Welcome to College Confidential!

The leading college-bound community on the web

Sign Up For Free

Join for FREE, and start talking with other members, weighing in on community discussions, and more.

Also, by registering and logging in you'll see fewer ads and pesky welcome messages (like this one!)

As a CC member, you can:

  • Reply to threads, and start your own.
  • Post reviews of your campus visits.
  • Find hundreds of pages of informative articles.
  • Search from over 3 million scholarships.
We want your feedback! Complete our survey and enter to win one of four $25 gift cards.

STANFORD planning on a 68% yield rate this year

2

Replies to: STANFORD planning on a 68% yield rate this year

  • yayverilyyayverily Registered User Posts: 222 Junior Member
    Just came across this thread tonight, and wanted to add my two cents. Yes, 84% of applicants with straight A's (translation--weighted GPA of 4.0) were accepted--you can't read it any other way. In fact, the Stanford news release that came out earlier this month stated "nearly 80%" of those accepted had a GPA of at least 4.0. I'm surprised nobody else has picked up on this, as it runs completely counter to the idea that each candidate should be considered on his or her own merits, as a complete person.

    So the secret is out--high school GPA is almost the only thing that matters if you want to be accepted by Stanford. 84% is not only high, it's ridiculously high. Any statistician would tell you that is an "extremely strong correlation". And of course it completely ignores the fact that different high schools grade differently. But of course, basing admissions decisions largely on GPA sure makes the selection process go a lot faster!
  • yahoooyahooo Registered User Posts: 1,386 Senior Member
    4.0 weighted isn't a high gpa..
  • chillaxinchillaxin Registered User Posts: 965 Member
    Straight A's isn't a weighted GPA of 4.0, but an unweighted GPA of 4.0.
    nearly 80%" of those accepted had a GPA of at least 4.0
    Doesn't that mean that eighty percent of people who got in had GPAs of 4.0, and not that eighty percent of all who applied with 4.0s got accepted?
  • TetragrammatonTetragrammaton Registered User Posts: 392 Member
    I read "straight As" to mean an unweighted GPA.

    Actually, now that I think of it, a 4.0 UW may be rare enough that the statistic could be true.

    But a good majority of Stanford's applicants have over a 4.0 Weighted. So your "translation" couldn't really work.

    I wish it could, though. Stanford will see a weigted GPA of 4.0 for me, which I fear is cripplingly low.
  • lexinorbitlexinorbit Registered User Posts: 312 Member
    why is it bad for waitlisted people? I don't see your line of reasoning. Please explain. It is only a 68% yield rate, which means they have to resort to the waiting lists.
  • stambliark41stambliark41 Registered User Posts: 2,527 Senior Member
    "So the secret is out--high school GPA is almost the only thing that matters if you want to be accepted by Stanford."

    yayverily, there is no way that is correct. The reason is this: there are too many applicants with a 4.0 for Stanford to accept 84% of them. For example, there were 3,000 Valedictorians in the Harvard pool last year. I assume most of these had a 4.0, and that many students who were not Valedictorian had a 4.0 as well. Even if GPA were the ONLY factor, there is no way that 84% could be accepted.
  • cjanthonycjanthony Registered User Posts: 46 Junior Member
    Well, it would be great for waitlisted people if Stanford planned on a 100% matriculation rate. Obviously, they didn't, which is why they admitted so many students, who, if they all came, would wreck havoc for Stanford's housing.

    They planned (or guessed) pretty well this year bc last year the full class size was only 1633 (with 13 waitlisted kids) so basically 1620. This year they have 1657, so if they only wanted a class as big as last years, they wouldn't take anyone off the waitlist. Hopefully they want a big class and have to take more off the waitlist.
  • DRabDRab Registered User Posts: 6,104 Senior Member
    Clearly those test scores don't even enter the picture, considering how high Stanford's averages are.

