@BiffBrown : No, they just do not have a good yield model, so they admit a a little over 5k(5.1-5.2k) regardless (this started when they wanted 1350+ students instead of 1300-1350. When they had 15-18k apps, they admitted like 4.5-4.8k students. Beyond yield, it kind of doesn’t matter as long as the app. numbers go up, at least the admit rate will go down. However, you have to do tricks to manipulate or enhance yield. Part of it is just accepting less of the students in the first place…which sucks for applicants but is a part of selectivity in USNWR (idiots promote unethical tactics that make applying to elites a nightmare) other factors. When they want a smaller class, I’m pretty sure they just go to the wait-list even less than they do already. This is one of those years I expect that.
Basically means Emory should market better and make a new model, so that they can admit a lower number of students and enhance both yield and admit rate (I guess lower is better in this prestige game Emory is a part of) at the same time. Like some schools will decrease in admit rate and increase yield regardless of if they get more applications because their models for predicting who/what type will come are so good. Yield indicates some weird mixture of popularity and manipulation, but most will see a good yield as popularity only when it could be an admissions office learning to play with numbers…Chicago. Great academically, but no doubt playing this game got them far in the rankings and others who played afterwards are benefiting (have benefiting) as well. Either way, Emory isn’t there. Marketing not strong/aggressive enough (means Emory needs to figure out what it is so that it can actually present itself effectively) and model obviously not good enough to play the same game. It costs to be somewhat ethical. Your rank and admissions stats which serve as the only proxy for prestige among the naive will lag versus quality level by not playing these games.