The dangers of deferral

Colleges and Universities A-Z University of Michigan
1

<p>I'd like to understand Michigan's deferral strategy, and what it means for the school and for the students.</p>

<p>The only thing we know for sure is that Michigan admitted 500 students more than planned last year, and they wanted to avoid it this year. The way they're doing this is by putting more students on the wait list, as per the provost's plan, see <a href="http://www.michigandaily.com/news/provost-announces-plan-curb-over-enrollment"&gt;http://www.michigandaily.com/news/provost-announces-plan-curb-over-enrollment&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p>

<p>What's perplexing is how this strategy will achieve the result they want. The yield was obviously higher than expected last year from the overall pool (EA+RD). But given that increasing commitment from the students, and Michigan's stats on what kinds of students actually joined last year, shouldn't they be accepting more qualified students in EA who they know are likely to attend than trying to defer more?</p>

<p>The other point that has been made is that many high stat students use Michigan as a fall-back for top 10, and hence Michigan is deferring the lot. This is like throwing the baby out with the bath water. There are many students with high stats who aren't going to get into top 10, and will truly appreciate being in Michigan. There are many more who just want to be in Michigan. By deferring this lot, Michigan runs the risk of losing them to other ranked universities. </p>

<p>And then there are those who are most likely to attend Michigan if accepted. Really good GPAs, SATs in the 2100+ range, accomplished. Seems like this set has also been deferred en masse. The only reason I can think of is to let this group play out against remaining top stats in RD. This strategy runs the same risk as above.</p>

<p>Not knowing the number of accepts and defers for sure in EA makes all this speculative, but it's not clear whether this mass deferral strategy is going to work for Michigan.</p>

<p>For the students, deferral is a pain in more ways than one. For those with good stats, it completely throws off your evaluation of which schools you're a fit (given your stats and your realistic expectations of getting accepted). It makes you scramble to put in additional applications to safer schools because of this doubt (and screws up the chances for those lower in the rung applying to those schools). It calls into question everything you have done, including essays, making you wonder where things went wrong. Some folks might take unnecessary additional tests. Overall, extremely disruptive. </p>

<p>What could Michigan have done?</p>

<p>a. Maybe have an earlier deadline for EA applicants to accept offers (say, April, 1) so that they can adjust RD offers?
b. Be more transparent about what their process is so that applicants have a clue as to what's happening, and what they should do?</p>

<p>Anything else you think will help?</p>

2

<p>So Michigan should just admit based on GPA and test scores? The only student I know who was admitted EA from the UAE had a 40/42 predicted on the IB and a 35 on the ACT. Many such students reported being admitted EA on CC. Clearly, Michigan is not shying away from “top 10 caliber students”. Why? Because Michigan is a top 10 university, and views itself as such. Perhaps Michigan recognized applicants who do not view Michigan as a top 10 university, but as a fall back? Universities are good at reading between the lines. </p>

<p>However, no university can admit a class entirely populated of 4.0 students with 2250/33+ SAT/ACT scores. Michigan obviously received far more such applicants than it could accommodate in the EA period. Michigan was transparent. They said from the beginning that they received approximately 25,000 EA applications and that this year, they were going to admit fewer than previous years to avoid over-enrollment. What more can Michigan have done? Admit its entire class from the EA pool and cancel the RD round?</p>

<p>What Michigan can do is release EA admission figures from the last 2 years to make it clear how difficult it is to get in EA. Perhaps that would temper expectations and make all involved realize that Michigan is a reach, not a safety as so many applicants seem to think.</p>

3

<p>FYI, Michigan does state that GPA, course rigor and test score play a big part in evaluating a student. Look at their evaluation sheet, the top three things are exactly these. But that’s not the point of my post. What everyone believes is that far too many people have been deferred as per the policy that the provost has advocated. That is, the decisions have been postponed based on some strategy as opposed to making it now, and the question is whether that strategy is going to work for Michigan. Plus, what could make it easier for people to understand the strategy and therefore understand what’s happening to them.</p>

<p>Your last statement on EA is not true. I don’t know of a single university which has a EA admission rate lower than RD. Michigan’s overall admit rate last year was 32% and I bet the EA rate was 32% or higher. Should not be too difficult for many of the deferred applicants we’re seeing now to get through if they’re admitting “normally”. The question is, what ARE they doing? It could be that we don’t have the full picture in CC and just speculating, but if Michigan can release figures for this year, we’ll know better. (Many colleges release EA/ED figures on the decision date itself).</p>

