Yield Protection?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The number of people out here defending yield protection practices is crazy.

And yes it is a real thing. Any college counselor knows this.

So don’t apply to schools that yield protect or make it very clear you are actually interested.

Colleges have no obligation to take the highest stats kids. They are generally very open about their holistic processes. They have every right to accept or reject folks for any reason as long as it is not an illegal one. As far as I know, “high stats” kids are not a protected class, just one that feels entitled.

No one has said yield protection is illegal. Just shameful. (You know it’s shameful because of how hard people work to deny that it happens.)

It's not shameful for a college to reject someone they don't think will attend.

Exactly! I'm not seeing the problem here. If you asked these people whether their kid would have gone to X school, if accepted - the answer will invariably be NO. They're just using it as a backup and the schools see right through that.

EVERY student should have backups. The answer about whether they'd attend would depend on where else they were accepted and also likely what their financial offers were.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The number of people out here defending yield protection practices is crazy.

And yes it is a real thing. Any college counselor knows this.

So don’t apply to schools that yield protect or make it very clear you are actually interested.

Colleges have no obligation to take the highest stats kids. They are generally very open about their holistic processes. They have every right to accept or reject folks for any reason as long as it is not an illegal one. As far as I know, “high stats” kids are not a protected class, just one that feels entitled.

No one has said yield protection is illegal. Just shameful. (You know it’s shameful because of how hard people work to deny that it happens.)

It's not shameful for a college to reject someone they don't think will attend.

Exactly! I'm not seeing the problem here. If you asked these people whether their kid would have gone to X school, if accepted - the answer will invariably be NO. They're just using it as a backup and the schools see right through that.

The applications are not free. If the kid has gone thru the process and paid the fee then it means they may attend it even if the likelihood is small. If good colleges reject because of the competition and average colleges reject because of yield protection then what should the students do?

This. The likelihood is the issue - expensive enrollment management consultants for the would-be safety (yes, I'm taking a swipe at them here) can't figure out the likelihood that the high stats student will/won't attend because selective college admissions is so rife with uncertainty. If they could overcome that uncertainty and calculate that likelihood, they would know how many high stats students would be expected to end up enrolling at the safety once accepted, and the would-be safety could just accept them. Instead, it's off to the WL.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The number of people out here defending yield protection practices is crazy.

And yes it is a real thing. Any college counselor knows this.

these are clearly parents of students attending college-for-losers gloating that those colleges rejected some outstanding candidates. so it makes sense that there will be people like that.

DP. What an utterly bizarre (and insecure) post. My kids both benefitted from ED at highly selective schools. Why? Because it showed the schools they would absolutely attend if admitted. I'm all for ED and think it's a huge help for kids who have a first-choice school and want to express that preference.

You just sound insufferable and tiresome.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The number of people out here defending yield protection practices is crazy.

And yes it is a real thing. Any college counselor knows this.

So don’t apply to schools that yield protect or make it very clear you are actually interested.

Colleges have no obligation to take the highest stats kids. They are generally very open about their holistic processes. They have every right to accept or reject folks for any reason as long as it is not an illegal one. As far as I know, “high stats” kids are not a protected class, just one that feels entitled.

No one has said yield protection is illegal. Just shameful. (You know it’s shameful because of how hard people work to deny that it happens.)

It's not shameful for a college to reject someone they don't think will attend.

Exactly! I'm not seeing the problem here. If you asked these people whether their kid would have gone to X school, if accepted - the answer will invariably be NO. They're just using it as a backup and the schools see right through that.

The applications are not free. If the kid has gone thru the process and paid the fee then it means they may attend it even if the likelihood is small. If good colleges reject because of the competition and average colleges reject because of yield protection then what should the students do?

I don’t think “average” colleges yield protect. It’s more likely your targets will do that than your safeties. And the answer is apply to more targets, you won’t get yield protected from them all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The number of people out here defending yield protection practices is crazy.

And yes it is a real thing. Any college counselor knows this.

So don’t apply to schools that yield protect or make it very clear you are actually interested.

Colleges have no obligation to take the highest stats kids. They are generally very open about their holistic processes. They have every right to accept or reject folks for any reason as long as it is not an illegal one. As far as I know, “high stats” kids are not a protected class, just one that feels entitled.

No one has said yield protection is illegal. Just shameful. (You know it’s shameful because of how hard people work to deny that it happens.)

It's not shameful for a college to reject someone they don't think will attend.

Exactly! I'm not seeing the problem here. If you asked these people whether their kid would have gone to X school, if accepted - the answer will invariably be NO. They're just using it as a backup and the schools see right through that.

The applications are not free. If the kid has gone thru the process and paid the fee then it means they may attend it even if the likelihood is small. If good colleges reject because of the competition and average colleges reject because of yield protection then what should the students do?

