Yield Protection?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Accepted Stanford, Harvard, and Dartmouth
WL Williams
Rejected Pomona, Brown

Are we supposed to think yield protection had anything to do with this?

[Anonymous]

For the following colleges, a rejection doesn’t mean yield protection.
HYPSM, Caltech, Duke, Brown, Dartmouth, UPenn, Columbia, Pomona, Williams, Amherst, Vanderbilt, WashU, CMU, USC, Notre Dame
Not sure about JHU, Northwestern, Rice, Georgetown

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Accepted Stanford, Harvard, and Dartmouth
WL Williams
Rejected Pomona, Brown

Are we supposed to think yield protection had anything to do with this?

Exactly.
This was fit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Accepted Stanford, Harvard, and Dartmouth
WL Williams
Rejected Pomona, Brown

Are we supposed to think yield protection had anything to do with this?

If they’re getting into Harvard and Stanford, there’s probably some yield manipulation by the lesser schools, especially Pomona. These schools are known for their collusion!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Accepted Stanford, Harvard, and Dartmouth
WL Williams
Rejected Pomona, Brown

Are we supposed to think yield protection had anything to do with this?

If they’re getting into Harvard and Stanford, there’s probably some yield manipulation by the lesser schools, especially Pomona. These schools are known for their collusion!

But schools look for different things. They have different priorities. You got rejected by a selective school because it's selection process didn't look favorably on your application.

Also, how many kids pour their energy into the applications for those top schools and then phone it on on "lesser" colleges?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Accepted Stanford, Harvard, and Dartmouth
WL Williams
Rejected Pomona, Brown

Are we supposed to think yield protection had anything to do with this?

If they’re getting into Harvard and Stanford, there’s probably some yield manipulation by the lesser schools, especially Pomona. These schools are known for their collusion!

Pomona has a very low acceptance rate for a SLAC so it could just be the luck of the draw.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Accepted Stanford, Harvard, and Dartmouth
WL Williams
Rejected Pomona, Brown

Are we supposed to think yield protection had anything to do with this?

Exactly.
This was fit.

💯

[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.

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.)

Why is is "shameful"? A school's ultimate goal is to have those admitted Matriculate in the Fall (or at least a certain percentage of those admitted). If the school is not your kid's Top Choice, then they might not actually attend. So the school is right to not want to admit your kid. Your kid can only attend 1 school ultimately. Yet they get to apply to as many as they want. So unless you want to be able to apply to only 1 school, there will always be some form of "calculation to determine who is actually a great fit and will attend"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Posters keep saying 'demonstrate interest' as if most ambitious students don't know/ don't do that. These kids are clicking on emails daily and keeping zoom sessions running while they watch Game of Thrones.


This is the hoop jumping generation. Yield protectors may be able to eliminate a small minority of applicants with this hurdle, but I can't imagine it's that useful to them. The mid-tier schools make educated guesses about which students will be accepted at higher tier schools, and reject or WL them.

Since just about every private mid-tier school yield protects, it seems, the only way to avoid them is make sure to apply to at least one large public?

Yup! A good example is case western. The campus is filled with kids who all applied to several "higher ranked schools" and would be attending those schools had they been admitted. Some years, Case pulls a very high amount from their Wait List. Other years it's 0. They have a yield calculation problem---because they are at that spot where--"it's a great school, but there are many other top schools most would rather attend, and many don't want to end up in Cleveland". So they know those who apply who are above the 75% for case stats are 95%+ also applying to several T25-30 schools. They know many will get accepted at one or more of those schools and many will choose that school over case. So for them, it's a hard time to calculate who will actually attend. They do NOT want to have to fill 50% of the freshman class from the waitlist (yet it happens some years). That is an issue several schools in the 35-50 range have.

[Anonymous]

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.