4

<p>BTW, Michigan can’t fill the classes with 2250/33+ students, or more accurately, 2250/33/3.9+GPA students, not because they wouldn’t like to, but there aren’t too many of these. After all, this group is probably in the 99th percentile, and these students have choice. They won’t all come to Michigan for one thing. The other factor is Michigan’s obligation to in-state. It’s naive to think that Universities don’t want more of such students - look at the increasing SAT mid 50% in Michigan, and other top colleges. </p>

5

<p>Holistic admissions means for the kind of students they are looking for- it does not mean just the numbers. </p>

<p>I am the parent of a kid who was deferred last year ( and accepted in January). There is no waitlist yet ( which was the point of the provost strategy). As such, at this point, you do not know the percentage of deferrals ( although there will be more because there are more applicants, but as for percentage of total? Nope) so to say they are doing it wrong- you have no idea. </p>

<p>Holistic is a full student picture. The world at Michigan is not run by simply just the numbers. There are six points of admission to be looked at, with subcategories beneath. </p>

<p>I understand being disappointed in deferral. It was really hard in our house last year, with a super high achieving child, and two alum parents. Trust me.</p>

<p>But don’t think the people getting in right now are somehow less than those who may have higher numbers on a facet or two. That’s not the case. </p>

<p>Michigan will shape the class of the future the best way they can. And they are not lessening the quality by doing it the way they are. And frankly, it is reeking of entitlement to say otherwise. Michigan is not a safety school. It is a reach for almost everyone who applies, especially out of state applicants.</p>

6

<p>anxious00, GPA, course rigor and test scores (to a lesser extend when it comes to Michigan) play a big part in evaluating an applicant at virtually all elite universities. Michigan is no exception. But the fact remains, all elite universities reject a bunch of applicants with perfect grades, ridiculously challenging courses and outrageously high test scores and then admit students with lesser GPAs, easier course rigor and lower test scores. In part, that’s a university protecting the yield. All universities do it. But then, there are intangibles that cannot be accounted for. Passion, demonstrated interest, admission officer gut feelings etc…The more selective a university, the more random decisions become. </p>

<p>For some reason, when those exceptional applicants are deferred or rejected by schools like the Ivy League or Chicago, or Northwestern etc…, it is perfectly acceptable, but when Michigan defers or rejects such applicants, it is automatically assumed that Michigan is acting unethically and that something must be amiss. I can understand why in-state applicants, given the reasonable competition levels for those spots, could feel that way. However, OOS and international applicants should curb their expectations. I would estimate that currently, Michigan admits under 10% of international applicants and roughly 20% of OOS applicants. </p>

<p>Now to get technical with you. Not all universities have higher EA acceptance rates than RD acceptances. The University of Chicago, MIT and Georgetown have EA acceptance rates that are roughly equal to their RD acceptance rates.</p>

<p>As a rule of thumb, the larger the EA applicant pool as a function of the overall applicant pool, the lower the EA acceptance rate. That’s because no matter what, a university will seldom admit more than 35% or 40% of its class EA. The remaining 60%-65% will be admitted from the RD pool. For example, at Harvard or Princeton or Yale, the EA applicant pool is roughly 20% of the overall applicant pool. At Chicago, MIT and Georgetown, it is closer to 35%. At Michigan, it is almost a whopping 50%. That is why the EA admit rate is significantly higher than the RD acceptance at Harvard or Princeton, roughly the same as the RD rate at Georgetown, and likely lower than the RD rate at Michigan. </p>

<p>The reason why students SHOULD apply EA to a university is simple. They want to hear back from that particular university ahead of time. Unfortunately, many applicants these days apply EA because they assume is it “easier” to get in. That is not always the case, and was never the “policy” at any university. </p>

<p>There was a time when Michigan had rolling admissions. Back then, those who applied early faced better odds of admission. But that was when Michigan received 20,000-30,000 applications annually. With 40,000 or 50,000, that is no longer possible. </p>

<p>Perhaps that is why some assume it is still easier to be admitted EA as opposed to RD. And for this reason, I think Michigan should release EA admissions data to make it clear that Michigan should be considered a reach by all. This is where I agree that Michigan should be more transparent. All universities release their EA acceptance data. Why doesn’t Michigan? From that point of view, I think the University should be more forthcoming.</p>

7

<p>@DeaconBlues‌ Agree with everything you said. The frustration now is the haze around deferrals - not so much “why me?”, but “why so many, and why most are so well-qualified”? Is it the case that most of the 25K EA applicants were so well qualified and therefore we are seeing only those? Or, is it only that set that inhabits CC? I think Michigan’s statement on shooting for numbers below the planned is causing a lot of speculation as well. Only Michigan can clear up the picture. </p>

