We did not see the insides of any engineering buildings. We did see, however, the chemistry and physics buildings, which were pretty tired.
No doubt, UIUC is a great school. My son applied to relatively few schools by CC standards (seven) and Purdue beat out UIUC.
Auburn just posted stats for the EA1 round admits - the average ACT for OOS went up almost a point. Fits with the trend the article is discussing.
Because it means more students OOS will be applying once they read the article. Itās getting harder and harder to get into the southern colleges
Another way to look at it isā¦if there are 20 women on the team, then there are probably something close to 5 freshmen, 5 sophomores, 5 juniors and 5 seniors.
The frosh and sophomore players are often ādevelopmentalā and not playing as much. But there is no College JV or Frosh team (as in high school) for them to play their ādevelopmental ball.ā So the college Varsity team is bigger than most high school varsity teams because they donāt have developmental teams beneath them.
20 isnāt out of line, it plays out pretty much as @NemesisLead has described. However, there are a couple of NESCAC schools carrying very large rosters this year and it has raised some eyebrows. One somehow had around a dozen incoming recruits last year and another had 11 this year. Both were far outside of typical.
Yields are dropping. If every kid applies and gets accepted to 20 schools, then the average yield has to be 5%. The common app trend is greatā¦but definitely creates this higher number of applications, but lower yield environment.
The number of students doing 7 or more applications has tripled from 1995 to 2020. Other data I saw says that the average student is applying to 40% more schools than they did in 2000 (although they didnāt provide solid numbers to back that up).
Yield numbers are not very helpful in evaluating individual chances for admission though because they assume that every applicant is equally competitive for admission. They arenāt. Depending on the specific school thereās bound to be a percentage of āHail Maryā applications that really have no chance at admission. This skews the yield numbers. Also an applicant with stats towards the top end of the admissions profile will undoubtedly be more competitive for admission than someone in the middle or towards the bottom. Add in holistic admissions criteria and the yield figure becomes even less helpful. What it really is is a measure of a schoolās popularity, but that doesnāt necessarily translate to being a measure of admissions selectivity.
agree 100%. Numerator AND denominator folks.
Missing the point ? Yield is only impacted by those actually admitted, not by those who arenāt.
What am I missing that you are trying to say ?
If I throw a Hail Mary and donāt get in, Iām not impacting yield.
IF I do get in, maybe I go or maybe I canāt afford.
My daughter got into a school I didnāt think she could - but it was $81k a year so it wasnāt a possibility.
So 0/1. But given it was her highest ranked school, for some it could have been 1/1.
Thatās what I said in my post that you tagged.
You mean admission rates. Yield rates cannot be dropping for every school because even if a kid gets admitted to 20 schools they will have to choose one.
Yield rates are dropping for the set of four year non-profit schools that provide IPEDs data (see source data note.) Hereās the trend thru Fall 2022, nacac fall 2023 data not publicly available AFAIK.
I think mathematically the only explanation would be that the schools - on average of course - are increasing their admission rates. Students admitted to more schools cannot cause the average yields to drop. JMTC of course.
Actually thatās likely why they are dropping.
If u apply 20, get into 10, then 9 have an 0 for one.
The common app makes it easy to have lower yields.
Thatās obviously incorrect. Take a simplified example. There are 1000 students applying to 10 colleges and each college has 100 seats available (every student finds a seat somewhere).
In year 1, each student applies to 4 colleges, uniformly distributed so each college receives 400 applications. Each college admits 200 students (50% admit rate) because they expect a 50% yield (because each student will have an average of 2 offers to choose from).
But in year 2 the number of applications goes up and each student applies to 8 colleges, uniformly distributed so each college receives 800 applications. Then each college admits 300 students (37.5% admit rate) because they expect a 33% yield (because each student will have an average of 3 offers to choose from).
TL/DR: a sharply increased number of applications per student drives both decreases in admit rate and decreases in yield. Colleges make more admission offers in total but to a lower percentage of applicants.
Same point, just in a different form.
Cumulative admissions rate across all colleges is total offers (O) divided by total applications (A), O:A ratio.
Cumulative yield rate is total students (S) divided by total offers (O), S:O ratio.
Total applications per student, A:S ratio, goes up. If O:A ratio stays fixed, O:S ratio will go up, S:O ratio will go down, meaning the yield rate will go down while the acceptance rate stays the same.
Or, O:S could stay the same, in which case A:O will go up, O:A will go down, meaning the acceptance rate will go down while the yield rate stays the same.
Or, they could both go down some. Which appears to be happening.
I agree, my bad, I meant increasing the number of admits, not admission rates, would drop yields. Increasing the number of applications alone would not drop average yield.
Not sure when you grew up, but I graduated from UCLA in 1990. Getting admitted in state in the 1980s was not particularly easy, and my Orange County high school was a feeder school for UCLA.
Absolutely. USC - yes my 2.8 and 1070 gained admission.
UCLA - only the best of the best.
Same college grad year - from San Diego.
Only UCR and UCSC were safe, even back then. No UCM.
