<p>Does a college admit more students than spots available to account for students who will reject their acceptance?</p>
<p>For example, let’s say Princeton accepted 1000 students but only 600 enrolled. </p>
<p>Did Princeton accept 400 more students on purpose to account for kids who will not go to Princeton? OR does Princeton now have 400 open spots that are going to be empty?</p>
<p>They admit more than they have spots for because they know that they will have a certain - generally predictable number- who will go elsewhere. That’s where the ‘selectivity’ statistic comes from - how many offers does a school have to make in order to fill it’s freshman class. So no, they don’t go to the waiting list for those 400 extra spots, if that’s what you are wondering.</p>
<p>So, in other words, as the college gets worse, they will accept more kids because they know more kids are going to reject their acceptance?</p>
<p>Some colleges try to raise their yields by rejecting or waitlisting top applicants, on the theory that the top applicants are just using them as a safety and will probably go elsewhere. (It typically is the case that yield is highest at the lowest end of the admissions class and lowest at the highest end of the admissions class.)</p>
<p>If your first choice college is a likely safety for admissions if just looking at stats, check its common data set section C7 for whether it uses “level of interest” in admissions. If it does, you may have to play the “level of interest” game – e.g. visit and make sure that the visit is somehow recorded by the admissions office, etc… However, the super-selective colleges and most public colleges do not use “level of interest”. But using “level of interest” is common at private colleges not at the super-selective level (including those just a bit less selective that some applicants to super-selective schools mistakenly apply to as safeties), and some public colleges like Michigan do use it.</p>
<p>"So, in other words, as the college gets worse, they will accept more kids because they know more kids are going to reject their acceptance? "</p>
<p>It’s not that. Colleges know, historically, the general number of YES replies and NO replies they will get. They extrapolate and admit accordingly to try to fill each open slot. For the more selective colleges, the use of waitlists creates a ready pool of people just in case the initial yield is lower than forecast.</p>
<p>It’s simple math and simple business.</p>
<p>So if I’m applying to the following schools:</p>
<p>Harvard (High Reach)
Princeton (High Reach)
Williams (High Reach)
Amherst (High Reach)
Yale (High Reach)
Stanford (High Reach)
UPenn (Reach)
UChicago (Reach)
Dartmouth (Reach)
Carleton (Match)
WashU (High Match)
Vanderbilt (High Match)
Emory (Match)
Wake Forest (Match)
UW-Madison (Safety)
UMN-TC (Safety)
UND (Safety)
UMD (Safety)</p>
<p>What would your analysis say? Like can you give me an example with my schools.</p>
<p>Schools have computer-models that they use that tell them approx how many accepted students will enroll. They don’t need the numbers to be perfect, but close.</p>
<p>These models also allow them to over-award financial aid and merit awards. Which means that when a needy or merit student ends up declining, that does NOT mean that his money can now go to someone else. Exceptions might be when there is only 1 or 2 merit awards, so they might re-award after the 1-2 students decline.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Like, give you an example of what? The high reach schools on your list are high reach because of your statistical profile versus the competition and the low admissions rate. Either these schools find you an acceptable candidate or they don’t. If you’re among the 8% accepted by Stanford that’s all that matters. It’s irrelevant to you if 98% or 90% accept their offers of admission.</p>
<p>As for an analysis of your list, with 18 applications hopefully you’re working on essays already. IMO that’s far too many schools; it’s difficult to imagine any candidate doing a superlative job on this many applications. Anything less that a stellar application will likely result in a rejection from the high reaches on your list. But to each his own.</p>
<p>^^ yeah. goingtoapply, your original question has nothing to do with your relative chances at any school. your analytical skills need some sharpening.</p>
<p>@vinceh – My statistical profile is above average for all of the schools I’m applying to. The only reason I wrote reach is because the top 10 are reaches to EVERYONE.</p>
<p>Although there are 18 applications – keep in mind that the bottom 4 schools have no essay requirements as they are all state schools. WashU, Vanderbilt, and Carleton have VERY easy supplements so those don’t really count either. So in reality, I have 1 common app and 11 supplements to craft. Also, I started essay writing last week. Do you think it’s any more manageable now?</p>
<p>@T26E4 – Sorry for not being specific enough on what I was trying to ask by giving my list of schools. I’m not asking for my chances to get into these schools. Up above, ucbalumnus wrote something about how some schools that are reaches but not high reaches use level of interest to gauge candidates. So I wanted clarification and was asking to apply that paragraph to my list of schools.</p>
<p>Also, Dartmouth has no essay either, so 10 supplements to craft.</p>
<p>Harvard 76% yield this year
[College</a> Yields: Harvard, U Of Chicago Report Record Numbers](<a href=“HuffPost - Breaking News, U.S. and World News | HuffPost”>College Yields: Harvard, U Of Chicago Report Record Numbers | HuffPost College)</p>
<p>OP, you can answer some of your questions by checking the “yield” statistics for each of the schools on your list…that is the percentage of students who accept the offer of admission. Those numbers are available in any college guide.</p>
<p>I am sure you are a very strong student, but even so, your list seems top heavy to me. Some of the state schools on your list are not easy admits for out of state students. And some of the schools on your list that you identify as “match” are still tough admits who accept fewer than about 30% of their applicants…such as Emory, Vanderbilt and Wash U…</p>
<p>If you want to, look up some threads from a couple of years ago about Andison.</p>
<p>“Also, Dartmouth has no essay either”</p>
<p>that’s not what their website says:</p>
<p>it lists a personal essay/ statement as required.
[Regular</a> Decision](<a href=“Apply to Dartmouth | Dartmouth Admissions”>Apply to Dartmouth | Dartmouth Admissions)</p>
<p>and dont forget they also require a Peer evaluation, which must be written by a friend or fellow student.</p>
<p>Thanks. I am in state for U of M and UW’s second favorite state is MN. And I have labeled them as High Match for a reason :)</p>
<p>goingtoapply:
</p>
<p>Understand that the statistical profile you see is tempered by the developmental admits, olympic athletes, URM, recruited athletes, etc. that may need lower stats for admission. If you are an unhooked upper middle class white or asian student, you need to be at the top end of the statistical profile to appear competitive.</p>
<p>Stradmom, that article is from two years ago if you didn’t know. UChicago’s yield jumped to 47% this year and Harvard’s yield is in the low 80’s now I think.</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>Menlo - what I think he means is that Dartmouth, unlike its peer institutions, doesn’t require an extra essay beyond the standard common app essay. Which is true. It doesn’t.</p>
<p>Stradmom - Harvard’s yield topped 80% this year:
[Harvard</a> Yield for Class of 2016 Soars to 81% | News | The Harvard Crimson](<a href=“http://www.thecrimson.com/article/2012/5/10/admissions-yield-2016-action/]Harvard”>Harvard Yield for Class of 2016 Soars to 81% | News | The Harvard Crimson)</p>
<p>My apologies for getting the date wrong. I thought the article might fill in some blanks in the OP’s knowledge of yield rates, even though it’s not the latest information.</p>
<p>That was what I was thinking after you posted that, sorry. Just wanted to make sure people knew the updated yields. :D</p>