What did you wear to interview?

Lergnom
Fri, 02 Aug 2013 15:20:57 +0000

The real statistical highlights in those numbers are they are getting a lot of applicants, but they are relatively often losing the choice to other schools. The yield isn’t bad but it’s not super. But the reason why can’t be analyzed unless you have a breakdown of who went where and then ideally why, meaning money offered, location comparisons, etc. This would be a fairly difficult analysis to get right.

My point is these numbers tell bits of a larger story, but those bits aren’t particularly telling. A school much large can attract only a relatively small number more in applicants, admit a larger percentage and have a higher yield, etc.

Here’s an odd way of phrasing a question from data like this: what if UR’s admissions methods generate admissions who are more torn between UR and other schools? That is, if UR admitted based on a straight ranking system of SAT’s and grades would that feed a loop in which people with that level of SAT and grades applied, were admitted and accepted? Beats me. If UR indeed looks at more, then they put themselves into a variety of competitive situations that can’t easily be summarized in 2 or 3 statistics. And remember, these statistics are themselves massive combinations of complicated data. As in, who applies is a number but that stands for who, with all the characteristics “who” can be.