@Mastodon97 I’m not sure I completely agree. While I would say that’s the case at many schools (say Duke which only takes a few dozen transfers), the fact that Vanderbilt has a similar retention rate (~97%) and undergraduate class size to those schools yet consistently enrolls ~200 transfers each year suggests other factors are in play. Personally I think it’s just Vanderbilt’s policy to set aside 100-200 transfer seats each year regardless of the retention rate which can’t rise much higher anyways.
Also I think the claim of Vanderbilt using a higher transfer acceptance rate to “game” freshman admission statistics is somewhat overstated. While an imperfect comparison, for reference the freshman admit rate was ~10.7% last year. Even if we now included all transfer acceptances that year the admit rate would still be only 12%, hardly a major improvement.
One, transfers do not effect graduation rate. See definition posted above. Heres a quote from another source to prove this, as I realize the definition is somewhat ambiguous:
“the graduation rate does not include transfer students” (https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/college-inc/post/college-grad-rates-are-bad-data/2012/01/26/gIQAfmdKTQ_blog.html?utm_term=.c64cf1dbbbf5) Interestly enough, transfers are actually counted for their old school for this stat. So if we all transferred to vandy and graduated, then we wouldn’t be counted in vandys grad rate, but would be considered dropout at our old university.
Second, if you look at the retention rates, its high at all these top schoos( https://www.usnews.com/best-colleges/rankings/national-universities/freshmen-least-most-likely-return). Both Vandy and Cornell are 97%. the higher transfer rate is because they set aside seats for transfers. Georgetown, for example, actually has a lower retention rate(96%) and a lower transfer rate. The question is then, why would a school set aside more for transfers? I have not found any reasoning for this besides the intuitive one that I stated above.
To answer somehmongirls question, let me explain. Lets say a school has room for 100 new students. Look at the following 2 situations
a: 50 of seats go to transfers, 50 go to first years
b: 75 go to transfers, 25 go to first years.
Ok, now assuming that transfers have no effect on stats, then, statistically speaking, the only difference between A and B is the 25 more first years who got in in situation A. one would assume that the 25 who didn’t get in in situation B had the worse stats. Thus, the average stats of first year students in B is superior to A. Thus, again assuming transfers don’t affect stats, the overall stats for school would be higher if they selected B over A. In other words, admitting more transfer students allow them to deny first year students with stats that are weighing down averages.
That’s what I am saying. Look, I’m not saying its some consiprary theory. More of just like “oh if we accept a few more transfers we can approve our stats” kinda of thing.
I guess, I was just saying that at Vanderbilts level there is not really a shortage of students with stellar stats where I think they’d need to do this
@somehmonggirl My opinion is that the type of transfer students vandy is accepting all know what they are doing, and have a track record of high college success. For whatever reason, a lot (i mean a lot) of first year students fall off hugely when they get to college. My guess is, they are hedging their bets that transfers will continue to perform well at their school and cover the students who they admitted as first years who are either failing or barely scraping by. Also, a lot of people don’t put together how to do well in school until later than others.
Yes, they have a lot of great students, but that doesn’t mean it cant be improved. Theirs one at the top of the top and the bottom of the top. So this may allow them to reject some at bottom of top. U see? Again, not saying its a widespread conspirarcy but maybe more of a ad hoc kind of thing.
And I agree with @watermychances . I honestly believe both play a role. Combined with maybe they like something about what transfers provide to the community. I think we tend to have a much different college experience and maybe they think that experience is conducive to contributing to campus community or being successful in life.
But maybe I just have too much of a cynical world view.
@AGoodFloridian, thanks for that explanation. How is it that there is housing for the students transferring into Vandy, or do many intend to live off campus?
Hey guys, what do you think of a current freshman not sending a midterm report for Spring 2017? Do you think it would raise any eyebrows for the ad comms? I had a 3.92 at the end of Fall 2016 and a 3.72 for my current midterm grade.
I wouldn’t send it unless it was stronger than your cumulative/upward trend/asked for
and it’s not weird to decide to not send, it’s an additional form inessential to your application
I was just elected into SGA at my current institution. Would this be something worth contacting my counselor and updating them on?
@RunnerDude14 The only thing I’d update admissions about at this point is anything that has to do with grades.
keep it in your pocket for if you’re in the one of the last waves of applicants or get waitlisted
Could decisions be coming out next Friday or Monday?
Potentially based on last year portals could be updated this Friday and emails sent to those whose portals were updated this upcoming Monday
If you’re already a sophomore and will be entering Vanderbilt as a junior, then sending in your mid-term report won’t do much.
On the other hand, if you’re in your second semester and only have one semester worth of college grades to show, sending in your mid-term report for your second semester could be a great supplement to your overall application. If you fall into that category, I’d personally suggest you send them it.
As for decisions… Yikes, this Friday huh?
@somehmonggirl if I don’t get accepted this Friday, does that mean I would get waitlisted or rejected eventually?
People will not get rejected this Friday right?