<p>though interesting, the applicants per spot numbers are irrelevant.</p>
<p>colleges admit more students than the number of spots they have in the freshman class. so colgate has a higher number than MIT, but only because MIT's yield is astonishingly high.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I live in an area with a large Catholic population. Ever year, Notre Dame is very in (for some reason that I have yet to determine)
[/quote]
</p>
<p>haha, if that is sarcastic humor, it's one of the funniest things i've read in awhile</p>
<p>"colleges admit more students than the number of spots they have in the freshman class. so colgate has a higher number than MIT, but only because MIT's yield is astonishingly high."</p>
<p>-Uh... This doesn't explain why people APPLY to the school. Those numbers are applications per AVAILABLE SPOTS in each freshman class. What you said would explain why MIT ADMITTED fewer people (if the yield is higher, it could admit fewer people expecting that more would actually attend), but not why more people applied (per spot) to Colgate in 2005.</p>
<p>For addition to my post #48, I found the numbers for Northwestern. The school had a 37% yield for the class entering in Fall, 2006 (this was down from 41% in Fall, 2005). This would rank the school 15th on the previously supplied list of top colleges and their relative yields. </p>
<p>For this class entering in Fall, 2006, it should be noted that Northwestern had a very good year for applications which increased by 13% to 18,385 and led to 5534 acceptances (30% acceptance rate).</p>
<p>Another addition that I was able to uncover was Wash U. For their class entering in Fall, 2006, they had 22,251 applications. Students were accepted at a 21% rate (4673 students) and 1470 enrolled for a yield rate of 31%. This would rank Wash U at #20 (tied with Tufts).</p>
<p>The ivys were always "in-demand" school. However, based on increased admissions' standards , endowments, and application increases over the last 10 years, the following schools are "in" (in no particular order)</p>
<ol>
<li>NYU</li>
<li>University of Miami</li>
<li>RISD (if you are into art)</li>
<li>Tufts</li>
<li>Michigan</li>
<li>UCLA</li>
<li>USC</li>
<li>University of Cincinnati ( especially for their design and music schools and some grad programs)</li>
<li>Syracuse (although not as much as others here)</li>
<li>Carnegie Mellon</li>
<li>Emory</li>
<li>Wash U</li>
<li>State University of NY at Stonybrook</li>
<li>Clairmont Schools such as Pomona, Scripps, Pitzer etc.</li>
<li>RIT somewhat</li>
<li>Northeastern</li>
<li>Northwestern</li>
<li>NotreDame</li>
<li>Villanova (Although I don't see the attraction here)</li>
<li>University of Wisconsin</li>
<li>University of Florida</li>
</ol>
<p>Notice I didn't metion top LACS such as Williams, Haverford etc., because they were always "in demand" schools like the ivys. I also didn't list schools like MIT, Cal Tech etc., because they too were always "in-demand" schools.</p>
<p>Most of the above-noted schools have seen significant increases in the factors noted above during the last 10 years and, in many cases, during the last 5 years.</p>
<p>Using the logic of Post #57, Pomona received 14.4 applications/spot (5,439/378) in 2006, and 15.6 applications/spot (5,907/378) in 2007.</p>
<p>Amherst received 14.2 applications/spot (6,142/433) in 2006, and 15.4 (6,668/433) in 2007. (Data from each school's CDS and press releases)</p>
<p>Does that make Pomona the "most demanded" elite school now?</p>
<p>applications per spot is worthless without yield data, anyone can apply to a college, but if they're not going to go there it doesn't mean anything</p>
<p>I don't know if it's "worthless". There is something to be said for people's original preferences- when given a list of thousands of colleges, they choose a few to which to apply. After all, MOST people wouldn't pay application fees, or fill out applications just for the heck of it. This can indeed show us how demanded a school is... for its size. </p>
<p>As for yield, again, it's not that difficult to play with yields. ED programs (most of all) bolster the yields at many schools... Columbia, Penn, etc. I do, however, think that there is at least some value in yield data- but determining how in-demand a school is is, for me, not really a part of that value.</p>
<p>USC </p>
<p>/* aslkdfj */</p>
<p>
[quote]
As for yield, again, it's not that difficult to play with yields. ED programs (most of all) bolster the yields at many schools... Columbia, Penn, etc. I do, however, think that there is at least some value in yield data- but determining how in-demand a school is is, for me, not really a part of that value.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>what would you say, then, about a school like washu, that gets TONS of applications, but even after using stuff like waitlist manipulation, poses virtually no competition towards schools as "selective" as it is, and instead competes for students with schools such as SMU, george washington, etc</p>
<p>I'd say what are the numbers.... What is the avg SAT? Is it comparable to its peers? How many NMS attend the school.. etc....</p>
<p>that's the thing, it has comparable SAT scores, etc. to its peers, but a much higher number of applications per spot, simply because most of the applicants have very little interest in attending there (presumably from its yield)</p>
<p>H,Y,P, Stanford and Duke are always popular. Among Universities-NotreDame, UChicago, USC. Among LAC's-Davidson and Holy Cross have become more popular-maybe Davidson close to Charlotte and Holy Cross near Boston.</p>