This. The likelihood is the issue - expensive enrollment management consultants for the would-be safety (yes, I'm taking a swipe at them here) can't figure out the likelihood that the high stats student will/won't attend because selective college admissions is so rife with uncertainty. If they could overcome that uncertainty and calculate that likelihood, they would know how many high stats students would be expected to end up enrolling at the safety once accepted, and the would-be safety could just accept them. Instead, it's off to the WL.

You’re not going to get yield protected from a safety ( >70% admit rate) ffs. They don’t care about their yield.

Or are you one of these people who says about a 30% admit rate school - “that’s a safety for MY KID”?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The number of people out here defending yield protection practices is crazy.

And yes it is a real thing. Any college counselor knows this.

these are clearly parents of students attending college-for-losers gloating that those colleges rejected some outstanding candidates. so it makes sense that there will be people like that.

DP. What an utterly bizarre (and insecure) post. My kids both benefitted from ED at highly selective schools. Why? Because it showed the schools they would absolutely attend if admitted. I'm all for ED and think it's a huge help for kids who have a first-choice school and want to express that preference.

You just sound insufferable and tiresome.

Completely agree with the person you quoted. You sound like someone rich and willing to overpay for college.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The number of people out here defending yield protection practices is crazy.

And yes it is a real thing. Any college counselor knows this.

So don’t apply to schools that yield protect or make it very clear you are actually interested.

Colleges have no obligation to take the highest stats kids. They are generally very open about their holistic processes. They have every right to accept or reject folks for any reason as long as it is not an illegal one. As far as I know, “high stats” kids are not a protected class, just one that feels entitled.

No one has said yield protection is illegal. Just shameful. (You know it’s shameful because of how hard people work to deny that it happens.)

It's not shameful for a college to reject someone they don't think will attend.

Exactly! I'm not seeing the problem here. If you asked these people whether their kid would have gone to X school, if accepted - the answer will invariably be NO. They're just using it as a backup and the schools see right through that.

The applications are not free. If the kid has gone thru the process and paid the fee then it means they may attend it even if the likelihood is small. If good colleges reject because of the competition and average colleges reject because of yield protection then what should the students do?

This. The likelihood is the issue - expensive enrollment management consultants for the would-be safety (yes, I'm taking a swipe at them here) can't figure out the likelihood that the high stats student will/won't attend because selective college admissions is so rife with uncertainty. If they could overcome that uncertainty and calculate that likelihood, they would know how many high stats students would be expected to end up enrolling at the safety once accepted, and the would-be safety could just accept them. Instead, it's off to the WL.

You’re not going to get yield protected from a safety ( >70% admit rate) ffs. They don’t care about their yield.

Or are you one of these people who says about a 30% admit rate school - “that’s a safety for MY KID”?

No, though there are schools in the neighborhood of 50% that have reputations for yield protection. Santa Clara, GWU, for example.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The number of people out here defending yield protection practices is crazy.

And yes it is a real thing. Any college counselor knows this.

So don’t apply to schools that yield protect or make it very clear you are actually interested.

Colleges have no obligation to take the highest stats kids. They are generally very open about their holistic processes. They have every right to accept or reject folks for any reason as long as it is not an illegal one. As far as I know, “high stats” kids are not a protected class, just one that feels entitled.

No one has said yield protection is illegal. Just shameful. (You know it’s shameful because of how hard people work to deny that it happens.)

It's not shameful for a college to reject someone they don't think will attend.

Exactly! I'm not seeing the problem here. If you asked these people whether their kid would have gone to X school, if accepted - the answer will invariably be NO. They're just using it as a backup and the schools see right through that.

The applications are not free. If the kid has gone thru the process and paid the fee then it means they may attend it even if the likelihood is small. If good colleges reject because of the competition and average colleges reject because of yield protection then what should the students do?

This. The likelihood is the issue - expensive enrollment management consultants for the would-be safety (yes, I'm taking a swipe at them here) can't figure out the likelihood that the high stats student will/won't attend because selective college admissions is so rife with uncertainty. If they could overcome that uncertainty and calculate that likelihood, they would know how many high stats students would be expected to end up enrolling at the safety once accepted, and the would-be safety could just accept them. Instead, it's off to the WL.

You’re not going to get yield protected from a safety ( >70% admit rate) ffs. They don’t care about their yield.

Or are you one of these people who says about a 30% admit rate school - “that’s a safety for MY KID”?

here you go again, gloating that a talented, hard working, high achieving student was punished for the hubris of believing that they would be accepted to a school where they are very much above 75h percentile.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The number of people out here defending yield protection practices is crazy.

And yes it is a real thing. Any college counselor knows this.

So don’t apply to schools that yield protect or make it very clear you are actually interested.

Colleges have no obligation to take the highest stats kids. They are generally very open about their holistic processes. They have every right to accept or reject folks for any reason as long as it is not an illegal one. As far as I know, “high stats” kids are not a protected class, just one that feels entitled.

No one has said yield protection is illegal. Just shameful. (You know it’s shameful because of how hard people work to deny that it happens.)