+1000

It's a business. If you want to attend, you would commit with ED1/ED2 (many who "yield protect" will provide a very accurate FA/Merit aid information to try and entice you to ED2 especially). Fact is the school you're claiming "yield protects" is one your kid only wants to attend if they dont' get into 1+ higher ranked schools. You can't have it both ways and claim "foul play".

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Posters keep saying 'demonstrate interest' as if most ambitious students don't know/ don't do that. These kids are clicking on emails daily and keeping zoom sessions running while they watch Game of Thrones.


This is the hoop jumping generation. Yield protectors may be able to eliminate a small minority of applicants with this hurdle, but I can't imagine it's that useful to them. The mid-tier schools make educated guesses about which students will be accepted at higher tier schools, and reject or WL them.

Since just about every private mid-tier school yield protects, it seems, the only way to avoid them is make sure to apply to at least one large public?

Yup! A good example is case western. The campus is filled with kids who all applied to several "higher ranked schools" and would be attending those schools had they been admitted. Some years, Case pulls a very high amount from their Wait List. Other years it's 0. They have a yield calculation problem---because they are at that spot where--"it's a great school, but there are many other top schools most would rather attend, and many don't want to end up in Cleveland". So they know those who apply who are above the 75% for case stats are 95%+ also applying to several T25-30 schools. They know many will get accepted at one or more of those schools and many will choose that school over case. So for them, it's a hard time to calculate who will actually attend. They do NOT want to have to fill 50% of the freshman class from the waitlist (yet it happens some years). That is an issue several schools in the 35-50 range have.

If Case Western is so worried about its yield then maybe it should try to get into T25-30. It can also clearly tell students that if they have a GPA of 3.8+ and SAT score above 1500 etc. then they don’t need to bother applying. It can also put students into waitlist instead of rejecting and then tell them that if they commit, they will remove them from the waitlist.

Not doubt any of those and having students pay the application fee to only reject them thinking they won’t attend is idiotic at best.

[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?

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.

This 1000%. And demonstrate interest by talking to your AO and showing you have researched and want to attend.
One common example of "yield protection" is Case Western. Well case is known for asking top students to switch to ED2. They also provide a very accurate FA/Merit Aide information to help you decide. If they ask you to do that, and you don't, well then the best you can expect is WL. If you really wanted to attend, you would ED2. They are known for doing that with kids at/above the 75%, those kids who are likely applying/have the resume for a T25 school. So if you tell them "nope, I still have other schools I'd much rather attend" why the hell should they admit you over someone at the 50-70% who most likely will attend? Their goal is to get X students to matriculate for the fall. If you won't commit, they (smartly) assume you don't really want to attend. So they might WL you and hope you dont' get in anywhere else higher ranked.

But seriously, you don't want to attend, so why should they admit you?!?!? They are better off admitting kids at the 50-75% who statistically are more likely to attend, or who will switch to ED2

[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”?

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

So those are Target schools for 99% of kids. And yes, Targets are exactly who "yield protects". Schools who have many applying who COULD get admitted to a much higher ranked school. Nobody is yield protecting and WL a kid with a 3.5UW, 1200 SAT.

[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.

Because 75% doesn't mean anything, if the acceptance rate is less than 50-60%. If it's lower than 20% it means it's a REACH for everyone. And 50% acceptance with a 75%+ stats means a Target, not a guarantee.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Accepted Stanford, Harvard, and Dartmouth
WL Williams
Rejected Pomona, Brown

Are we supposed to think yield protection had anything to do with this?

If they’re getting into Harvard and Stanford, there’s probably some yield manipulation by the lesser schools, especially Pomona. These schools are known for their collusion!

But schools look for different things. They have different priorities. You got rejected by a selective school because it's selection process didn't look favorably on your application.

Also, how many kids pour their energy into the applications for those top schools and then phone it on on "lesser" colleges?

I would say a lot. There is only so much time and that is how they prioritize. They assume they will get in because they have the stats. They think they will never go there anyway (and probably don’t want to). It’s natural, but it backfires. You have to convince the school they are not a safety, even though they are.