<p>I don’t think anyone thinks of Michigan as a safety. The high achievers think of it just a level below ivy’s (match, if you’re so fortunate) and for others with super solid record, it’s certainly a reach. </p>

8

<p>By the way, just to demonstrate my point:</p>

<p>Total applications
Chicago 30,000
Georgetown 20,000
Harvard 35,000
Michigan 49,000
MIT 19,000
Princeton 26,500
Stanford
Yale</p>

<p>EA applications (% of the total applicant pool)
Chicago 10,000 (33%)
Georgetown 7,000 (35%)
Harvard 4,500 (13%)
Michigan 23,000 (47%)
MIT 7,000 (37%)
Princeton 4,000 (15%)
Stanford 7,000 (18%)
Yale 5,000 (17%)</p>

<p>Overall acceptance rate
Chicago 9%
Georgetown 17%
Harvard 6%
Michigan 32%
MIT 8%
Princeton 7%
Stanford 6%
Yale 7%</p>

<p>EA acceptance rate
Chicago 12%
Georgetown 15%
Harvard 18%
Michigan ???
MIT 9%
Princeton 18%
Stanford 11%
Yale 15%</p>

<p>See, easy. The smaller the delta between the EA applicant pool and the overall applicant pool, the smaller the delta between the EA acceptance rate and the overall acceptance rate. In the case of Michigan, I would estimate that given the disproportionately late EA applicant pool, the EA acceptance rate is, in fact, lower than the overall acceptance rate.</p>

9

<p>why doesn’t U-M offer ED? </p>

10

<p>I think ED lacks a degree of integrity that public universities try to avoid. </p>

11

<p>@anxious00 I know you’re not trying to be snooty, but it’s either incredibly naive or extremely entitled to ask “Why so many qualified” applicants have been defered from Michigan. EVERY applicant to Michigan (ok, minus a few) is well qualified. Despite what the criteria on the website says, they end up deciding between a 4.0 with 34 ACTs and a 4.0 with 34 ACTs. What makes one a better fit for Michigan is now up to them. I know more than a dozen top students with siblings at UM now who were deferred. No one is getting a hall pass here. It kills me when kids feel just because they meet the criteria on paper, they deserve to get it. It’s a huge problem that we parents have created with the whole notion of getting into a “Top” school. You’ll get in where you’re supposed to get in, and you’ll never look back. Promise. </p>

12

<p>@Osserpusser I agree. My D isn’t even phased by the deferral. She has already been accepted to 3 other schools for college of engineering. One of which is out of state(Purdue). U of M was her other OOS choice. Purdue and U of M are similar in their engineering program, depending on which stat list you look at (Forbes, etc.) She’s moved on, and is excited enough knowing she was selected for 3 good schools even with a lower ACT score (27) but excellent stats everywhere else. Whatever happens is supposed to happen and she will fit in well at one of the other 3.</p>

<p>FTR, my other daughter got into 2 of her 3 college choices. Case Western deferred her and she is now attending Ohio State and has never looked back on her deferral from Case as she is doing extremely well at OSU. Plus, she is really enjoying her time there (she is in her third year).</p>

13

<p>@Osserpusser‌ I didn’t mean to be snobbish or snooty, and I’m not sure whether I’m using the right words. When I said “qualified” I meant kids who have worked hard for academic accomplishments, and whose gpa and scores are well above the accepted profile of Michigan. Many of these kids also have significant other accomplishments. There is a general sense of confusion and puzzlement as to ‘what happened to me?’ that you can see in the EA and deferral threads. This is not because of a sense of entitlement, but just because of the numbers of such deferral (admittedly, we don’t know the actual numbers). This confusion is compounded when you see “inexplicable” admits. We can say that the admissions committee knows best, but we should be able to understand the rationale. The problem this time is an implementation of a policy that deliberately defers a whole lot of students, and many of us don’t understand how exactly this policy is being implemented, and what it means for the deferred students. </p>

<p>@MomofSprinter I very much agree - there is wide world outside of Michigan, and in particular, engineering programs in other Big Ten schools are very good as well. </p>

14

<p>“I meant kids who have worked hard for academic accomplishments, and whose gpa and scores are well above the accepted profile of Michigan.”</p>