It's not shameful for a college to reject someone they don't think will attend.

Exactly! I'm not seeing the problem here. If you asked these people whether their kid would have gone to X school, if accepted - the answer will invariably be NO. They're just using it as a backup and the schools see right through that.

The applications are not free. If the kid has gone thru the process and paid the fee then it means they may attend it even if the likelihood is small. If good colleges reject because of the competition and average colleges reject because of yield protection then what should the students do?

This. The likelihood is the issue - expensive enrollment management consultants for the would-be safety (yes, I'm taking a swipe at them here) can't figure out the likelihood that the high stats student will/won't attend because selective college admissions is so rife with uncertainty. If they could overcome that uncertainty and calculate that likelihood, they would know how many high stats students would be expected to end up enrolling at the safety once accepted, and the would-be safety could just accept them. Instead, it's off to the WL.

You’re not going to get yield protected from a safety ( >70% admit rate) ffs. They don’t care about their yield.

Or are you one of these people who says about a 30% admit rate school - “that’s a safety for MY KID”?

here you go again, gloating that a talented, hard working, high achieving student was punished for the hubris of believing that they would be accepted to a school where they are very much above 75h percentile.

Why is it gloating if a student believes he/she would be accepted when they are very much about the 75th percentile?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The number of people out here defending yield protection practices is crazy.

And yes it is a real thing. Any college counselor knows this.

So don’t apply to schools that yield protect or make it very clear you are actually interested.

Colleges have no obligation to take the highest stats kids. They are generally very open about their holistic processes. They have every right to accept or reject folks for any reason as long as it is not an illegal one. As far as I know, “high stats” kids are not a protected class, just one that feels entitled.

No one has said yield protection is illegal. Just shameful. (You know it’s shameful because of how hard people work to deny that it happens.)

It's not shameful for a college to reject someone they don't think will attend.

Exactly! I'm not seeing the problem here. If you asked these people whether their kid would have gone to X school, if accepted - the answer will invariably be NO. They're just using it as a backup and the schools see right through that.

The applications are not free. If the kid has gone thru the process and paid the fee then it means they may attend it even if the likelihood is small. If good colleges reject because of the competition and average colleges reject because of yield protection then what should the students do?

This. The likelihood is the issue - expensive enrollment management consultants for the would-be safety (yes, I'm taking a swipe at them here) can't figure out the likelihood that the high stats student will/won't attend because selective college admissions is so rife with uncertainty. If they could overcome that uncertainty and calculate that likelihood, they would know how many high stats students would be expected to end up enrolling at the safety once accepted, and the would-be safety could just accept them. Instead, it's off to the WL.

You’re not going to get yield protected from a safety ( >70% admit rate) ffs. They don’t care about their yield.

Or are you one of these people who says about a 30% admit rate school - “that’s a safety for MY KID”?

Instead of rejecting or asking students to apply to ED2 etc. why can’t they just put the students in waitlist and let them know that if they commit, they would take them off the waitlist. They can still maintain their yield that way.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The number of people out here defending yield protection practices is crazy.

And yes it is a real thing. Any college counselor knows this.

So don’t apply to schools that yield protect or make it very clear you are actually interested.

Colleges have no obligation to take the highest stats kids. They are generally very open about their holistic processes. They have every right to accept or reject folks for any reason as long as it is not an illegal one. As far as I know, “high stats” kids are not a protected class, just one that feels entitled.

No one has said yield protection is illegal. Just shameful. (You know it’s shameful because of how hard people work to deny that it happens.)

It's not shameful for a college to reject someone they don't think will attend.

Exactly! I'm not seeing the problem here. If you asked these people whether their kid would have gone to X school, if accepted - the answer will invariably be NO. They're just using it as a backup and the schools see right through that.

The applications are not free. If the kid has gone thru the process and paid the fee then it means they may attend it even if the likelihood is small. If good colleges reject because of the competition and average colleges reject because of yield protection then what should the students do?

This. The likelihood is the issue - expensive enrollment management consultants for the would-be safety (yes, I'm taking a swipe at them here) can't figure out the likelihood that the high stats student will/won't attend because selective college admissions is so rife with uncertainty. If they could overcome that uncertainty and calculate that likelihood, they would know how many high stats students would be expected to end up enrolling at the safety once accepted, and the would-be safety could just accept them. Instead, it's off to the WL.

You’re not going to get yield protected from a safety ( >70% admit rate) ffs. They don’t care about their yield.

Or are you one of these people who says about a 30% admit rate school - “that’s a safety for MY KID”?

Instead of rejecting or asking students to apply to ED2 etc. why can’t they just put the students in waitlist and let them know that if they commit, they would take them off the waitlist. They can still maintain their yield that way.

I love this idea!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The number of people out here defending yield protection practices is crazy.

And yes it is a real thing. Any college counselor knows this.

So don’t apply to schools that yield protect or make it very clear you are actually interested.

