Yale University Early Action for Fall 2024 Admission

Colleges and Universities A-Z Yale University
262

Based on what they said, the only situation in which they would seem likely to do interviews with absolutely no identified interest in additional information would be if they had a lot of available volunteers in an area and yet relatively few applicants. I guess in any such areas they could do it randomly, or possibly just interview everyone.

I am not sure that is a very likely scenario, however, since I would think usually those two things (density of alums and density of applicants) would correlate.

But I don’t think this is really inconsistent with interviewees often getting rejected. Others here may know more, but when the Yale Admissions Podcast discussed interviews, they often seemed to be suggesting they could be most relevant for people where they were not sure the committee could really evaluate their fit for Yale based on the application alone, and they thought an interview report from a neutral would be helpful to that assessment.

Which makes sense. There is probably not much new they can get from an interview about academic qualifications, or awards and such. But, to use a handy example, if the point is:

Be prepared to talk about what gets you excited academically and ec-wise. Why Yale and Yale’s part in your future. Have questions ready for the interviewer directed at their experience during and after school.

OK, those sound like expansions on the fit-related questions they ask in the application. And to me it is plausible that an interview report could really help, sometimes, the committee address questions like that.

Of course all this still implies interviewees might have gotten past the initial review. But that is still a long way from admissions. I don’t know for sure how many people they are cutting out that way, but my guess is still only like around 1 in 15 (give or take) people who get past the initial review are going to get admitted anyway. Meaning something like 14 of 15 were academically qualified, but not quite what Yale was looking for.

And I am confident that getting a really positive assessment by the committee in terms of fit for Yale is a big part of who gets admitted at that point. So, being unsure you are a good fit based on just your application is not necessarily bad, but it would imply to me there is definitely a good chance the answer after the committee gets your interview report will still end up some form of “not quite”. In which case you will join the hordes of other academically well-qualified applicants who are not quite admitted to Yale.

263

There was a long discussion about SIDs in last years threads as well. In short, it is NOT indicative of anything. My D’23 applied SCEA to Yale last year. She was deferred and was given a SID in January during RD. Then finally got rejected. It’s all good as she’s now at Princeton. But don’t waste your time on portal astrology. It was not useful last year. Getting a SID (or not) is not indicative of acceptance. Best wishes to all of you!

4 Likes
264

Good to know. Esp as I did not get an interview yet! I feel my file is strong enough to get past the initial pre-read, but am nervous that not getting an interview means that the AO no longer has an interest. I guess 3 more weeks will tell!

265

I think you bring up a lot of good points. There are some quotes from the Yale podcast that I think almost contradict each other?

This part seems to suggest what you are saying (that interviews play a substantial role in committee, which is arguably the most important part):

“Another thing that the interview really helps us with is to help answer the questions that we’re always thinking about when we’re discussing students in committee, which is, what are they going to get out of Yale and what are they going to bring to Yale? 
 the interview can sometimes really help with those.”

But also here, the interview seems to be pretty unsubstantial: “Frequently, though, it doesn’t move the needle very much for an applicant.”

As for the pre-read stage, this also seems to contradict the podcast: “It’s also not the case for Yale that it’s a second round, or a second stage, or anything like that. It’s not that if you’re getting an interview, it’s because you’ve moved on to the next round”

Tbh I’m not sure what to make of it


266

That second statement makes no sense. An interview is quite clearly a second round, right? They can only know if additional information is needed if someone’s eyes have already been on the application.
Also, very very hard to imagine Yale (or any college – Duke has same “more information needed” policy this year) would publicly state an interview means the app has “moved on” because then you would have a massive freak out well before the decision date of everyone not contacted.
My guess is that the huge numbers of apps these last few years have proved unmanageable. Schools can’t interview everyone and are prioritizing kids they think are competitive. The “additional information” phrase is intentionally vague.

267

The AO office folks sounds a lot like my school administrators. Conversations are seemingly informative, but adding up what they offer and what they take back leaves you with only a vague sense of what to take away! It is a tough job, I suppose.

1 Like
268

My interpretation of those statements is that when they determine they need more information on fit they opt to interview where able and thus the reports are informative in committee to that end.

2 Likes
269

Would you say then it is bad to be asked for an interview, since, in a sense, your application did not offer a full picture?

270

Not at all, they like you enough to learn more! Good luck!

2 Likes
271

@isitmayyet Statistically speaking I think it means that you are likely to be deferred or admitted in SCEA. If there are 8K SCEA apps and 60% will be declined in REA that leaves 20-30% deferral and around 10% admit. If they are offering 8K interviews out of 50K total applications I cant imagine they are offering more than 2K SCEA interviews of which most of the 800 or so admitted students and the remaining deferred students will come from. Essentially about 35% of the SCEA (2800 give or take) will get accepted or deferred in early round. Getting an interview would generally get you in that range for SECA.

1 Like
272

I think they offer 18,000 interviews

273

It was only 9000 last year. Maybe even fewer this admission cycle


274

One thing to keep in mind is those episodes are spread over time.

