<p>A lot of emphasis is to be placed on recruiting off the West Coast, in areas where Stanford has not been as successful as its peers in getting the top students.</p>
<p>Alumni will become involved in the effort, hopefully, to an extent they haven’t been in the past.</p>
<p>Much emphasis will be placed on increasing yield.</p>
<p>To this end, there were 121 “likely letters” sent this year, including 61 to “academic superstars” and 60 to top URM candidates, hoping to gain a recruiting edge with them over the competition.</p>
<p>Further, special telephone solicitations were sent to over 80 of the SCEA admits who, along with the 161 who got “likely letters”, were probably admitted to competing institutions as well.</p>
<p>Faculty comments that the humanities students are not as high quality as the science majors, perhaps due to Stanford’s “semi-tech reputation.” Efforts needed to recruit better potential humanities students.</p>
<p>2430 admits, and 1657 matriculants expected, for a 68% yield rate.</p>
<p>wow, great article/post. very interesting read.</p>
<p>one question: on page 10 in the last sentence of the second-to-last paragraph of the page, it states: “And this is all in concert with the extraordinarily wonderful announcement from President Hennessy that in five years or so perhaps we can try to work towards being completely need-blind and need-based.”</p>
<p>I think it’s referring to international admits, who are currently NOT admitted on a need-blind basis. Stanford isn’t unique in this respect; most if not all of its competitors also assess need when reading international applications.</p>
<p>I thought it was interesting when Dean Shaw noted that 16% of people with straight A’s were rejected. Maybe I’m just too familiar with high school grade inflation, but the admit rate for straight-A students seems very high…</p>
<p>I thought so too. When I was told at an information session that 40% of 1600 scorers got in, it was an impressive statistic. But “only” 84% of straight-A students? Perhaps Stanford places more emphasis on grades than we’ve been led to believe (most people I’ve spoken to seem to think that Stanford has an essay- and EC-heavy evaluation).</p>
<p>I’m pretty shocked by that statistic as well! Is it possible that it’s a typo? I feel that so many more students would have been admitted if only 16% were denied admission. That would mean that less than 3000 of those 20,000+ who applied had straight-A’s, something I find very difficult to believe. Or perhaps he meant to say sixty and said sixteen, which would go along with the 40% of 1600 scorers admitted?</p>
<p>Do you guys think 16% straight A students accepted would be too low?</p>
<p>I would hypothesize that most of those “all study, no play” applicants that Stanford likes to reject, saying that they lack “intellectual vitality”, would be straight A students.</p>
<p>I think hes referring to international aid. Although I’ve heard that many international students have gotten great aid packages, the official policy is that Stanford is not need blind to internationals.</p>
<p>I thought the thing about the A’s was strange too, so strange I assumed it was a type-o. We had two kids accepted from my school: one had straight A’s. However, there were many with straight A’s that were rejected. About five or so come to mind at the moment, but there may be more. The acceptance rate for Valedictorians is only in the 40% range, so I think it is impossible that 84% w/ straight A’s are accepted. I’m guessing it is 16% w/ straight A’s are accepted. Even though this may be hard to believe, given the quality of the applicant pool it may be possible.</p>
<p>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.</p>
<p>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!</p>