Yale Admits 675 for SCEA

Early Action Applications, Yale Class of 2016
Number of Applicants: 4304
Number of Admits: 675
Rate of Admission: 15.7%
Number Deferred: 2394
Number Denied: 1180
Incomplete or Withdrawn: 55


<p>This 15.7% rate is slightly higher than last year's, though still pretty low. Interestlying, that puts Yale's admit rate 3% lower than Harvard's this year. </p>

<p>What might account for this?</p>

<p>...other than the fact that Yale is the better school, of course.</p>

<p>I think many feared that Harvard's early pool would be the cream of the cream of the crop, and were thus scared by the prospect of being rejected outright. Since the applicant pool did of course spread out among H, Y, and P, I think people figured they would have a better chance at EA by applying to Yale, which would logically have less of these super-qualified applicants. Of course, that wasn't exactly the case...
Of course, this is just one of my ridiculous theories --
who knows?</p>

<p>Congrats on your acceptance though! :)</p>

<p>Also, Princeton's was even higher at 21%. They ended up taking more people (both by total amount and by percentage) than Yale, even though they had a much smaller applicant pool and a smaller undergrad class.</p>

<p>If I had to guess, part if it was probably that the Yale admissions office knows what a proper early applicant should look like. Staffing does change up in four years, and I would think that many in the Harvard and Princeton offices might not really truly know what it means to be a sure shot for the spring. Yale, on the other hand, has a better sense of who to accept, and who to (realistically) defer, and so airs less on the side of accepting people.</p>

<p>I agree with HADC10, but now I really wish that I had applied to Harvard early, even though I like Yale better. I was deferred.</p>

<p>I don't understand what their strategy is in comparison to Harvard and Princeton. I've noticed, in general, that many deferrees have had better stats (number stars like gpa and sat) than accepted students but maybe this is me searching for answers. Are they putting a lot less focus on numbers this year?
So jealous :(</p>

<p>Sent from my SPH-D710 using CC App</p>

<p>HADC10, both the dean and director of admissions at Harvard have been in their jobs for about 30 years. There's no lack of long-term EA expertise there.</p>

<p>If you think about it, there's really no reason that H and Y early results should resemble each other that closely. Given a different pool of kids, different decision-makers, and lots of hairsplitting in committee, I would find it much stranger if both schools admitted exactly 16.4% (or whatever). They're all talking about angels dancing on the head of a pin.</p>

<p>It's likely a few factors:</p>

<p>First, yield. Yale now has a pool of students who, on the whole, are more likely to attend than last year. With Harvard and Princeton both offering EA this year, those who would have applied EA to Harvard or ED to Princeton in the past few years can now do so (instead of applying to Yale or another school). Thus, fewer applicants accepted EA.</p>

<p>Second, a smaller pool. Following the reasoning of the first factor, Yale may want to hold off on accepting as many students as they did last year because some of those that they would have admitted EA last year have applied to other schools.</p>

<p>Third, Harvard, at least, did not see its EA numbers rebound to their levels they were at before it was suspended (after taking into account the overall increase in applications). If they accept a constant number of applicants every year, you get a higher acceptance rate.</p>

<p>It's so difficult to judge the applicant based on the stats posted here. I know personally that I was accepted EA to Yale and my SATs were significantly lower than most of the deferred applicants. However, many people need to take this with a grain of salt and think about the personal side to everyone elses applications. Everyone has awards and ecs. In my opinion, the ones who get in are the ones who can effectively showcase their unique personality. it's odd when you see someone get deferred who had a 2400, but numbers are not what define a person.</p>


This is just my opinion but I believe Yale is looking for the high stat (not perfect) student who has interests and is involved socially (i.e. theater, music, a capella). Also, I believe the essays are very important to one's acceptance and you can't get an idea of how well the applicants have written theirs or how much time was spent on them by just looking at stats. My son, a current freshman didn't have perfect stats but he did have a high interest and participation in theater and spent weeks reviewing and editing his essays prior to sumission.</p>

<p>I agree. Also, in my opinion Yale looks for well-rounded students (i.e. involved in theater, music, A capella, etc) and not "perfect stat" students. In addition, I believe the essays are real important in the decision making and you can't see how well the applicants essays were written or how much time was spent on them by viewing stats. My son, a current freshman, spent weeks editing and refining his essays. He also did NOT have perfect stats (low to mid 700's on SAT subject level tests and 35 on ACT).</p>

<p>^See, but tons of 35's were getting rejected and many 31's/low 2000's were getting in. I am definitely not saying these are bad scores-- they're NOT. However, I found it odd that many higher scoring/near perfect students were turned away, even when they seemed to be well-rounded as well. This is what confuses me.
Of course, we don't know what Yale is trying to sculpt this class into and I don't disagree with their choices as I'm not in their admissions room as they deliberate, but I can't find any trend whatsoever between admitted students and deferred students. This strikes me as odd.
I was also surprised at the number of rejected students but still wonder why Yale deferred so many. Maybe to have more room to sculpt their classes in the RD pool? I dunno. Then again, I could just be falsely searching for some sort of pattern to justify my deferral. Idk, maybe I'm a little too disappointed, but I guess all of us deferrees are to some extent.
Congrats to all those who got in!</p>