Colleges have no obligation to take the highest stats kids. They are generally very open about their holistic processes. They have every right to accept or reject folks for any reason as long as it is not an illegal one. As far as I know, “high stats” kids are not a protected class, just one that feels entitled.

No one has said yield protection is illegal. Just shameful. (You know it’s shameful because of how hard people work to deny that it happens.)

It's not shameful for a college to reject someone they don't think will attend.

Exactly! I'm not seeing the problem here. If you asked these people whether their kid would have gone to X school, if accepted - the answer will invariably be NO. They're just using it as a backup and the schools see right through that.

The applications are not free. If the kid has gone thru the process and paid the fee then it means they may attend it even if the likelihood is small. If good colleges reject because of the competition and average colleges reject because of yield protection then what should the students do?

This. The likelihood is the issue - expensive enrollment management consultants for the would-be safety (yes, I'm taking a swipe at them here) can't figure out the likelihood that the high stats student will/won't attend because selective college admissions is so rife with uncertainty. If they could overcome that uncertainty and calculate that likelihood, they would know how many high stats students would be expected to end up enrolling at the safety once accepted, and the would-be safety could just accept them. Instead, it's off to the WL.

You’re not going to get yield protected from a safety ( >70% admit rate) ffs. They don’t care about their yield.

Or are you one of these people who says about a 30% admit rate school - “that’s a safety for MY KID”?

here you go again, gloating that a talented, hard working, high achieving student was punished for the hubris of believing that they would be accepted to a school where they are very much above 75h percentile.

Why is it gloating if a student believes he/she would be accepted when they are very much about the 75th percentile?

PP is gloating that the student was rejected. The student above 75th percentile is rightly assuming that, assuming the rest of the application is on the level, the school should accept them and not engage in elaborate guesswork of where else the student will also be accepted.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Any school that rejected a kid. Yield protection is a coping mechanism used by many on here when kids get rejected.

I disagree. If two ivies accept and a top 75 rejects, it's not a copying mechanism. Yield protection is real.

If it’s a consistent pattern, maybe. But it’s also possible that the student did something in the application to the T75 school to warrant the rejection. There are a lot of kids now applying to 25 or more schools and it’s hard not to make mistakes/get sloppy with the essays.

Such a perfectly impervious theory. Didn’t get in? You should have applied to more schools. Still didn’t get in? You applied to too many schools. No matter what happens, it’s always the kid’s fault.

Nope, not blaming the kids. But there are simply way, way more qualified students than their are slots at the "top" schools. The bottom line is that kids need to understand that nothing is guaranteed, that they are not entitled to get into any one of these schools (regardless of their metrics), and that there are other kids who are just as deserving as they are. Moreover, as soon as everyone realizes that there are super-smart, highly-accomplished kids at literally hundreds of colleges--kids just as amazing as their own (gasp!)--everyone will be better off.

Sorry, but my issue with yield protection isn’t the top schools. I get that they’re too small for their avowed purpose. It’s the lower-tier schools like Elon. You wind up with high stats kids who don’t get into top schools because of random chance, and then also can’t get in to lower-tier schools because those schools assume the kids will get into a more impressive school OR because the lower-tier school filled up with less impressive kids in the ED round. The high stats wind up being an albatross that prevent strong students from getting into the kind of small or mid-size, four year private residential college they wanted. This is why people with 1600s debate applying TO to those mid-tier schools. The schools’ behavior shows them to be so opposed to academic achievement that students think they might have to hide it. And it makes me sad and angry to see educational institutions treat educational achievement as a strike against anyone.

Your view is so judgmental and cynical. The lower ranked schools are making a calculation, often based on demonstrated interest. Educational achievement is not a strike against these almighty high stats kids. The reality is that they likely did not show interest or did not tailor their essays to the school. Lower stats schools would love to have high stats kids but they want kids who want to be there and who will accept. My kid went to Elon and there are plenty of high stats kids there. They are kids who wanted to be there and likely articulated why. They are kids who applied for programs like fellows. That shows the school they are serious. They are not kids who just clicked a few boxes and cut and pasted a couple of essays. These schools can tell who has spent the time getting to know the school and actually wants to be there as opposed to the kids who were told they need a “safety” and assume they are too good for the school and can’t be bothered to demonstrate interest.

If your kid demonstrated interest and did not get in, there is likely some other problem.

Exactly! It's up to your kid to convince each and every school they are your #1 choice. If you don't do that, it's on you.
Also, recognize that at a T25, 85-90% of the kids are "highly qualified", so your 1580 and 4.0UW are nothing special---most kids meet the "academic threshold". So it's on you to highlight yourself and why you should be attending.

