| The fact that MIT and Harvard have such high yields is even more impressive when one considers that neither has binding early decision. |
USNWR doesnt include acceptance nor yield in their calculations. https://www.usnews.com/education/best-colleges/articles/ranking-criteria-and-weights |
Which means they take in less competitive candidates, it's also going to impact their ranking. |
Exactly. Both numbers are pretty pointless - there is better data to use to compare schools. |
| There are only about 10 schools having yield rates above 60%, excluding UChicago. It’s not easy to get without gaming the numbers. |
Also Notre Dame! |
| UChicago also puts some kids on waitlist in RD and takes them off waitlist only after they sign an ED agreement. Only reason people talk about uchicago is because it actively manages and manipulates yield and its yield is artificially high. No one doubts that the school has great academics. |
OK, U Chicago gaming it just to show it's competitive? |
|
Some people’s obsession with UChicago is wild to me. If you don’t like it, don’t apply. Simple as that. Disparaging schools on the internet reeks of insecurity, but I guess that’s mostly what happens on DCUM these days.
A number far more important than yield and acceptance rate: retention rate. And UChicago has the third highest at 99%. |
+100 |
No need to single out Chicago, all the major schools currently compete to have the lowest acceptance rate even though there’s no relationship between acceptance rate and quality. |
There are more rankings than US news. Some do use these numbers as factors. US news indirectly uses these numbers through other factors. |
I think they should have to publish two numbers: overall and the yield without excluding ED. |
How so? |
And why Harvard (and the likes) defer high percentages of ED1 students. They know that they can then offer acceptances in RD and have an extremely high likelihood of getting a matriculation come fall. |