<p>That schools are WLing and not accepting many or none is a sign that they are nailing it in terms of acceptances to actual seats from those who end up coming I have no problem with that. But I smell a change in that some schools are heavily accepting from the WL for yield purposes. That’s when they hedge their bets by WLing kids and then accepting those whose counselor or who swear that they will accept. It also helps financially since schools can say they are need blind and meet 100% of need for the regular applicants with no caveats made as a matter of course for the waitlists. So get those full pay hot to trot waitlisters to stretch the money and the yield.</p>
<p><a href=“http://www.aei-ideas.org/2014/04/when-courting-colleges-a-waitlist-decision-is-probably-a-resounding-no/#mbl[/url]”>http://www.aei-ideas.org/2014/04/when-courting-colleges-a-waitlist-decision-is-probably-a-resounding-no/#mbl</a> </p>
<p>Comment by the author of the study linked in the OP.</p>
<p>I think this has been apparent over the past couple years and most parents would encourage students who are waitlisted to find their place with one of those acceptances…for those that might be in that tiny minority who are offered a place it can be dealt with at that moment in time. I totally agree with cpt that it is how colleges are managing their yield and their finances. </p>
<p>Waitlists have been tantamount to a rejection at many colleges for as long as I can remember. Even back in 2007 I remember one of the colleges my son was waitlisted at some years didn’t take anyone at all off the list. If they are using it to manage yield it seems to me they’d be underaccepting for the class and would have to go to the waitlist more than before (unless of course they’ve also hugely increased the number of students on the waitlists.)</p>
<p>DS experienced this with a highly regarded east coast school who wait listed him, but made it clear if he would accept then and there, they would remove him and accept him. It was obviously a yield ploy and completely soured him on that university. As his parent who also spoke to the admissions officer and confirmed this insanity, I was outraged and told him there was not a prayer of a chance he would accept admission at an institution without benefit of seeing his FA package, etc. Two years later, I am still floored at the unethical practice this institution employs to increase its yield. (I believe I posted about this situation two years ago about this time, which you can dig up under my name if you wish to read more.)</p>
<p>
I thought waitlisted candidates, and whether they accept or reject, don’t count in yield calculations. Am I mistaken? How exactly is yield calculated?</p>
<p>I have a child who was ultimately accepted off a waitlist, along with around 100 classmates. Different universitiesuse the waitlist in different ways. The Common Data Set usually tells you how many they take from the waitlist each year. Some take very few and others take a considerable number.</p>
<p>It looks like there have been a few reports of students getting off the wait list already (i.e. March/April). But these have all involved athletes.</p>
<p>Dad, not sure about what counts toward yield, but by accepting hand-picked kids off the WL rather than admitting two or three times that many and only getting a small portion of them it could increase yield.</p>
<p>Yield=matriculators/admissions offers. So if a waitlisted applicant is given an offer and matriculates, that adds 1/1=100% to the yield calculation</p>
<p>Edit: So if a school accepts 100, and 50 agree to attend, the yield is 50/100=50%. If they then offer to another applicant on the waitlist who agrees to attend, the yield is 51/101=50.4%</p>
<p>It depends. Even they offer admission to someone on the wait list, there is still no guarantee the WL student will go. Also, the yield is often announced soon after deposit deadline as the number of students have paid the deposit vs the number of admission, although the number may change slightly afterward. In any case, the number of WL admission would be very small compared to the whole freshmen class that it may not affect the overall yield rate significantly.</p>
<p>In reality, most students should treat WL as rejected although miracle will sometimes happen.</p>
<p>Dad of 3, to explain my earlier comment about the university back East that accepted DS, they asked him on his application to disclose which institutions he was applying to. Based on where he was likely to be accepted, the university did NOT want to make a clear offer of acceptance because the likelihood was pretty high he would turn them down, which would affect their yield. Instead, putting him on the wait list forced him to have to tell THEM if he really wanted them. You’re right, wait lists do not affect yield, so they can manipulate their yield statistics artificially by putting students on wait lists. This way, when my son rejected them (not because of the wait list, but because of the smarmy tactics), it did not appear in the yield results. Make sense? </p>
<p>@laplatinum Wow, that is very sneaky, if I understand what you’re saying: schools manipulate yield by waitlisting students who seem “over qualified.” That way, they avoid admitting the student and being turned down (bad for yield). But if the kid signs on to the waitlist they know he or she might really want to come and they therefore admit them. It’s a win-win: they protect their yield but also get to include that waitlisted student’s impressive stats in their “class profile.” Sheesh. </p>
<p>On the other hand, DS’s school underestimated the yield and ended up scrambling to find enough
dorm space for all the students who showed up. It would have been better if they had used the wait list more aggressively.</p>
<p>That is exactly right @fondmemories. In the case of this big-name East Coast university, you not only committed to the wait list, but you told the admissions officer on the phone that you would accept admission then and there so he would REMOVE you from the wait list and make you an accepted student. This way they protect the yield stats. Of course they wanted DS. He had Ivy test scores, etc. It was very smarmy. I have never heard of this exact situation happening at other institutions, however, but it is certainly possible as a yield protection strategy. DS was wait listed at a UC school that year, too, but it was just a pro forma exercise and the likelihood he’d get off that wait list, which was his 10th choice anyway, was remote. </p>
<p>Active WL is one of the best yield management tools. Deferrals and WL are nonetheless mostly polite rejections that serve to please GC, interviewers, and possibly alumni. </p>
<p>Nothing scandalous per se. Just part of the game. As long as the school is transparent about the process, all is well. Schools that hide this information are … well blatantly devious. Common Data Sets anyone? Chicago? </p>
<p>What a freaking scam! Seems like some Admissions Offices are taking pointers from the NCAA.</p>
<p>I was surprised how many students are getting waitlisted. I wonder how well this works out in practice for colleges. My daughter was WL at one of her top choices, but I suspect that if she gets called, she may not feel comfortable now that she’s missed out the chance to do an accepted students visit and learn about the program in detail. She has some good offers and once she settles on one I doubt she will want to drop that plan. So does the mean they’re likely to attract the kids whose other alternatives aren’t as attractive? Seems like they would get a weaker pool overall with that strategy.</p>
<p>I think another way to look at WL is for need aware schools to weed out those less than top tier students that has financial needs. They only take off students that has expressed High Love and No FA needs.</p>