For ex: at my kid's top Target (and where they ended up), there were 3 supplementals. One gave the option to provide a video/photo collection, ideally of something you have great interest in, such as music/dance/artwork/etc. My kid submitted a video of them dancing. It was open ended, allows for creativity and sure as hell makes it more exciting for the AO watching it rather than reading "yet another essay". I suspect anyone who submitted a video rather than just an essay gets a "leg up". This is at a school that strongly encourages students to learn just for learning and to explore anything that interests them. This "essay" is a way to highlight your creativity and show them you up close and personal.

the garbage people here accept. stockholm syndrome if ever there was one.

according to your own accounts, your own kids preferred other schools (reaches) to their targets. so THEY LIED that their targets and safeties were their #1 choices. and these inferior schools TEACH STUDENTS TO FAKE INTEREST in order to have a backup. sometimes you have to do it, but you people love it. yes, yes, my kid got in because he LIED WELL and your kid didn't because they relied on their "stats", you know, their talent and hardwork. you gotta learn to lie!

+1 it’s garbage

Plus then there are the kids lying about ECs and awards. My kid told the truth and then watched some of their classmates embellish and then got celebrated for their admissions results.

How about instead of lying, the kids actually find safeties they like and would be happy to attend? Or is your kid too good for every school under T25?

I’m not the poster you are referring to and I don’t think you have to (or should) tell every school they are your first choice, but you should legitimately have reasons why you would want to go there and the application you reflect that interest and that you have done some research on the school.

Be honest, your kids just threw in the app and didn’t do any work. I had a kid with high stats who actually spent time visiting safeties as well as reaches and had things she liked about every school (including the safeties). She got into every target and safety.

Calm down, my kid hasn't applied yet. But they would certainly prefer to use their time pursuing their actual interests as opposed to researching a dozen or so schools themselves so they can write a fake essay on how they must go there or nowhere else. Intellectually, it's a waste of time. You love it because that advantages students who have time to waste, I guess?

DP: wow, you are quite literal/ b&w thinker. No one is saying write a fake essay. Why would you apply to a school that you need to fake that you want to attend? People on this thread are trying to tell you that kids should 1) pick targets/safeties that they ACTUALLY want to attend and 2) write an essay explaining WHY you want to attend and are a good fit. How would your child know if they want to attend if they don't do the research?!

I am hiring for a position and we received over 200 applications. Half the applicants clearly didn't do any research about our organization and didn't express in their cover letter why we should consider them for the position. Why should I consider them?

Exactly! This carries over to "real life" in the future. Demonstrated interest, perseverance, willing to do a bit more work (or in this case just any effort) take you far in life.

Hardly. As you yourself keep saying, hard work, effort, and perseverance gets you nowhere. Not if you put that effort into earning high grades and scores.

You take away knowledge and education from getting high grades---or at least that's what one should take away. For the final time, high grades and scores is NOT the be all end all of demonstrating you are "tops in life". Life is a journey, smart people do well, enjoy learning and also learn how the system works---which means it's never ALL about 1 thing---it's about a lot of things.
So as a manager, if I'm comparing 2 people: one with a 4.0 in college, with minimal work experience, no real references and who doesn't seem like a team player versus one with a 3.5, 2 internships both with excellent references as a team player, great contributor and who interviews well, well I'm taking the 3.5 with the experience and references of being an amazing team member/contributor.
It's not ALL about just excelling in classes You have to actually apply what you learn on the job/in life and be able to work with others.

Soon you will learn that there are plenty of people doing better than you at your company/in life who "only attended a no name school rated 200#", yet somehow are your manager, getting paid more, more advanced than you are. Why? Because they learned on the go and adjusted to what is needed---and learned a long time ago that nobody gives a shit about what your SAT score is

With yield protection we’re talking about a 4.0 and a 3.5 with similar soft skills, but HR hires the 3.5 because they believe they can pay them less. The 4.0 priced themselves out of the market by doing too well in school. They should have had the wisdom to realize they needed to sabotage their own grades to be more appealing to employers.

Nope, I'm talking about companies where everyone who starts at Position X starts at salary $Y. IT's just employers know that GPA is NOT everything. They want to know you have critical thinking skills and can problem solve. They want to know you are adaptable to learning new things and thinking on the job and can collaborate well with different teams. So basically they want someone who will do the job best. And once you hit a certain GPA, they trust that the basic knowledge is there for everyone and they look at other things---sometime a 4.0 kid will have the other things, sometimes the 3.5 kid will have it better and will get hired instead

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Any school that rejected a kid. Yield protection is a coping mechanism used by many on here when kids get rejected.

I disagree. If two ivies accept and a top 75 rejects, it's not a copying mechanism. Yield protection is real.

If it’s a consistent pattern, maybe. But it’s also possible that the student did something in the application to the T75 school to warrant the rejection. There are a lot of kids now applying to 25 or more schools and it’s hard not to make mistakes/get sloppy with the essays.

Such a perfectly impervious theory. Didn’t get in? You should have applied to more schools. Still didn’t get in? You applied to too many schools. No matter what happens, it’s always the kid’s fault.