The “not a second stage” quote is from Episode 8, which I believe was recorded in 2020.

The new initial review process was announced in Episode 30, January 2023. So I don’t think that line from Episode 8 is intending to address the initial review phase, as it did not exist at the time. But I do think the gist of it probably still applies, in the sense that even if you are past the initial review, it is not the case that “everything is going to then hinge on the interview report.” So it likely is still good advice that “don’t expect that your interview is your big opportunity to get in and it’s going to make or break your application. It’s not really the case.”

In terms of the other quotes, in the one they are discussing how the interview can “sometimes” really help with answering certain questions. But that is not the same thing as saying in all those cases it really helped change the outcome. In contrast, the move the needle quote is about what it does for the applicant as a whole, and they are talking about how it is just one piece of the puzzle and it is not typically make-or-break on their own. Which is reiterating what they said before.

This combination of thoughts is suggesting that getting real help answering those questions won’t always, indeed not often, change the outcome. But that is consistent with the discussion above where most people end up not quite being admitted, and even interviews the committee sees as helpful–in the sense they helped answer those questions–might not do a lot to change the outcome in the end, most of the time.

Of course the transcripts are consistent with the discussion above because I read it in the transcripts first! And I guess in my mind, at least, it makes sense. This is a process, part of the process is gathering information first, and sometimes they want more information than what is in the initial application. That information then may be helpful to their process, but that doesn’t mean it will necessarily do much to really help the applicant. Indeed, the harsh reality here is almost no one who goes through this process will actually end up admitted.

So helping the process move to completion simply isn’t inconsistent with that process usually ending up with a rejection anyway.

1 Like
275

Hmm, I’m not sure: Does it mean anything if Yale requested an alumni interview? - #9 by BKSquared

My wild and totally baseless theory is that applicants who receive any shade of a 2 (2-, 2+, maybe not 2++) overall rating receive an interview :sweat_smile: I think it would go along with the need for additional info idea


276

So if we are looking for clues in that episode, I note Mark once again talks about how when he is excited to present a case to committee, it is usually use the sees the file as consistently supporting a positive evaluation, and Hannah agrees with that concept of consistency.

This seems to dovetail with the somewhat confusing but certainly interesting “physics” discussion from Mark in the interview episode:

[Mark] So I like to think of the different parts of the application as different waves. And what you want is resonance, you want constructive interference. The best interview reports are the ones that really resonate with other parts of the file so that the person that I’ve met in your essays is the same kind of person I’ve met in your letters of recommendation, and that’s the same person who showed up with this disinterested third party, in the form of our interviewer, who didn’t know any of the other stuff. They are describing the exact same person. So I might learn something new but what I’m really getting is a reinforcement of the other parts of the application. So I say, I had a sense that this kind of person. And then this interview report really magnifies all of that together.

What this suggests to me is someone who they want to interview has perhaps not yet reached that level of exciting resonance on the basis of just things like their essays and recommendations. So they want to add this report from a disinterested third party to see if it will reinforce that resonance effect, or not. And even if that works, it just means the applicant can be presented to committee, not that they are actually going to be admitted.

So I am not sure such a person already actually has an overall grade, or not a fixed one at least, and the interview will then make the final difference in terms of which people with such grades get admitted.

It more sounds to me like their overall grade is still an incomplete, and hence they are not yet ripe for a committee discussion until the interview report is added to the file.

By the way, I think at least once or twice they discuss interview reports in the same context as midyear transcripts. I think that might be a helpful analogy. If they say they need to see your midyear transcript before considering you in committee, that would similarly suggest to me they are not necessarily saying you have a grade, it is more saying your grade is incomplete.

1 Like
277

@onthechopinblock It could mean that they had enough information on you to make a decision one way or the other, it could also mean that they did not have a volunteer to interview. I don’t remember where I read it but I believe they will only be able to offer up to about 9K interviews including RD. There is no way for us to really know but we wish you the best.

278

You always have some great insight! Thanks, this makes sense—hopefully others can read it and understand the process a little more :slight_smile:

2 Likes
279

Why do you think most of the SCEA admits will be interviewees?

Generally, they say many of their admits will not be interviewees. Is there a reason that couldn’t also be true specifically of SCEA admits?

1 Like
280

I had the same question. Since Yale does not seem to split the published total interview numbers between REA and RD, I guess there isn’t anyway for us to know, other than by guessing.

281

In fact we could speculate in all sorts of plausible ways.

Like, apparently there is a type of Yale admit where their assessment of good fit is confident enough that they see no need for an interview.

Off hand, it seems plausible to me those sorts of admits are more frequent in SCEA. After all, just to begin with those people have self-assessed as particularly good fits with Yale. You are also going to have some recruited athlete admits, some legacy admits, and so on. Those sorts of admits all might plausibly skew more toward no-interview-needed admits.

Or not, who knows? But to me it doesn’t feel safe to assume there are not many no-interview-needed SCEA admits.

2 Likes