<p>Can’t believe I got in! At just 15!!! :)</p>
<p>pinkie12 - my DD was waitlisted last year. There were ultimately about 400 applicants who accepted spots on the waitlist. The “yield” from the accepted applicants was very high, they “overenrolled” by about 60 and ultimately took zero - not one - from the waitlist.</p>
<p>i still haven’t checked my email for stanford… im terrified to look</p>
<p>You can do it, just get it over with! I couldn’t open it for 4 solid hours and am so so glad I did:)</p>
<p>@stanford78 Does Stanford plan to accept people from its waitlist this year?</p>
<p>@himanshusahay
I believe it depends on how many of the accepted students decide to attend Stanford. From there, I think if not enough accepted students enroll, they’ll take students off waitlist.</p>
<p>@himanshusahay</p>
<p>I agree with @thehaakun - it totally depends on the “yield” from their accepted applicants. </p>
<p>But, consider the numbers:</p>
<p>They’ve extended admission to 217 fewer applicants to the Classs of 2017 than they offered to the Class of 2016. </p>
<p>Their Class of 2016 yield was 72.8% and 1765 freshmen enrolled. That was 58 more than the prior year (Class of 2015) when the yield was 69%. That was 65 more than the “historic” freshman class target of 1,700.</p>
<p>So, let’s say they achieve a yield in between those two years - call it 71%. That would bring in 1,547 freshmen out of the 2,210 offered admission. That would be 153 fewer than that 1,700 target. </p>
<p>But Stanford hasn’t historically taken anywhere near that number of waitlisted students - the exception being 2010 when they took 127 off a waitlist of 934 (out of 1,354 offerred) in a year when they had a 70% yield.</p>
<p>So, it seems to me that Standord is either:</p>
<ol>
<li>Anticipating an even higher yield than last year (77% to get to 1,700 enrolled);</li>
<li>Intentionally trying to hold down the size of the Class of 2017 to ease pressure on housing and other facilities due to increased class sizes in prior years; or</li>
<li>Deciding not to get surprised if (like last year) their yield is “too high”, preferring to go the waitlist to fill the class if need be.</li>
</ol>
<p>My prediction is its #3 - combined with a little of #1.</p>
<p>Only time will tell.</p>
<p>Stanford78’s analysis is right on point. It’s a good year to be on the wait list as Stanford has been exceptionally stingy with its offers of admission. That said, Stanford has good reason to be stingy because it is more and more becoming the place to go. They now outdraw every school with cross admits except Harvard and even that could change this year. So a 77% yield is not out of the question.</p>
<p>SocalPapa - I think you may be right. But were I Stanford Admissions (and I am far from it) I would prefer to be able to go to the waitlist at least to some degree in order to be able to round out the class after offered applicants have made their decision rather than be “stuck” with what I got. </p>
<p>Waitlists are constructed so that, whe it comes time re-balance the class, there’s someone still available to fill an unfilled slot. </p>
<p>I mean, what if that left-footed playing cellist who was slated to take a position in the ILSJUMB chose poorly and accepted admission to Cal? There will be someone on the Stanford waitlist to take her spot!</p>
<p>^No self-respecting left-footed marching cellist would ever pick Cal over Stanford! That said, I see your point. While having a high yield reduces the risk that the school will lose out on such treasures, the adcom might have good reason to try to take at least a few students off the wait list each year.</p>
<p>I just heard from a fairly well-placed and usually reliable source that Stanford’s decision to reduce their pool of admitted applicants was intentionally designed to decrease the size of the incoming freshman class to accommodate for the last couple of years of high yield and over-subscription. So, my guess is the class of 2017 ends up around 1650 or maybe fewer. With a somewhat higher yield than last year’s record and the historically low number of admits, they’ll hit that number with minimal need to go to the waitlist. </p>
<p>So, rather than a combination of #1 and #3 - it looks more like a combination of #1 and #2. Which does not bode well for a large number coming off the waitlist.</p>
<p>Well, I said a 77% yield wasn’t out of the question. Turns out it was pretty close - 76.7%! [Class</a> of 2017 produces record high 76.7 percent yield](<a href=“http://www.stanforddaily.com/2013/05/14/class-of-2017-produces-record-yield/]Class”>Class of 2017 produces record high 76.7 percent yield) The class is at 1695. There’s no mention of the status of the wait list, but it sounds from stanford78’s post that they may be effectively oversubscribed as it is.</p>
<p>My sense is that what they did was account for the possibility of an historic yield by suppressing the number of admitted applicants, with the option of going to waitlist if need be. With the 76.7% yield they planned very well. It looks like for the second year in a row they won’t need their waitlist and some of the residential facilities will remain a bit crowded.</p>
<p>Personally, I’m suprised their yield isn’t 100% - but then I’m biased!</p>
<p>What were your SAT scores.</p>
<p>@BigThink
Who are you addressing?</p>