Nope, not blaming the kids. But there are simply way, way more qualified students than their are slots at the "top" schools. The bottom line is that kids need to understand that nothing is guaranteed, that they are not entitled to get into any one of these schools (regardless of their metrics), and that there are other kids who are just as deserving as they are. Moreover, as soon as everyone realizes that there are super-smart, highly-accomplished kids at literally hundreds of colleges--kids just as amazing as their own (gasp!)--everyone will be better off.

Sorry, but my issue with yield protection isn’t the top schools. I get that they’re too small for their avowed purpose. It’s the lower-tier schools like Elon. You wind up with high stats kids who don’t get into top schools because of random chance, and then also can’t get in to lower-tier schools because those schools assume the kids will get into a more impressive school OR because the lower-tier school filled up with less impressive kids in the ED round. The high stats wind up being an albatross that prevent strong students from getting into the kind of small or mid-size, four year private residential college they wanted. This is why people with 1600s debate applying TO to those mid-tier schools. The schools’ behavior shows them to be so opposed to academic achievement that students think they might have to hide it. And it makes me sad and angry to see educational institutions treat educational achievement as a strike against anyone.

Your view is so judgmental and cynical. The lower ranked schools are making a calculation, often based on demonstrated interest. Educational achievement is not a strike against these almighty high stats kids. The reality is that they likely did not show interest or did not tailor their essays to the school. Lower stats schools would love to have high stats kids but they want kids who want to be there and who will accept. My kid went to Elon and there are plenty of high stats kids there. They are kids who wanted to be there and likely articulated why. They are kids who applied for programs like fellows. That shows the school they are serious. They are not kids who just clicked a few boxes and cut and pasted a couple of essays. These schools can tell who has spent the time getting to know the school and actually wants to be there as opposed to the kids who were told they need a “safety” and assume they are too good for the school and can’t be bothered to demonstrate interest.

If your kid demonstrated interest and did not get in, there is likely some other problem.

Exactly! It's up to your kid to convince each and every school they are your #1 choice. If you don't do that, it's on you.
Also, recognize that at a T25, 85-90% of the kids are "highly qualified", so your 1580 and 4.0UW are nothing special---most kids meet the "academic threshold". So it's on you to highlight yourself and why you should be attending.

For ex: at my kid's top Target (and where they ended up), there were 3 supplementals. One gave the option to provide a video/photo collection, ideally of something you have great interest in, such as music/dance/artwork/etc. My kid submitted a video of them dancing. It was open ended, allows for creativity and sure as hell makes it more exciting for the AO watching it rather than reading "yet another essay". I suspect anyone who submitted a video rather than just an essay gets a "leg up". This is at a school that strongly encourages students to learn just for learning and to explore anything that interests them. This "essay" is a way to highlight your creativity and show them you up close and personal.

the garbage people here accept. stockholm syndrome if ever there was one.

according to your own accounts, your own kids preferred other schools (reaches) to their targets. so THEY LIED that their targets and safeties were their #1 choices. and these inferior schools TEACH STUDENTS TO FAKE INTEREST in order to have a backup. sometimes you have to do it, but you people love it. yes, yes, my kid got in because he LIED WELL and your kid didn't because they relied on their "stats", you know, their talent and hardwork. you gotta learn to lie!

+1 it’s garbage

Plus then there are the kids lying about ECs and awards. My kid told the truth and then watched some of their classmates embellish and then got celebrated for their admissions results.

How about instead of lying, the kids actually find safeties they like and would be happy to attend? Or is your kid too good for every school under T25?

I’m not the poster you are referring to and I don’t think you have to (or should) tell every school they are your first choice, but you should legitimately have reasons why you would want to go there and the application you reflect that interest and that you have done some research on the school.

Be honest, your kids just threw in the app and didn’t do any work. I had a kid with high stats who actually spent time visiting safeties as well as reaches and had things she liked about every school (including the safeties). She got into every target and safety.

Calm down, my kid hasn't applied yet. But they would certainly prefer to use their time pursuing their actual interests as opposed to researching a dozen or so schools themselves so they can write a fake essay on how they must go there or nowhere else. Intellectually, it's a waste of time. You love it because that advantages students who have time to waste, I guess?

DP: wow, you are quite literal/ b&w thinker. No one is saying write a fake essay. Why would you apply to a school that you need to fake that you want to attend? People on this thread are trying to tell you that kids should 1) pick targets/safeties that they ACTUALLY want to attend and 2) write an essay explaining WHY you want to attend and are a good fit. How would your child know if they want to attend if they don't do the research?!

I am hiring for a position and we received over 200 applications. Half the applicants clearly didn't do any research about our organization and didn't express in their cover letter why we should consider them for the position. Why should I consider them?

Exactly! This carries over to "real life" in the future. Demonstrated interest, perseverance, willing to do a bit more work (or in this case just any effort) take you far in life.

Hardly. As you yourself keep saying, hard work, effort, and perseverance gets you nowhere. Not if you put that effort into earning high grades and scores.

