<p>Harvard can eventually reach the goal of 100 percent yield of an outstanding group of admitted applicants, or as close to that goal as any college can, without necessarily needing to do anything to its largest-in-the-country NCAA sports program.</p>
<p>I imagine Athletic Scholarships (or lack thereof at Ivies) may also have something to do with it.</p>
<p>"Your inside information about Harvard comes to me as quite a surprise. It was my impression that Harvard's administration would not rest until its yield is 100%. "</p>
<p>An alum may have said that, but the statement was ridiculous. If Harvard's yield were 100%, it wouldn't have enough housing for its entering classes.</p>
<p>
[quote]
An alum may have said that, but the statement was ridiculous. If Harvard's yield were 100%, it wouldn't have enough housing for its entering classes.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Sorry, but that makes no sense. If a university's yield from year to year is close to 100%, then obviously it would only admit the number of students it needs to fill its entering class.</p>
<p>It makes total sense, Bay. If everyone who H offered admission to in this latest cycle said yes, H isn't going to have enough housing and they're not going to be able to handle that, because they built in whatever their current yield is. What part of that is confusing? </p>
<p>Besides, why would having a yield of 100% be necessarily a huge goal for H? It's unachievable anyway -- there is always going to be someone who was admitted to H who is simply going to prefer another campus for whatever other reason. I understand in general why colleges want to improve yield, but there has got to be a point at which those efforts yield only diminishing returns.</p>
<p>Harvard's head of admissions has been quoted as saying that they like to be able to to to the waitlist to fill holes in the class,</p>
<p>"Admitted students have until May 3 to accept or decline a place in Harvard’s Class of 2009.</p>
<p>Fitzsimmons noted that a small number of students are typically granted admission after that date.</p>
<p>“What we try to do is to take about 50 or 75 off the wait list,” he said. “Some years, it’s over the 100; some years, it’s none.”
The</a> Harvard Crimson :: News :: Admissions Rate Sets New Low</p>
<p>Pizzagirl,</p>
<p>This discussion is getting off-topic, but I think it was obvious I was not referring to THIS admission cycle. H's recent yield history is only about 85%. My point is that I was under the impression is that H's goal is to reach as close to 100% as possible. Why? Because apparently it factors into USNW's ranking systems, which right now ranks Harvard #2.</p>
<p>Actually, yield is no longer a factor in the calculation of USNWR rankings.</p>
<p>I was not meaning to limit my earlier comments to just Harvard and so perhaps the discussion could expand to include the other Ivy schools. I have a high regard for the academic qualities of the Ivy colleges, just as I have a high regard for the academic quality of colleges like Stanford, Duke, Northwestern, Rice, Vanderbilt, and Notre Dame. I just thought that it would be neat to see more elite colleges playing Division I athletics (like the Ivies claim that they are) try to compete at the top levels nationally in this area as well. </p>
<p>Looking forward and taking into account the new financial aid policies of all (?) of the Ivy colleges, perhaps more of the low-income athlete types who would otherwise choose another college for athletic scholarship purposes will now put one of the Ivy colleges on his/her college list. Is having more of these folks on Ivy campuses seen by the Ivy posters as being a positive or a negative?</p>
<p>I came late to this thread, so if this has been said earlier excuse moi. Make no mistake, the ivies do recruit athletes. In the 1980s, it was revealed that the Ivy League's officials were so concerned about the poor state of Columbia football (44 straight losses), they secretly agreed that Columbia would be allowed a greater number of athlete admits than the rest of the league.</p>
<p>Not to beat a dead horse, but here it is! USNWR's rankings based on yield!</p>
<p>USNews.com:</a> America's Best Colleges 2008: National Universities: Most Popular Colleges</p>
<p>Didn't realize you were talking about their "Honor Roll" lists. Sorry. </p>
<p>But for the calculation the oft-cited school ranking, the yield is not considered. Acceptance rate (1.5% of total score) is, but yield is not.</p>
<p>
[quote]
yield is no longer a factor in the calculation of USNWR rankings
[/quote]
</p>
<p>This is a correct statement. </p>
<p>Perhaps Bay is remembering this post by Hanna in the Parents Forum: </p>
<p><a href="http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/5219085-post417.html%5B/url%5D">http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/5219085-post417.html</a> </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>This is not Hanna making a definitive statement of Harvard admission policy, but it does reflect a culture in which Harvard takes nothing for granted. </p>
<p>Online</a> Extra: How Harvard Gets its Best and Brightest </p>
<p>Talent</a> scouts — The Harvard University Gazette </p>
<p>If there were anything about Harvard's current practices regarding sports that damaged yield (but there is not, as Harvard has as high a yield as any college), then Harvard might consider changing the sports program at Harvard. Harvard's current yield and outstanding pool of applicants suggests that there isn't anything seriously awry with Harvard's approach to sports on campus. By the way, I expect Harvard's yield to increase this year over last year.</p>
<p>"Looking forward and taking into account the new financial aid policies of all (?) of the Ivy colleges, perhaps more of the low-income athlete types who would otherwise choose another college for athletic scholarship purposes will now put one of the Ivy colleges on his/her college list. Is having more of these folks on Ivy campuses seen by the Ivy posters as being a positive or a negative?"</p>
<p>It's always a positive when a low-income person who is academically qualified can get a great education such as an Ivy one. I think it's great that the Ivies ensure that there is enough financial aid so that no low-income person need forego that type of education. I don't think it's "better" if those low-income people are also athletes versus if they aren't.</p>
