Some admission questions, misconseptions

muckdogs07
Sun, 26 Aug 2012 20:36:16 +0000

Gibby,

Thanks for providing the figures on 2011 hooked EA acceptances, assuming your numbers are right and the 2011 class at Yale included 340-350 hooked early admits and the 2012 numbers were comparable (using 345 as my number for SCEA acceptances), then Yale’s early admit unhooked rate was 8.33% (according to the choice on nyt, Yale’s EA stats for 2012 were 675 acceptances out of 4304 applicants = 15.68%; take out 345 and this leaves 330 unhooked EA acceptances; then divide 330 by 3959 (number of total applicants minus the hooked acceptances and you get an unhooked EA admit rate of 8.33%).

This compares with an overall admit rate (both EA + RD) of about 6.8% (per the choice, 1,975 acceptances out of 28,974 applicants). Taking out the EA pool completely, this leaves 1300 acceptances out of 24,670 applicants or 5.26%. So, even looking at unhooked SCEA v. RD, the SCEA unhooked had a 50%-plus better chance than their RD counterparts. If Yale is captainbrohabs true love, then I would go for it SCEA, as it does appear their is an advantage.

As for Yale admissions statements, almost all admissions departments say the same thing – RD = no disadvantage over EA/ED – and why wouldn’t they so as not to discourage RD applicants. But that does not make it so. As for the super star applicants, I doubt this accounts for the difference as Harvard, Princeton, and Stanford also were SCEA in 2012 and Yale’s SCEA pool was lower in 2012 than 2012 by over 18%. Plus how do you measure superstar v. typical accepted yale student (an oxymoron). They are all superstars.