The Ivy-Wise yield for Wesleyan is incorrect and is probably based on past targets or class size. By all accounts, Wesleyan overaccepted by about 140 students this year!
In another thread, I asked a kid majoring in math why he wanted to transfer out of wustl, he said,
“If you aren’t premed, then most STEM pursuits are mediocre, including the department of my major. I also don’t really vibe with the environment of the school and the student body, which is definitely a more minor issue, but I want to find a place where I’ll be somewhat happy for the next few years.”
1 Like
Eliminating ED would definitely make things more fair, but unless the Justice dept makes it illegal, for being anti-competitive, which imo it its, more colleges will use it and select more students in the ED round. I wouldn’t put a max on the number of colleges as that would make things even more restrictive than it is.
Colleges somehow managed to convince many families that EDs (both ED 1 & 2) are their tickets to selective colleges, even though the truth is that EDs disproportionally benefit the colleges at the expense of most applicants and their families. EDs are among the most significant factors that made RD nearly irrelevant for many of these colleges. These colleges would have loved to fill their classes completely with EDs if they didn’t need to keep the appearance that RD is still somewhat viable so as to drive up the number of RD applications (and to drive down the rate of acceptance).
4 Likes
Usually those colleges like to use a very limited number of merit scholarships as allurements.
Some of these colleges legitimately think they’ll get a lot of good candidates in the RD round as well, maybe even some that are better than ED, now they may not get the yield of course but you don’t want to totally shut yourself off in RD.
If they really care about getting good candidates, shouldn’t they get rid of EDs all together, so that better RD applicants wouldn’t be shut out because ED admits have taken up most of the seats?
5 Likes
I know what you mean about name recognition, I’d never heard of it until we started looking at US News, but what a find!
1 Like
They care about a lot of things, not just good candidates, but good candidates that will enroll. They all have budgets, even the wealthier colleges, so yield, enrollment, selectivity all have to be considered. And given that ED benefits the college a lot more than it benefits the families, and it helps achieve those goals better than RD, they’ll take the risk of losing out on some really good applicants.
Depends on the definition of “good”. For some definitions of “good” from those colleges’ points of view, ED helps get “good” students (e.g. those with lower financial aid need, so that a smaller financial aid budget is needed while still being able to claim to “meet full need”). Obviously, such a definition of “good” may not be the same as “the strongest academic and other merit and achievement”.
2 Likes
I agree with that. I didn’t mention financial aid in my earlier posts on this topic because of my observation (at least based on CC discussions) that many of the students and their families who are most supportive of, or even enthusiastic about, EDs are full pay. Even those who aren’t don’t seem to be concerned that they may not receive the best (or even an adequate) FA package. They always point to some examples of someone who received a “great” financial aid offer to justify their lack of concerns in that regard.
1 Like
Limiting the number of colleges is definitely where I think we need to head. Applicants can not be at all serious about schools 13-20 something on their lists. I don’t know where traction can be gained to create such a system.
It may need to start with a select group of schools forming an admissions compact. Like private AAU institutions creating a joint pool where students disclose priority 1 to n. Maybe 6-8 schools. Schools can do a quick yes/no/maybe pre-read on a rolling basis on any applicant identified as a match. Obviously they’ll focus more on the applicants highest up their priority list. When you’re dealing with schools with 6% acceptance, maybe 2% of apps are obvious yeses, 80% are no’s and 18% are maybes anyway.
It allows schools to spend their time focusing on candidates listing them as one of their preferred 1-3 schools at any point in time.
Unfortunately, for those students who need to merit hunt (a not insignificant proportion of applicants), applying to 12+ schools is the norm. Because most schools don’t have merit grids, it is often unknowable before applying how much merit (discount) one might get until they apply and are accepted.
I don’t see application limits coming anytime soon. Even if common app (or other app vehicles) did place limits, students could just use each college’s own app…many colleges still offer that option, and if additional limits were in place, more colleges would add their own app.
3 Likes
I don’t know if they’re enthusiastic about it given that it’s binding. CC makes ED appear more popular than it is. Even at the 5 ivies that have it, it’s only about 10-15% of applications.
"It may need to start with a select group of schools forming an admissions compact. "
That sounds a lot like collusion that colleges have tried in the past, at which point I think the DOJ told them to stop (this could have been colleges sharing ED data or the ivies deciding on financial aid together).
However, having to do unique applications may be enough of a barrier to reduce the number of applications by some students. Presumably, that is the reason for the Common/Coalition/Universal applications, since colleges generally want to increase their application volume.
I agree…the focus on greater equity and access is another reason that IMO there won’t ever be application limits. Look at HBCU app…one $20 app allows the student to apply to 62 schools. It’s generally in the best interest of most, if not all, parties to not limit apps.
Other examples of shared applications are shared state university applications.
Shared applications are also helpful for high school staff. Counselors need to be familiar with fewer types of applications (particularly important with first-generation-to-college students), and need to upload their recommendation text to fewer places (also applies to teacher recommenders).
I agree. What I tossed out wasn’t intended to be a fully baked idea or anything like that. You could have greater limits for candidates with demonstrated need. You could have a binding NPC among compact mschools where you submit all information at once and NPC is calculated for all 40 or so private AAU schools. You can run a “beefier” Questbridge style matching program to enhance access for those with demonstrated need, first Gen college, etc.
There are ways to execute something like this that would definitely not run against DOJ complaints where you’re increasing transparency and decision liquidity in the “market”. No one needs to be bound by the highest ordered “accepted” on their list.
It doesn’t really matter if there is a limit or not. The overriding goal:
-
ensure that applicants whose credentials match a given institution’s is given as much possible time for consideration as early as possible.
-
allow applicants real time yes/no/maybe information as quickly as possible so they can adjust choices.
The “front end” of the pipeline could be jointly beefed up, but presumptive “no’s” are both numerous and easy to quickly spot. Schools could get a “these are applicants who have identified you in their top 4, not in any particular order” with the top 4 reshuffling as students are cut from their higher choices. Maybe if a kid is a quick “no” from NU and Duke, they realize they need to reshuffle their list, fill out supplementals to add another school, etc. This is more of a non-binding, rolling ED that gives schools and applicants more timely info to create matches/interest/decisions. Once you get n acceptances, if you want to keep “shopping”, you need to reject an acceptance. That sort of thing.
2 Likes
Good point, but they do produce a lot of grads that end up in business.
Some updated numbers for the class of 2025: 33,634 applied and 4,374 accepted.
Class of 2025 is largest in school history with 1,994 students. If I am doing the math right that is a 45-46% yield overall.
3,066 applied ED so up from the 1,840 the previous year. Again, if I am doing math right 9 - 10% of the total applicants applied ED.
From their newspaper:
Washington University in St. Louis is welcoming the Class of 2025, its biggest and most diverse yet. This week, 1,994 first-year students from 49 states and 20 countries will move onto the South 40. Among them: 17% are Pell Grant-eligible, 12% are the first in their families to attend college, 5% are international and 49% identify as students of color.
3 Likes