<p>I'm a bit at a loss trying to understand the whole point of this thread. As interesteddad points out, there is often enormous variation in these numbers year to year due to significant variations in application numbers and yield. The last thing any school wants to see happen is OVER enrollment - this is a problem that can't be fixed. Underenrollment just means turning to the waitlist to get to whatever magical target the school's set. </p>
<p>Harvard turned to the waitlist significantly last year with the uncertainties posed with changes in ED/EA policies. They knew they could easily fill their class off of that list with equally stellar students. This was certainly a much more palatable option than potential overenrollment.</p>
<p>Northwestern has seen a surge in applications over the past several years and each of those years it's been a virtual crap shoot trying to calculate yield from RD. In addition, their ED admits represent a much smaller percentage of each class than most of the ivys. This leaves RD prediction uncertainties even more potentially treacherous. Unpredictability reared its ugly head just this past week once again - Northwestern announced that ED application numbers increased 15% over last year for the 2009 applicant pool, something (given the current economic climate) no one had expected. I'm going to predict that wait lists are going to see even more action this coming spring than last.</p>
<p>In response to Post #14: This is the first year that Northwestern University may add deferrals to its admit/deny ED admissions process. The mid-50% SAT range of matriculated students to Northwestern University increased to 1360- 1530 from 1350-1520 CR & Math.
The SAT 25th percentile for matriculated students starting in Fall, 2007 was:</p>
<p>CalTech 1470
Harvard 1400
Yale 1400
Princeton 1390
MIT 1380
WashUStL 1370
Columbia 1360
Northwestern 1350 (now 1360)
Stanford 1340
Duke 1340
Tufts 1340
Penn, Chicago, Dartmouth & Brown 1330
Rice 1310</p>
<p>In light of the above post's info. that Northwestern's ED apps are surging even though the national trend for colleges is showing a decrease in number of ED apps, it will be interesting to see how the above list looks with the new data as some elite national universities may show a decrease for the matriculated students 25th percentile SAT scores.</p>
<p>It will be very interesting to see a list for 2008 - it was a big year for the waitlist due to the change in policies at some of the Ivies and the trickle down effect.</p>
<p>does waitlisting people lower the school's acceptance rate? In other words, do schools admit less people to lower their acceptance rate but waitlist a bunch to pick from later?</p>
<p>^ A waitlist can lower a school's acceptance rate if they use it the way I described in post #11. Let's say you're the adcom. You're trying to fill an entering class of 1,000, you have 10,000 applicants, and your yield is 33%. That means you'd normally need to accept 3,000 applicants (out of the 10,000) to get your 1,000 entering freshmen. So your acceptance rate would be 30% (3,000 acceptances out of 10,000 applicants). </p>
<p>Now suppose instead you accept 2,700 applicants outright and put the other 300 on a waitlist. Out of the 2,700 you accept outright, you expect to have the same yield of 33%, so that means you'll get 900 to enroll. That leaves another 100 slots to fill. At that point you call up the 300 on the waitlist one by one, and tell them you're prepared to offer them a place in your entering class if, and only if, they promise to accept the offer. Those who don't agree to this deal stay on the waitlist. Those who agree to the deal are committed to come, so you need to manage the process to get only 100 to commit to it. With people accepted off the waitlisted in this fashion, your yield is 100% (or something close to it; their promise to attend is in fact unenforceable, but you can make the offer only to those who sound like they're most sincere and really will accept). </p>
<p>So now you've filled up your class of 1,000 through 2,800 acceptances---2,700 accepted the old-fashioned way, and 100 accepted from the waitlist on negotiated terms---cutting your overall acceptance rate to 28%. The people you accept are just as qualified---you're drawing from the identical pool of 3,000 top applicants. That sounds like a lot of work for a marginal improvement in acceptance rate, but if you're very close to moving up a notch in the US News rankings, or worried about being bumped down a notch by an aggressive competitor, it may be worth it.</p>
<p>There's an even more pressing reason to use the waitlist. It allows the college to see "what they've got" and "what they need" before topping off the class.</p>
<p>Did they get their oboe player? Or do they need one from the waitlist?</p>
<p>Did they get enough classics majors? Latino/a students? Enough guys? A discus thrower for track and field?</p>
<p>Particularly at small schools, that's an invaluable tool.</p>
<p>I agree that by abusing the waitlist and gaming the system one could theoretically improve a school's US News selectivity numbers. But practically I've only heard of this possibly happening once. As far as I know, an acceptance off the waitlist has been pretty universally accompanied by formal notification in writing and/or online at any number of colleges I've been involved with directly or indirectly.</p>
<p>The possible exception last year, though, was Wash U. A number of CC posters waitlisted at the school complained about receiving calls in the late spring notifying them of acceptance but never seeing their waitlist status upgraded to accepted if the offer was turned down. Though formally accepted, they remained forever waitlisted as far as their online notification was concerned (and US News data?). </p>
<p>Again, doubt this is an endemic problem. I believe most schools use the waitlist honestly to protect from overenrollment, not to game the system.</p>
<p>^^concur; WL is primarily used to avoid over-enrollment and fill niches as I-dad notes. While dropping my S off for orientation, I bumped into a family in the lobby, and struck up a conversation. It seems the kid had just gotten of the WL four weeks prior, and was off to tennis practice (coach obviously lost a recruit, so kid came off the WL ~Aug 1.)</p>
<p>There are probably only a handful of colleges (or less) that really game the WL system, and WashU appears to be the biggest player in that game, since they WL the masses each and every year.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Again, doubt this is an endemic problem. I believe most schools use the waitlist honestly to protect from overenrollment, not to game the system.
[/quote]
That's why it works to the advantage of the few.</p>
<p>Well I did my part for Penn and gave them a 1580...sad to think there must be someone with a 1230 or something to balance me out....guess that's what the football team is for.</p>
<p>Northwestern? more like...Northworstern! <em>zing!</em></p>