<p>One other possible explanation for Stanford’s high yield is yield management – at least based on what I saw at my high school this year. While there were a large number of cross-admits among HYPM, there was relatively little overlap of that group with Stanford admits. Most kids who got into Stanford were not admitted to any of HYPM and, for the most part, were lower in the class. They ended up with only Stanford as a high-ranked option, so when decision time came around, most of them didn’t have any real choice to make. The only exceptions were a couple of superstars: a URM, legacy, high-stats, highly-ECed kid and a major national award winner, both of whom also got admitted to other top schools and presumably were deemed to be worth fighting for. Perhaps the result was an anomaly at my school based on the fact that in prior years most of the top kids admitted to Stanford opted elsewhere, but, among the top schools, Stanford definitely stood out in its approach to admissions.</p>
<p>I agree with STMoore 100%.</p>
<p>^^That’s a pretty small sampling from which to draw that kind of conclusion, don’t you think? I know lots of ( very high-stat, non-URM, non-legacy) cross-admits to HYPSM, and many of those selected Stanford. In fact at Stanford Admit Weekend, lots of the cross-admits to H were accepting S right then and there, before H’s prefrosh weekend got underway. So I doubt your theory of students “defaulting” to S is accurate in any broad sense. Good luck with H’s waitlist.</p>
<p>Even as a Stanford-Princeton cross-admit, I think STMoore has a point. Stanford does seem to have the most unpredictable admissions… I go to a school that sends around 10 to Stanford every year and this year I know several highly qualified applicants who were flat out rejected but got into any combination of H/Y/P.</p>
<p>Among other likely reasons for more rejections from Stanford at any given school this year is that Stanford experienced a particularly big surge in applications, with a correspondingly larger pool of highly qualified applicants.</p>
<p>So… Stanford (and any other college that doesn’t accept the students that “deserved” to be accepted) practices yield management? That would imply that they know all the schools to which an applicant applied, exactly which applicants will be accepted to which schools, and at which school that applicant is likely to enroll.
After carefully determining all of these factors, Stanford then selects the applicant pool just below the HYP-bound one and yet still remains the second most selective university. Great job, Stanford!!</p>
<p>I doubt this is the case. Regardless, it does appear that more people accepted Stanford if cross admitted with HYPM this year, which is good for us WLs. Call it a wishful thinking. My bold (and baseless) prediction is Harvard’s yield will be lower this year.</p>
<p>any info about P yield?</p>
<p>@reach4thestars45: Ahhhh, that makes me so nervous :(! I had last minute updates I wanted to add to my letter so I sent it in really late (on Monday) so now I’m afraid that it didn’t get there in time since you said they already started having meetings about the waitlist. I know that the letter probably won’t make a difference, but still, it would’ve been better than staying quiet? 
</p>
<p>And this is bad…I need to stop thinking about Harvard so much when the chances of me getting in are low :(</p>
<p>@back2ca
All schools try to increase their yield as much as possible. I doubt that they’d know where you have applied though, but some schools do ask explicitly on their application. </p>
<p>Also, I’d say that Stanford is def. prestigious enough to accept the best of the best (and have them matriculate), it’s just they have a diff. taste in admissions then HYPs.</p>
<p>Schools can predict if an applicant is likely to go or not though, via their interest demonstrated in the essays, or for example I know someone on CC who’s vale, 2390 SAT, a bunch of awards, the president of several major clubs, intensive research, blah blah blah, who got into all three of HYP but was waitlisted at Duke, implying that Duke figured he’d probably go to some place better, so they could not accept him due to yield concerns, but he was too good to be flat out rejected</p>
<p>Just my opinon XD</p>
<p>This is late, but I was also waitlisted. [Stanford]</p>
<p>Anecdotally, I have to agree with STMoore. Stanford is wonderful school in a great part of the country. Still, in my high school class ('09) in California, 15 people were accepted there. 12 matriculated (none of whom was accepted by HYPM); the three who turned them down went to Yale, Princeton and Brown. Although Stanford has a high yield, it may be that a large portion of its class are choosing it over the UC’s, Pomona etc. and a large portion of its class receive athletic scholarships (non-existent in the Ivies).</p>
<p>Whatever anecdotes get you through the night, I guess.</p>
<p>There’s no point in speculating whether or not Stanford’s high yield will foreshadow Harvard’s yield or not…we should know within a few days what the official yield numbers are.</p>
<p>jbk151, if none of us gets off the waitlist, I’ll see you at Stanford.</p>
<p>My first post. I’m a fellow Wait Lister but I just heard about this thread today. Enjoyed reading last five pages or so. Here’s what I can offer: there will be between 60 and 70 slots in H’s class of 2014 filled from the Wait List. (Harvard is secretive about the number of people on the List but highly reliable sources say it is several hundred.)</p>
<p>The number of slots to be filled comes directly from inside 86 Brattle Street in Cambridge. The number is down from 100 slots in class of 2013 and from 200 in class of 2013. The first Wait List selection meeting is Tuesday the 11th with the first round of congratulatory phone calls made a week later, on Tuesday the 18th. Call the Admissions Officer who oversees your geographic region to have this info verified. Cheers, SD</p>
<p>Nice work, Stephen. Your figures are reasonable enough that you could have made them up, but I’m willing to take your word for it.</p>
<p>Yeah, I don’t know how reliable SDedalus’ facts are, but I agree with nickwasy that they seem reasonable and would agree with what has happened in the past. And if it is true, yield must have been somewhere between 75 and 76.</p>
<p>Get real - obvious ■■■■■. First time post, after going through entire admissions process and getting on Harvard WL, just happens to review this thread, just happens to have absolutely perfect inside information, which noone else has? Plausable facts presented as actual. Not worth consideration.</p>
<p>SDedalus: Can you share with us the source of your information? I.e., Guidance Counselor, Harvard Rep, etc. I am particularly interested in the source of the dates. Thanks.</p>