<p>anxious, I am not sure that is an accurate statement. The mid 50% unweighed GPA range of admitted students to Michigan last year was 3.8-4.0 and the mid 50% ACT and SAT for admitted students last year was 30-34 and 2030-2270. As such, no applicant has a GPA and scores that are well above the accepted profile of Michigan. Michigan is as selective as Cornell and Northwestern for OOS students. It is a reach, regardless of your credentials.</p>

<p>“There is a general sense of confusion and puzzlement as to ‘what happened to me?’ that you can see in the EA and deferral threads. This is not because of a sense of entitlement, but just because of the numbers of such deferral (admittedly, we don’t know the actual numbers).”</p>

<p>Anytime an applicant questions why one of the top universities in the country has deferred them, it is a sense of entitlement. The applicant pool to top universities is so accomplished, there are bound to be many qualified students that will be deferred and eventually rejected.</p>

<p>“This confusion is compounded when you see “inexplicable” admits.”</p>

<p>This happens everywhere. you have students who are admitted to all top universities with sub 3.5 GPAs and sub 1800 on the SAT/sub 28 on the ACT. Michigan is no exception.</p>

<p>“The problem this time is an implementation of a policy that deliberately defers a whole lot of students, and many of us don’t understand how exactly this policy is being implemented, and what it means for the deferred students.”</p>

<p>You keep referring to a “policy”. There is no policy. Like all admissions office, the Michigan admissions office had a target in mind. This target was broken down by region, which is also standard. Although I am not sure what the exact number was, most universities like to keep their EA acceptances at roughly one third that of the entire acceptance pool. So, if Michigan is planning on admitting 15,000 students this year, it will likely admit 5,000 in the EA phase. The figures will not be released, but I assume the acceptance rate for EA applicants this year was roughly 20%.</p>

<p>Like I said, there seems to be a double standard. When peer universities like Cornell or Penn or Northwestern reject qualified applicants, it is perfectly acceptable, albeit disappointing. But when Michigan rejects a qualified applicant…outrage! I think this outlook will change once it becomes fairly common knowledge that Michigan has become very selective.</p>

15

<p>@alexandre. I think the difference with Penn or Cornell or NW is that they don’t usually let in significantly lower stats kids without some real hook over equivalent kids with higher stats. My experience tracking this at our HS is that if lower stats kids get into those it’s with a true hook ( URM. Special family challenge etc…) . But that is exactly what seems to happen at Michigan. And I’m speaking as a parent of a kid who got in OOS with much lower test scores than kids who are pretty equivalent ( in terms of things like hooks, extra circulars demonstrated interest etc.) but with much higher scores and a more rigorous curriculum who got deferred. Of course I’m thrilled for my daughter. But I can understand why this feels more frustrating for deferred kids than deferrals at other schools. </p>

16

<p>Folks, here’s an article that explains this year’s huge deferral. The EA admission rate has been dramatically and deliberately reduced. This is NOT normal deferral case.</p>

<p><a href=“http://www.examiner.com/article/why-thousands-were-deferred-this-year-by-the-university-of-michigan”>http://www.examiner.com/article/why-thousands-were-deferred-this-year-by-the-university-of-michigan&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

17

<p>Anxious, I was just about to post this. It’s about to become the new norm across the board, and in the long run, it’s better for you kids. </p>

18

<p>maya, my observation with admissions at Cornell, NU and Penn is very different from yours. I have seen many unhooked students with mediocre grades (sub 3.5) and scores (sub 1900/28) get in. Well, that is assuming that one does not consider paying full tuition a hook. Ironically, most of those are admitted RD, not ED. I am not including in-state applicants in this since in-state applicants number at 10,000 and over 5,000 of those will be admitted. </p>

19

<p>anxious, that is pretty much what I was saying above. The EA applicant pool at Michigan increased suddenly, and based on the mistakes made last year and the year before, Michigan has had to reevaluate its approach to EA applicants. The 37% figure seems about right. Michigan will admit only 5,000 of the 15,000 students they will admit though EA. </p>

20

<p>@maya54 Respectfully, unless you work in the admissions office, you and I have no idea (and never will) what ‘the hook’ was. First, people here on CC are known to overinflate stats. Secondly, talk to any admissions counselor - a 3.5 at one school can be equivalent to a 4.0 at another - and believe me, they know which schools are which. They know that APs at one school are a joke compared to another. Also, the 3.5 essay could have contained pertinent “hook” info that you will never know- or it could just have frankly been way better and more personable than the kid who has a perfect ACT score. My kids wrote about issues that no one else in town knew about. We can all sit and guess and make comparisons, or we can be happy for the kids that did make it in and counsel those who didn’t. No rhyme or reason will ever be given, to you, me or the individual applicants. </p>