybe even approaching 80%? Having visited the school, I can understand why. IMO, you aren’t going to apply to Thacher “just to have another school in the mix” — especially if you are from the East Coast and have mostly East Coast schools on your list. Also, they REQUIRE (or at least they used to require) an onsite interview, further culling out the tire-kickers. The act of simply applying to Thacher says that you buy into the remote location, the horse program, and the 100% boarding environment — and are committed enough to interview on campus. Meaning, people who are applying to Thacher are more committed to attending than most. </p>
<p>I also wouldn’t be too sure that “many” kids receive more than 1 acceptance. I would say many kids get rejected, some get 1 acceptance, and a few get more than 1. And as noted by Peri, the kids who report their results here on M10 skew toward reporting good news. Very few are brave enough to report getting zero acceptances.</p>
<p>Heartburner, you should read up on the so-called “Tufts effect.” It’s a strategic approach to admissions, which IIRC, was first used by a Tufts admissions dean. In short, the university doesn’t admit the strongest class on paper; it admits the class most likely to enroll, with the qualities the university needs. </p>
<p>For many years, Tufts was regarded as a backup school for kids applying to Harvard and MIT. So it would enroll a fair number of kids for whom it was not the first choice. It was a fine university, with an able student body, which looked worse when judged on its stats, because it could not compete with its near neighbors. Looking for students for whom Tufts was not a backup choice seems to have decreased the admit rate and increased yield. </p>
<p>I would not be surprised if schools are doing something similar. So if you have a favorite school, it does not hurt to let them know. Just don’t promise your undying affection to multiple schools. </p>
<p>School 1: Admits students most likely to enroll. May not accept students it thinks will be accepted by wealthier, more prestigious schools. Decreases admit rate, increases yield. As yield is higher, does not have spaces free for kids who come late to the process, or don’t get into the most competitive schools. </p>
<p>School 2: Admits students the school likes the most. (Other schools like them too.) Higher admit rate, lower yield. May end up with students who were not lucky on March 10th.</p>
<p>Which school is better? Which school ends up with a better student body? I couldn’t answer that question. In my opinion, it comes down to fit. Certainly, the Tufts effect will draw more statistics-inclined parents watching admit rate and yield to judge quality. </p>
<p>(Edit to add: If you find boarding school admissions puzzling, you will be driven round the bend by college admissions.)</p>
<p>I think that the only explanation for all of these schools having >50% yield is this “Tufts Effect.” This is what I am concerned about. Schools/AO’s working with connected middle school counselors making assumptions and a match and possibly sharing information about applicants. If a qualified applicant is applying to several of these top schools, there is a reasonable chance that this person would legitimately get accepted to more than one and therefore have to choose. How many kids only applied to Andover or Exeter? How many kids who applied were accepted to Andover (yield rate 78%) also applied and were accepted to Exeter (yield rate 68%) and vice versa? Or received a better financial aid package at Choate (yield rate 66%) or SPS (yield rate 67%). There must be some overlap in acceptances to get to a lower yield rate at some particular school. Are kids really saying its either ____ or LPS? Or is there some gaming of the system somewhere. It doesn’t really matter, but I think that the phenomenon is certainly interesting enough to raise an eyebrow over and question reliability of the data.</p>
<p>Any data, admission or otherwise, that is not audited should be taken for what it is. The average applicant applies to 5 schools, gets into 2 or 3. Because they can only choose one school, the average yield can only be around 30-50%. Never heard of kids applying to just one school. Also, the number kids rejected (not claimed to be reporting / under-reporting on CC) won’t affect the yield.</p>
<p>^^^ My daughter applied to only one BS. She wanted to go only to her older brother’s school, or stay home (with good options). As SAS does value known families in good standing, it attracts a percentage of siblings and legacies that may be higher than at larger peer institutions. Yield is boosted by this, and the community feel probably benefits. A good number of these families are Mid-Atlantic, but others range from Florida to Maine to Texas (off the top of my head). The younger siblings and legacies I’ve met have been engaging; the impression is that they are a good fit. A form letter encourages the connected families to apply to other boarding schools if boarding is a must, as it never guarantees admission; but I don’t know what the acceptance rate is for the “connected” pool. </p>
<p>I don’t know where Heartburner draws the line for “good school.” </p>
<p>I know a fair number of families who only applied to one or two schools. Many students are enrolled at private day schools which continue past the 8th grade. For those kids, it can be “go big or go home.” Traditionally, (a long time ago), private pre-preps ran through the 9th grade; most students would enter in 10th. Some schools have continued the 9th grade tradition. Kids in those schools can apply to one or two schools in 8th grade, knowing they can try again in 9th. </p>
<p>Many kids on this site apply to 5 or 6 schools. That’s not the norm for students who have great options at home. Also, alumni families have a different relationship to admissions departments. If there isn’t a fit, I do think they are less likely to allow their children to apply (if they think it’s not appropriate), and more likely to get clear indications of whether the school would be suitable from admissions. Or at least more likely to get a reply to a direct question.</p>
<p>I do not know how schools account for students whom would admit, but can’t offer financial aid to. Some schools call families to ask if they’d like their children to receive an admit letter (but no FA), or an outright rejection. </p>