You take away knowledge and education from getting high grades---or at least that's what one should take away. For the final time, high grades and scores is NOT the be all end all of demonstrating you are "tops in life". Life is a journey, smart people do well, enjoy learning and also learn how the system works---which means it's never ALL about 1 thing---it's about a lot of things.
So as a manager, if I'm comparing 2 people: one with a 4.0 in college, with minimal work experience, no real references and who doesn't seem like a team player versus one with a 3.5, 2 internships both with excellent references as a team player, great contributor and who interviews well, well I'm taking the 3.5 with the experience and references of being an amazing team member/contributor.
It's not ALL about just excelling in classes You have to actually apply what you learn on the job/in life and be able to work with others.

Soon you will learn that there are plenty of people doing better than you at your company/in life who "only attended a no name school rated 200#", yet somehow are your manager, getting paid more, more advanced than you are. Why? Because they learned on the go and adjusted to what is needed---and learned a long time ago that nobody gives a shit about what your SAT score is

With yield protection we’re talking about a 4.0 and a 3.5 with similar soft skills, but HR hires the 3.5 because they believe they can pay them less. The 4.0 priced themselves out of the market by doing too well in school. They should have had the wisdom to realize they needed to sabotage their own grades to be more appealing to employers.

You’ve clearly never hired before. No one pays someone more because they had a 4.0 rather than a 3.5. Most employers don’t care very much. They want to see that you can do the work. A 3.5 shows them a good level of intelligence, then they look to experience and skills. I’m sorry you do not have enough actual management experience to understand that.

Yup! My kid is at a well known company who if they "like your resume and the first 30 min phone interview with HR" then you must go thru a full day battery of testing. It's estimated that only 12-14% of people make the cut to the next round. My kid with a 3.4 made that cut. I know people with 1580SAT/4.0UW HS and a 4.0 College gpa who didn't "make the cut". My kid is excelling at that company because of their people skills, critical thinking, and ability to adapt to situations. They made the cut, didnt' get the first job there but the company kept having them interview with different departments because they wanted to find them a place (all at a time when finding a job was challenging 2 years ago). It is not always about your GPA/Test scores. The sooner you realize that, the easier it will be in life to forge your path

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Any school that rejected a kid. Yield protection is a coping mechanism used by many on here when kids get rejected.

I disagree. If two ivies accept and a top 75 rejects, it's not a copying mechanism. Yield protection is real.

If it’s a consistent pattern, maybe. But it’s also possible that the student did something in the application to the T75 school to warrant the rejection. There are a lot of kids now applying to 25 or more schools and it’s hard not to make mistakes/get sloppy with the essays.

Such a perfectly impervious theory. Didn’t get in? You should have applied to more schools. Still didn’t get in? You applied to too many schools. No matter what happens, it’s always the kid’s fault.

Nope, not blaming the kids. But there are simply way, way more qualified students than their are slots at the "top" schools. The bottom line is that kids need to understand that nothing is guaranteed, that they are not entitled to get into any one of these schools (regardless of their metrics), and that there are other kids who are just as deserving as they are. Moreover, as soon as everyone realizes that there are super-smart, highly-accomplished kids at literally hundreds of colleges--kids just as amazing as their own (gasp!)--everyone will be better off.

Sorry, but my issue with yield protection isn’t the top schools. I get that they’re too small for their avowed purpose. It’s the lower-tier schools like Elon. You wind up with high stats kids who don’t get into top schools because of random chance, and then also can’t get in to lower-tier schools because those schools assume the kids will get into a more impressive school OR because the lower-tier school filled up with less impressive kids in the ED round. The high stats wind up being an albatross that prevent strong students from getting into the kind of small or mid-size, four year private residential college they wanted. This is why people with 1600s debate applying TO to those mid-tier schools. The schools’ behavior shows them to be so opposed to academic achievement that students think they might have to hide it. And it makes me sad and angry to see educational institutions treat educational achievement as a strike against anyone.

Your view is so judgmental and cynical. The lower ranked schools are making a calculation, often based on demonstrated interest. Educational achievement is not a strike against these almighty high stats kids. The reality is that they likely did not show interest or did not tailor their essays to the school. Lower stats schools would love to have high stats kids but they want kids who want to be there and who will accept. My kid went to Elon and there are plenty of high stats kids there. They are kids who wanted to be there and likely articulated why. They are kids who applied for programs like fellows. That shows the school they are serious. They are not kids who just clicked a few boxes and cut and pasted a couple of essays. These schools can tell who has spent the time getting to know the school and actually wants to be there as opposed to the kids who were told they need a “safety” and assume they are too good for the school and can’t be bothered to demonstrate interest.

If your kid demonstrated interest and did not get in, there is likely some other problem.

Exactly! It's up to your kid to convince each and every school they are your #1 choice. If you don't do that, it's on you.
Also, recognize that at a T25, 85-90% of the kids are "highly qualified", so your 1580 and 4.0UW are nothing special---most kids meet the "academic threshold". So it's on you to highlight yourself and why you should be attending.

