<p>
[quote]
In an apparent contradiction to the initial posting, someone just posted that did indeed get in off of the wait list at Chicago.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Not surprising. I have found that statements made to school newspapers and the like don't always match reality.</p>
<p>I admissions, "the class is full" does not mean "we aren't going to the waitlist". Heck, "we aren't going to the waitlist" doesn't necessarily mean "we aren't going to the waitlist"....</p>
<p>For one thing, these schools often go to the waitlist early in April for specific reasons. If they find out their top left-handed Tibetian oboe player is going to Harvard, they'll immediately go to the waitlist to snag their #2 left-handed Tibetian oboe player.</p>
<p>The only thing you can really do is wait 'til the common data sets come out and see what the real numbers are!</p>
<p>I KNEW I should have pushed the Oboe playing thing. My left handed kid would be IN! Those left handed oboe players have all the luck. :)</p>
<p>Actually, I hear this year all the top schools are looking for six foot tall sword-eaters who speak Tagalog. Serious lack of those kids; recruited heavily.</p>
<p>robileez: Too bad S is already in college, he is 6 foot, and he does eat small swords, he can bend a 7 ft spear with the point against his throat and the staff-end on the floor, and he speaks passable Tagalog. There is always someone who has the "hook."</p>
<p>From the UChicago admissions blog, about as equivocal as one can get:
[quote]
Yes, we've accepted a very small handful of people from the waiting list. Yes, we may be accepting a few more. We don't know how many more. We don't know when--maybe as late as June or July. We've heard that a number of other schools are going to their waiting list in a big way, and are anticipating that they might be taking a lot of our committed students. We will communicate with everyone on the waiting list in the next few weeks about their status, which may either be "keep waiting, we may need you over the summer," or "stop waiting, we don't think we need you." There won't be a mass "stop waiting, you're in" at this point.
<p>This is all so interesting. When I graduated from HS -- in 1966; yes, that's 1966; no typo there -- one of my friends was waitlisted at Columbia. He didn't hear until August that he got in, and then he had only about two weeks until he had to be there.</p>
<p>In those days I don't think the schools "used" their WLs to manage yield; I think my friend just benefited from someone else's bad luck and inability to attend for whatever reason.</p>
<p>Re posts 16 and 17. Here is why Harvard is digging so deep into its WL pool. It's part of a two-part PR maneuver. First, Harvard under-admitted by a wide margin, allowing it to lay claim to the lowest acceptance rate ever. Then, to make up the shortfall, it will accept 150-175 off the waitlist -- and it gets to claim a 100% yield for waitlisted acceptees. (That does ultimately raise the percentage admitted, but only after the initial 7.1% acceptance rate has been shouted from the rooftops.) It’s brilliant. H gets to claim the lowest acceptance rate AND the highest yield, both of them artificially induced.</p>
<p>The theory might be correct, but I think you have the wrong party. Harvard does not need to play the PR game and their reasons to restrict admission to the low percentage were all legitimate. </p>
<p>As far as claiming the lowest percentage, they could have added more than 200 admissions to their tally and STILL remain below 8% and below all their close competitors. Further they could have added 100 students (and stay below 7.5% rate) and simply take 50 transfers ... if those numbers were critical. And as a long term policy, they might start playing the "college segregating game" that is played around Morningside Heights. </p>
<p>If you look for gamesmanship, move your radar in the direction of New Haven and Philly where schools maintained an early admission policy. I am sure than admission rates and yield seem more important at a school that admitted close to 900 student in December and just over 1000 in the Spring.</p>
<p>^
xiggi- Penn has ED, Yale has SCEA, which is non-binding, right? How does that game the yield, if students aren't locked in by ED?
still trying to grasp all of this, so pardon my ignorance, if this is obvious.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Yale has SCEA, which is non-binding, right? How does that game the yield, if students aren't locked in by ED?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>A Yale SCEA admit might keep a very highly qualified applicant from even applying to other schools... schools that might, ultimately, tempt the student to reconsider her love for Yale.</p>
<p>"A Yale SCEA admit might keep a very highly qualified applicant from even applying to other schools.."</p>
<p>Not "might." Usually does. One of the huge reasons for an EA app is to limit the length of one's college list. Worked for my D. Shortened her list to a total of 5.</p>
<p>(it works basically like a rolling admissions school, the difference being in this case a reach category, vs. the usual safety category of rolling admissions.)</p>
<p>The 150-175 statement in the Crimson and quoted from the head of admission's email has since been somewhat retracted. Harvard announced late last week that actual firm number will be disclosed in the coming week.</p>
<p>Yes, a Yale (or Stanford) SCEA admit does cause many students to shorten their lists. Based on my son's experience as an SCEA admit this year, though, it causes very few to withdraw all other applications. (Yale had a Facebook page for early admits, and they did plenty of communicating.) Kids who needed to compare financial aid packages left most or all apps alive. Of those for whom financial aid was not a concern, most kept alive at least a handful of apps, generally to other super-selective schools. And a surprising number of students who were not eligible for financial aid withdrew no applications after receiving a SCEA admit, just to see where else they'd get in. So much for shrinking the pool of applicants.</p>
<p>OP: Thanks for the link it is really a good news after such a tough admission year. 150 is almost 10% of Harvard freshperson class, so it is a big number. I wish good luck to couple of very well deserving students at D school.</p>
<p>Mammall,
What is the source for "The 150-175 statement in the Crimson and quoted from the head of admission's email has since been somewhat retracted."?</p>
<p>Here is the extract from the NY Times article..
"In an e-mail message sent on Thursday to colleagues at dozens of other institutions and passed on to The New York Times, William Fitzsimmons, the Harvard College dean of admissions, said, “Harvard will admit somewhere in the range of 150 to 175 from the waiting list, possibly more depending on late May 1 returns and other waiting list activity.”</p>
<p>
[quote]
In what may be a happy surprise for thousands of high school seniors, Harvard plans to offer admission to 150 to 175 students on its waiting list, and Princeton and the University of Pennsylvania each expect to take 90, creating ripples that will send other highly selective colleges deeper into their waiting lists as well.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>No retraction there. Is there a subsequent retraction?</p>
<p>There was an article in our local paper tody about addmissions, waitlists, etc. In it, they said the email from Harvard about the expected numbers they were anticipating taking from the waitlist was "leaked".</p>