<p>
[quote]
If there were anything about Harvard's current practices regarding sports that damaged yield (but there is not, as Harvard has as high a yield as any college)
[/quote]
</p>
<p>tokenadult,</p>
<p>Do you have anything to back this up? In other words, if Harvard is losing 21% of its admits to other universities, is there any research supporting your assertion that it is not due to Harvard's lack of competitive sports teams?</p>
<p>pizzagirl,
I think I understand your view that you give no value to athletic life and don't see any potential benefits to students at a college or to others associated with the college. </p>
<p>I hope you realize that, for a low-income athletic student, the quality of the athletic life of the college would likely be an important factor in his/her selection of a college. </p>
<p>Just out of curiosity, do you assign any value to any experiences that a college offers outside of the classroom?</p>
<p>^ lol i tink the impt factor for any low-income student would be aid, i dont think they will pass off a full-ride for a quality athletic experience</p>
<p>that said, the only reason y they view quality of athletic life as import is becoz of the possiblity of athletic scholarships, which qualifies them for a college they would otherwise not be able to get in due to academics....its more like a tool or a stepping-stone</p>
<p>a well-rounded college experience is impt, but academics are still paramount....i just dont see the need to have top-ranked sports teams in schools which already offer diverse and enriching sporting experiences</p>
<p>answering your qns</p>
<p>1)yes i think its cool to have the hoo-ha over a NCAA team, but only if in the process of achieving this we do not compromise admission standards....why should scholarships be offered for sports in place of academics, music or other area of achievements, if they are to be offered at all?</p>
<p>2)and having a top-ranked sports team or a quality athletic experience would affect the quality of the student body....lets face it, there arnt many Sporting Einsteins around, to be able to build such an NCAA team some students with atrocious grades (relative to the main student body) would have to be recruited....frankly speaking, even as an athlete myself, i would want to be around ppl who having outstanding academics and good athletics rather than national football stars who cant string a sentence together for christ's sake</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I fully agree with the above paragraph. Bring on the low income students. If they like to watch sports, there are plenty to watch at any Ivy League college, as has been stated in this thread by people who actually attended Ivy League colleges. If they like to play sports for the school varsity team, they have more opportunity to do that in an Ivy League college than in most other colleges, because Ivy League colleges have huge varsity sports programs. If they prefer to do other forms of recreation besides watching or playing sports, that's fine too. It's a free country and there are a lot of colleges. Anyone can apply to any college he or she likes--getting in is the problem. </p>
<p>I was asked above if there is any reason to suppose that the small number of Harvard applicants who are admitted but who do not enroll do so because Harvard doesn't have big sports a la the Big Ten. Most young people I know personally who declined an offer of admission from Harvard enrolled at MIT, which is certainly not a sports powerhouse. (I think statistics show that MIT and Yale are two of the three colleges that do best in cross-admit battles with Harvard. Each college studies this issue pretty carefully. Harvard, Yale, and MIT are much alike in having a focus on sports participation rather than on sports spectatorship.) I know absolutely NO ONE who turned down Harvard because he or she didn't like Harvard sports. (I do know one student who turned down Harvard to go to a college in a smaller college town, which happens to be a sports powerhouse college, but I listened to his reasons for preferring that college to Harvard, and small town atmosphere and more intimate feel of the university were mentioned, but sports wasn't mentioned at all.) I'm sure Harvard researches this issue. Perhaps some independent researcher researches this issue. Any independent researcher who researches college yield finds that Harvard is king of yield compared to the other colleges mentioned in this thread, so what evidence is there that Harvard should imitate them, rather than they imitating Harvard?</p>
<p>
[quote]
for a low-income athletic student, the quality of the athletic life of the college would likely be an important factor in his/her selection of a college
[/quote]
</p>
<p>What is the evidence for this? This must be an issue that some scholar has published about.</p>
<p>"I think I understand your view that you give no value to athletic life and don't see any potential benefits to students at a college or to others associated with the college."</p>
<p>That's decidedly not what I said. Indeed, I think that athletic PARTICIPATION is a good thing in the sense of staying physically fit, and I am personally pleased that my college now has a nicer workout center than it did in my day, when we did high-impact aerobics on concrete floors :-). I don't give a lot of value to WATCHING sports, though. </p>
<p>Of course I understand that it can be enjoyable for some people to watch sports. I don't personally think that it warrants compromising academic standards, however. Does my school do it? Yeah, probably to some extent -- I really don't know, nor would I stop donating if some subpar athletes got in. It's not the end of the world. But, I don't see a need to reward it, and given that Harvard *already makes it possible for anyone who is worthy of getting in to be able to afford it, I don't see why they should single out athletes and give them *more money.</p>
<p>"Just out of curiosity, do you assign any value to any experiences that a college offers outside of the classroom?"</p>
<p>Hawkette, that's a silly question. Of course I do. I don't find facilitating access to winning football games to be tied into the mission of a highly selective university, though.</p>