    :rolleyes:
  • JimmyEatWorld711JimmyEatWorld711 Registered User Posts: 2,399 Senior Member
    the Stanford news release that came out earlier this month stated "nearly 80%" of those accepted had a GPA of at least 4.0.
    That's not the point. Their use of "at least" implies that the GPA they're talking about is weighted GPA. So, for example, if Stanford releases a statistic that 80% of those accepted had a 700 or higher SAT Math score, would you be able to infer that a large percentage of Stanford admits had 800s? No, of course not, this inference makes no statistical sense. Hence you can't infer that lots of people had 4.0uw knowing that lots of people had 4.0w.
    Actually, now that I think of it, a 4.0 UW may be rare enough that the statistic could be true.
    I just don't know. In my class of 390 (and my school isn't especially competitive, just sorta grade inflated), we had 16 people with 4.0 unweighted after seven semesters. I was the only one who got in.

    Maybe the Dean used "straight A's" to mean 4.0 weighted? It sounds about right that 80-some percent of people with 4.0 weighted are accepted, considering how many URM/athlete/legacy/really bright kids who got a few low grades there are.
  • TSATSA Registered User Posts: 100 Junior Member
    To clarify for alexinorbit:

    Stanford receives such and such number of applications each year (this year, it was over 22,000), and admits such and such percentage of them (Just under 11%). If every admit accepted their offer of admission, there would be no need to take people from the waitlist, because the yield would be 100%. However, this is never the case. While most students choose to enroll at Stanford, some do not. Over the years, Stanford has observed this, and has learned to add an extra number (in the hundreds) of students, so that the incoming class size can be consistent year-to-year. In other words, the people at the admissions department have figured out approximately what percent of students enroll who are admitted, known as the “yield”, (it usually hovers between 66% and 70%--I don’t have the exact margin of error), and use it to admit the number of students the university can handle. It is unusual for the university to be over-enrolled, because it would much rather take students from the wait list if there is a deficiency in the class size, rather than deal with the extra number of people who are admitted (and sort through all of the housing problems.)

    Last year, the yield was slightly lower than “ideal”, and so the admissions department had to take applicants from the wait list to replace the spots that the predicted matriculants would have taken. This year, apparently, the yield has increased, which means that fewer (if any) students will be taken from the waitlist. Thus, this year is not a good year for waitlisted students, because their chances of acceptance are relatively smaller.

    A school that takes very little to none of its applicants from the wait list (like Stanford) has the yield percentages figured out pretty well, generally speaking.
  • n1bigduden1bigdude Registered User Posts: 350 Member
    Well maybe Shaw meant strait As as in no A-s? I know that in many schoos, A-s are still considered 4.0s.
  • chillaxinchillaxin Registered User Posts: 965 Member
    Maybe the Dean used "straight A's" to mean 4.0 weighted? It sounds about right that 80-some percent of people with 4.0 weighted are accepted

    But I still don't think that "80% of the accepted class have at least a 4.0" means the same as 80% of all people with at least a 4.0 is accepted. I don't know, maybe I'm not explaining what I'm saying very well.
    Well maybe Shaw meant strait As as in no A-s? I know that in many schoos, A-s are still considered 4.0s.

    That would make a lot more sense, since Stanford does calculate its own GPA. Still, can the secret to Stanford really be just getting straight-A's, even if it's only A's or A+'s?
  • JimmyEatWorld711JimmyEatWorld711 Registered User Posts: 2,399 Senior Member
    No, chillaxin, I understand and agree with what you said earlier. "80% of the accepted class have at least a 4.0" does not mean the same as 80% of all people with at least a 4.0 is accepted. The comment that from my post that you quoted is in reference to the 84% cited by the Dean in the OP.
  • chillaxinchillaxin Registered User Posts: 965 Member
    Ahh, got it. Sorry for the mix-up. :]
  • lkilki Registered User Posts: 192 Junior Member
    I mean empirically, there must be something wrong with 84% of an admit class getting all As. As a stanford student, i can say that while we're all very bright and hard working, most of us managed to get a B or two in high school. Such is the course of life. If it's true that so many admits have straight As, which would mean that at least 75% or so of the matriculating class has straight As (assuming two thirds yield rate), then I clearly have a group of friends here at Stanford that is Sooooo wildly not representational that I've managed to hang out only with the slacker stoner athletes... which is hardly true..


    Rant, but the point is clear
2
This discussion has been closed.