<p>Parents who turn to CC for prep school admissions are not the norm. They are more likely not to have placement counselors, nor to have family connections to schools. </p>
<p>I agree with @Periwinkle, at least in our experience. Most of the families that we know (NYC, private schools) only applied to a few boarding schools. Either they were coming from a school that continued through 12th grade so they had a “go big or go home” mentality, or they were coming from a K-8 and also applying to day schools. So they would apply to maybe 3 boarding and 3 day options. Many of these families are full-pay, legacy families, thus increasing their chances for admission. They were more likely to apply to only Andover & St Paul’s for example, because they had a good option at home and were a strong candidate. I don’t know if this demographic really is the “norm” however, or if it used to be and now it’s shifting. Some schools (like Deerfield) may have more of these candidates as a % of their admits, and others (like Exeter) proportionally fewer. Again, this is based on people that I know, and is certainly not a scientific study - ha! So I would agree that not all of these admissions stats are created equal.</p>
<p>The dynamic is somewhat confusing, in as much as it does not take many students who were accepted to more than one school to make a 60%+ yield rate hard to calculate as an average across schools. Certainly if only 20% or so of students were admitted to 3 or more schools it would be hard to figure However, seems unlikely that the data provided is deliberately falsified or misleading. </p>
<p>Excerpt:
“*Strong and improving market position with 21.5% application growth over the past two years leading to a low selectivity ratio of 16.5% in FY 2011. Yield on admitted students remains stable and was 59% in FY 2011. Total full-time equivalent (FTE) enrollment for fall 2011 was 599 students, 93% of which were boarding students.”</p>
<p>I doubt Hotchkiss would be supplying false info to the ratings agencies, so the only question is about the dynamic that lends itself to 60% plus yields. Simple averaging math would say that students applying to “highly selective” schools with 20% admit rates or lower would need to apply to 5+ to expect admission to one. Of course the population is not homogeneous, and the strongest candidates might be accepted to multiple schools. Still, on average you can imagine that selectivity + realistic cap on schools per applicant might make it likely that there are not tons of kids getting accepted to 3-4 schools with high selectivity… </p>
<p>I have also wondered if schools end up knowing more about the applicant’s probability of acceptance than you might think, either through a savvy read of candidate intentions, or even just touching base with each other. If you had a legacy candidate applying to Deerfield who had communicated a preference there, would Hotchkiss likely know this and be less inclined to offer the same candidate an admit slot?</p>
<p>My initial skepticism regarding yield and admission rate reporting is tempered when considering the fact that I did not consider the many candidates that only apply to a single school (siblings, legacies, day students). I am not much of conspiracy theorist, but I bet there is at least a small amount of collusion amongst schools via communication with each other or through a counselor so that there is not a lot of overlap between Andover and Exeter acceptances (for example) and thus these yield rates remain very very high (>70%). By definition there can never be more than 30% of the either class that was accepted to both Exeter and Andover (for example). Seems a little unlikely given how qualified the students at either of these schools are, unless the applicants are so confident that they will get in to one or the other before and know which one they want to go to before they even finish their applications.</p>
<p>FYI, a quick-n-dirty empirical formula (based on yield data from a number of schools) for average yield rate if you don’t have the exact yield figure: 0.06(avgSSATpercentile ÷ admit rate) + 0.35 = Yield*</p>
<p>Cool formula. Not entirely clear why it should work, but it does show very high correlation with actual published yields. I guess it mostly suggests yields are directly related to exclusivity, which is not surprising…Thanks! </p>
<p>In this situation, the lack of “favorite messaging” on the part of the placement counselors for particular students sends a message.</p>
<p>There is no need for the prep schools to talk with each other. They get information directly from the candidate’s representatives. Those representatives have every reason to be truthful with the prep schools, because they have an ongoing relationship with the high schools. And, frankly, prep schools are very competitive. I cannot see them colluding with each other; they all want to win.</p>
<p>They also get their information directly from the applicant/parents during the interview. Example: What other schools are you looking at/applying to? Usually the applicant is caught off guard and provides the entire list. Most applicants, however, offer up only a few schools and choose to keep their cards close to their vest. Why? Because full disclosure may not always benefit the applicant. </p>
<p>Two small things to keep in mind when an applicant is asked: What other schools are you applying to?</p>
<p>1) If an AO suggests other schools to add to the list: That’s a negative. ( It means you might be better served looking elsewhere. ). It amazes me how many people don’t pick up on this, or get angry when this happens to them. The AO is doing the applicant a favor. </p>
<p>2) If an AO responds with: The schools on your list are wonderful but here’s what sets us (this school) apart … : That’s a positive. It’s a buy signal. It doesn’t mean you’ll definitely get in but they’re encouraging you to apply. </p>
<p>3) Either way- the school list an applicant gives an AO is information they will factor in later on. It’s not small talk or benign curiosity.</p>
<p>Frankly- I’m not a big fan of declaring a favorite. My kids preferred the free agent approach to SS admissions and I felt comfortable letting their application/correspondence/ tour/interview speak for them . Even with superb JBS- SS placement, we always kept our feelings about schools private. I didn’t see how disclosing that information could possibly benefit us/them. </p>
<p>We’re applying aren’t we? What else do you need to know? </p>