Some admissions offices using new yield models

Parents Forum
1

<p>Interesting, suggests how changing economic situation may be affecting admission decisions.</p>

<p>
[quote]
“Some colleges use a predictive model that addresses each student and his or her capacity to pay, number of contacts with the admissions office, choice of a major, etc.,” O’Neill said.</p>

<p>This technique, called leveraging, positions a college to “set a price” for each student. “You can probably see why this isn’t completely aboveboard, and is not a way we would choose to behave,” O’Neill said.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>U</a> of C keeps admissions standards as others schools re-examine yieldformulae - The Chicago Maroon</p>

2

<p>When the article talks about setting a price for each student, is it the price the student will pay to attend that college (so you might snag that kid if you offer merit aid to make up with difference between that price and COA) or the price the university would have to pay to get that student?</p>

<p>Why wouldn’t that be “above board”?</p>

3

<p>I guess everyone needs to reevaluate the benefit of demonstrated interest.</p>

4

<p>I think it may mean that some colleges are increasing the number of acceptances of students from “rich” areas, because those students can afford to pay more for tuition than poorer students.
This part of O’Neill’s quote is what jumped out at me:
“Some colleges use a predictive model that addresses each student and his or her capacity to pay”
Full disclosure- Son was accepted at Chicago 3 years ago with $0 FA. He matriculated elsewhere. We live in what has become one of the VC capitals of the world, but moved here 25 years ago, long before Sand Hill Rd was famous[ or infamous] So based on our zipcode, maybe we looked “rich”. But other colleges offered S 15-20K in FA awards, not merit $.</p>

5

<p>Looks like U of C should have used more factors in their algorithm besides zip code! :)</p>

6

<p>The article said Chicago is NOT looking at ability to pay – it is referring to other colleges in the sentence. Chicago has need-blind admissions.</p>

<p>That being said, their financial aid award to my daughter was poor in comparison to at least one peer institution, and I don’t think my daughter could have afforded to attend. (My daughter told me otherwise later on: she said that if she had not been accepted to the college she nows attend, she would have been willing to take on greater debt to go to Chicago.) </p>

<p>Part of “leveraging” is being able to figure out how much financial aid to offer after admission. But Chicago also promises to meet full need for its admitted students, so I don’t think there’s much of an opportunity for leveraging built into their financial aid formulas. </p>

<p>As far as “leveraging” goes – too much “demonstrated interest” is not always good for the applicant – if the student has a demonstrated “need” of $30K, but the college figures out from the student’s enthusiasm that they can get away with offering a $10K merit scholarship… then who benefits when the student gets in and decides to take on massive debt to attend?</p>

7

<p>I did NOT say that CHICAGO is looking at ability to pay. I merely relayed our FA story after quoting O’Neill. Whatever “formula” Chicago used to calculate FA awards, their FA office has a record of being extremely “chincy” compared to their equally “need blind” peers.</p>

8

<p>From my experience, The U of C’s aid is generous further down the income scale. I have worked with work study students from California who wanted to go to Berkeley, but ended up at Chicago instead for financial reasons. At least one felt very bitter about it.
I’m guessing we’re talking about family incomes below $60,000 or so.</p>

9

<p>That predictive model has been in use for quite a few years now. When I first read about it, I immediately thought of Emory University’s very sophisticated tracking system, where every contact generates a self-paid postcard to be returned expressing continued interest.</p>

<p>Do an internet search for enrollment management consulting. There are quite a few long-established consulting groups that assist colleges maximize their student “quality” and “revenues”, using an airline pricing model to:</p>

<p>a) fill all the seats at some price
b) use variable pricing to (hopefully) charge each customer the most he or she is wiling and able to pay.</p>

<p>The visible merit aid “scholarship” programs and the tip of the variable pricing iceburg beneath the surfact.</p>

10

<p><a href=“http://www.shbrooks.com/shbreports/finaid.pdf[/url]”>http://www.shbrooks.com/shbreports/finaid.pdf&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p>it is one of thousands.</p>

11

<p>Re UChicago, small anecdote. We live in one of those wealthy zip codes near Chicago. </p>

<p>My daughter and her best HS friend both applied to UChicago, same major. </p>

<p>Test scores, grades, ECs, essay, etc. were known. Neither read their rec letters. No reason to think either had stronger letters than the other. Friend didn’t interview. Daughter’s interview extended 20 minutes longer than expected. Initial interviewer called regional admissions director downstairs to meet with her afterwards. </p>

<p>On all objective measures my daughter was superior. </p>

<p>Identical ECs except my daughter also played a varsity sport, held a black belt in martial arts, first chair on an instrument, member of two additional honor societies, and was published. </p>

<p>My daughter demonstrated appropriate, strong, targeted, informed interest. Made it abundantly clear UChicago was her top top choice. UChicago was friend’s fourth choice and did not pretend otherwise. </p>

<p>Friend was only child, wealthy parents, full-pay. Daughter needed lots of FA. </p>

<p>Guess who was admitted? Friend. </p>

<p>Furthermore, friend enrolled after being rejected/waitlisted by her three top choices, is miserable, and hopes to transfer!</p>

<p>I have a hard time believing colleges when they say they are need-blind. This includes O’Neill’s UChicago.</p>

12

<p>if you read the methodology in the above pdf file it is easy to see why high FA kids are rejected when they are in the most accomplished pool of admits, the ROI is less.</p>

13

<p>

</p>

<p>Chicago is very much known as a school that does not care so much about SAT scores, etc. as it does a stroke of genius in the essays.</p>

14

<p>There might be daylight between what they are known as and what they are.
Naviance charts I have seen on the U of C make the school look MORE reliant on SATs and GPA than other elites.
I always attributed that to more recruited athletes, URMs, and legacies at peer schools. But I wonder. Having either studied at or worked at the U of C for twenty years, I guess I don’t drink the kool-aid on the admissions department rep.</p>

15

<p>

</p>

<p>Our experience with U of C FA was very unsatisfying. They expected us to come up with over six times our EFC according to most methodologies, amounting to something like 2/3 of our income, which was WELL under $60K. This was partially due to an unsalable asset of which we inherited a minority share and against which we cannot borrow. I understand their point of view, that even if unsalable it was an asset, but the expectation was that we would pay over 2/3rds of our income annually. How we were to borrow that money and how we were to live on the remainder I do not know. Luckily, S chose another school.</p>

16

<p>"This was partially due to an unsalable asset of which we inherited a minority share and against which we cannot borrow. "
This was exactly our situation too! WHY the FA people at Chicago could NOT figure this out, as the FA staff at Dartmouth, Brown, Wash U, Ponoma could, was beyond me. They just didn’t want to is my guess. I actually emailed the head of Admissions and FA with the comparison of Chicago’s "award vrs other schools, and he was taken aback, to put it mildly. But nothing changed.</p>

17

<p>

</p>

<p>

This student is considered to be met 100% need? The student who gave up due to the financial gap is not even in the above statistics? </p>

<p>The above statistics are very similar to other top schools that are believed to be a top FA schools like Harvard. However, the different definition of “need / EFC” is clearly one of reasons some of us giving up UChicago.</p>

<p>Were we too naive to believe what UChicago at their Info session told how their FA is improved and fantastic now? Filtering the ability to pay after the admission is a reason of higher yield than HYP schools, then?</p>