<p>We can't blame the high-scorers' lack of ECs, strong personality, or poorly-written essays or something. If you look at the decisions thread, it's clearly ALL there. Those that were deferred have got it all -- I'm amazed at the top quality Yale had to select from...
Definitely better than H and P... there's no doubt in my mind that many of Yale's deferred could have been accepted at H/P. We took a chance, and it didn't play out... but there's still RD!
I think they accepted so few because they want to see the quality of the RD pool, which I think won't be as competitive, since many have already ED'd to various schools, and EA'd to their top choices. Wishful thinking? Of course. Will it help me sleep at night? Of course.</p>

<p>Here's to hoping it helps me sleep at night as well</p>

<p>Sent from my SPH-D710 using CC App</p>

<p>^lolToasty, there is absolutely no way of knowing this, but I seemed to notice that a huge portion of the deferred students on CC had excellent stats, but were all extremely involved in music. I don't know if this is the case with you, but I think that by deferring so many, Yale is not saying that they are unqualified, but rather is saying that they are searching to mold a class of students with really widespread interests. Music just really seemed to be a common entity among those who had truly excellent stats and were still deferred.</p>

<p>Unless you read everyone's essays you can't know how well written they were and how much effort was put into them. Based on what I saw last year, many of the one's who didn't get in admitted they didn't spend as much time on the essays as they could have. Some felt their stats would carry them. I am not saying this is the case this year but you can't just compare the stats and comments posted on the threads without having the complete application. Also, with an overall acceptance rate of less than 7.5% you will have many deserving candidates who don't get in.</p>

<p>Although essays are an important factor, Admissions Committee's understand that may students receive writing advice from their teachers, parents and even professional consultants. </p>

<p>I believe a huge "tipping point" in Admissions is teacher recommendations. And if MIT is to believed, thousands of students submit recommendations from teachers that do nothing to help distinguish themselves. See: Writing</a> Recommendations | MIT Admissions</p>

<p>"Jen was a student in one of my predominately senior physics classes. She took physics her junior year in high school and was a good student. Through hard work she was able to develop a good understanding of the subject material.</p>

<p>Jen also had personal qualities that are commendable. In the two years that I have known her I have never known her to be dishonest or untrustworthy. Once on an exam paper I had made a grading error in her favor. She brought this to my attention even though it resulted in a lower test grade.</p>

<p>In conclusion, I feel that Jen has both the academic and personal qualities to be a credit to the college of her choice, and I give her my recommendation without reservation.</p>

<p>Critique: We receive thousands of recommendations like this each year. It is all positive, but it doesn't give any real depth to the candidate. In this instance, the reader is left feeling the writer is reaching for something to say. Honesty and trustworthiness are certainly admirable traits, but they are not uncommon among the nation's top college applicants. We are looking for a compelling reason to admit someone, so information on class material does not help the candidate. Although Jen may be a hard worker, most of our applicants are. Although the comments are positive, it is difficult to grasp onto anything tangible to make this candidate's case stronger. Was this faint praise intentional? How does Jen fare in comparison with other (more outstanding?) candidates at the school?"</p>

<p>"We can't blame the high-scorers' lack of ECs, strong personality, or poorly-written essays or something. If you look at the decisions thread, it's clearly ALL there."</p>

<p>It certainly is not. Students are remarkably poor at guessing how their essays will come across and whether their teachers were effective advocates. Even if everything in the decisions thread is true (a big assumption), the fact that "I worked for weeks on my essays and my parent who is a professional journalist loved them" or that "This teacher adores me and thinks I'm a genius" does not mean that the essays or recs helped the application at all. (Yale doesn't put that much weight on the interview, but at schools that do, the same pattern applies.)</p>

<p>Early</a> admit rate increases slightly | Yale Daily News</p>

This 15.7% rate is slightly higher than last year's, though still pretty low. Interestlying, that puts Yale's admit rate 3% lower than Harvard's this year.</p>

<p>What might account for this?


<p>This is exactly the ratio one would expect if you take the athletic Likely Letter into account. In short, Ivy League athletes are recruited with a tool called the Likely Letter and nearly every recruited athlete gains admission during the EA round.</p>

<p>Harvard recruits approx. 220 athletes and Yale approx 140. So if we take the recruited athletes out of the equation, we get 552 non-athletes out of 4231 admitted at Harvard, for an non-athlete admit rate of 13%. At Yale it's about 535 out of 4304, or 12.4%</p>

<p>So the apparent difference in EA acceptance rates between H and Y is largely a result of President Levin's de-emphasizing athletics.</p>