For ex: at my kid's top Target (and where they ended up), there were 3 supplementals. One gave the option to provide a video/photo collection, ideally of something you have great interest in, such as music/dance/artwork/etc. My kid submitted a video of them dancing. It was open ended, allows for creativity and sure as hell makes it more exciting for the AO watching it rather than reading "yet another essay". I suspect anyone who submitted a video rather than just an essay gets a "leg up". This is at a school that strongly encourages students to learn just for learning and to explore anything that interests them. This "essay" is a way to highlight your creativity and show them you up close and personal.

the garbage people here accept. stockholm syndrome if ever there was one.

according to your own accounts, your own kids preferred other schools (reaches) to their targets. so THEY LIED that their targets and safeties were their #1 choices. and these inferior schools TEACH STUDENTS TO FAKE INTEREST in order to have a backup. sometimes you have to do it, but you people love it. yes, yes, my kid got in because he LIED WELL and your kid didn't because they relied on their "stats", you know, their talent and hardwork. you gotta learn to lie!

+1 it’s garbage

Plus then there are the kids lying about ECs and awards. My kid told the truth and then watched some of their classmates embellish and then got celebrated for their admissions results.

How about instead of lying, the kids actually find safeties they like and would be happy to attend? Or is your kid too good for every school under T25?

I’m not the poster you are referring to and I don’t think you have to (or should) tell every school they are your first choice, but you should legitimately have reasons why you would want to go there and the application you reflect that interest and that you have done some research on the school.

Be honest, your kids just threw in the app and didn’t do any work. I had a kid with high stats who actually spent time visiting safeties as well as reaches and had things she liked about every school (including the safeties). She got into every target and safety.

Calm down, my kid hasn't applied yet. But they would certainly prefer to use their time pursuing their actual interests as opposed to researching a dozen or so schools themselves so they can write a fake essay on how they must go there or nowhere else. Intellectually, it's a waste of time. You love it because that advantages students who have time to waste, I guess?

DP: wow, you are quite literal/ b&w thinker. No one is saying write a fake essay. Why would you apply to a school that you need to fake that you want to attend? People on this thread are trying to tell you that kids should 1) pick targets/safeties that they ACTUALLY want to attend and 2) write an essay explaining WHY you want to attend and are a good fit. How would your child know if they want to attend if they don't do the research?!

I am hiring for a position and we received over 200 applications. Half the applicants clearly didn't do any research about our organization and didn't express in their cover letter why we should consider them for the position. Why should I consider them?

Exactly! This carries over to "real life" in the future. Demonstrated interest, perseverance, willing to do a bit more work (or in this case just any effort) take you far in life.

Hardly. As you yourself keep saying, hard work, effort, and perseverance gets you nowhere. Not if you put that effort into earning high grades and scores.

You take away knowledge and education from getting high grades---or at least that's what one should take away. For the final time, high grades and scores is NOT the be all end all of demonstrating you are "tops in life". Life is a journey, smart people do well, enjoy learning and also learn how the system works---which means it's never ALL about 1 thing---it's about a lot of things.
So as a manager, if I'm comparing 2 people: one with a 4.0 in college, with minimal work experience, no real references and who doesn't seem like a team player versus one with a 3.5, 2 internships both with excellent references as a team player, great contributor and who interviews well, well I'm taking the 3.5 with the experience and references of being an amazing team member/contributor.
It's not ALL about just excelling in classes You have to actually apply what you learn on the job/in life and be able to work with others.

Soon you will learn that there are plenty of people doing better than you at your company/in life who "only attended a no name school rated 200#", yet somehow are your manager, getting paid more, more advanced than you are. Why? Because they learned on the go and adjusted to what is needed---and learned a long time ago that nobody gives a shit about what your SAT score is

With yield protection we’re talking about a 4.0 and a 3.5 with similar soft skills, but HR hires the 3.5 because they believe they can pay them less. The 4.0 priced themselves out of the market by doing too well in school. They should have had the wisdom to realize they needed to sabotage their own grades to be more appealing to employers.

You’ve clearly never hired before. No one pays someone more because they had a 4.0 rather than a 3.5. Most employers don’t care very much. They want to see that you can do the work. A 3.5 shows them a good level of intelligence, then they look to experience and skills. I’m sorry you do not have enough actual management experience to understand that.

I now feel like education is totally pointless. It’s better to have a 3.5 than a 4.0? Does that mean it’s even better not to go to college? Maybe dropping out of high school is best of all!

Nope---It's better to actually learn, and to learn more than just "academic skills". It's fine to have a 4.0 or close to it. But you also have to develop critical thinking skills and people skills, and stop being so arrogant to assume because you attend a T25 and have a good GPA that you are somehow "smarter and better than a 3.0 student from a school ranked 200+" What you do on the job matters much more than your ability to take tests. Truly smart people adapt and recognize that.