I don't think the top SLACS yield protect. DC got admitted (all RD) to Amherst, Pomona, Carleton, Davidson as well as 4 ivies (including one of the HYP, waitlisted at the other HYP applied to), USC, WashU, Boston U and some others. no rejections
Anonymous wrote:I don't think the top SLACS yield protect. DC got admitted (all RD) to Amherst, Pomona, Carleton, Davidson as well as 4 ivies (including one of the HYP, waitlisted at the other HYP applied to), USC, WashU, Boston U and some others. no rejections
You don’t think some of the most competitive colleges yield protect? Expert analysis.
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.
A school that considers demonstrated interest is not a safety, categorically, because that determination is not a certainty.
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 wrote:Any school that rejected a kid. Yield protection is a coping mechanism used by many on here when kids get rejected.
Correct. Yield protection is why my kid got denied by Harvard and Penn and waitlisted by UVA. Bastards.
No one says this.
Most big state schools don't yield protect. Schools with impressive yields don't yield protect. The next tier of competitive privates all yield protect.
-private counselor
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.
Well that is what "will you switch to ED2" is. They give you your merit/FA package and ask, "are you ready to commit?" If you say no, then they might put you on the WL, they might just reject you.
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.
But what does this have to do with yield protection? The college admission process doesn't even have interviews or any social skills assessment. Recommendations are notoriously unreliable on this measure.
The schools that reject or WL students as part of a yield protection plan are not basing any decisions on social skills. They are making guesses on whether any particular student will matriculate (with their tuition $$).
You want to discuss employability of T1 vs T2 students (without any data for that the median T2 student has higher social skills than the median T1 student). Might be an interesting conversation but it's completely off topic.
It's insight into the fact that "test scores" are not everything in life. So if you think your kid was "yield protected" there's a much higher chance they school just admitted someone who is a "better overall fit" for them. Despite the fact that you cannot understand how a kid with only a 1450 can be a better fit than your 1580 kid, the school thinks otherwise.
Anonymous wrote:Any school that rejected a kid. Yield protection is a coping mechanism used by many on here when kids get rejected.
Correct. Yield protection is why my kid got denied by Harvard and Penn and waitlisted by UVA. Bastards.
No one says this.
Most big state schools don't yield protect. Schools with impressive yields don't yield protect. The next tier of competitive privates all yield protect.
-private counselor
Anonymous wrote:I think there’s something else that people are forgetting- so many of the students that think they are being “yield protected” have academic and demographic profiles that are way over-represented in the applicant pool, ie UMC, STEM, east coast/west coast, affluent neighborhoods, etc. Universities are simply inundated with these types of students so it is disproportionately hard for these kids to get everywhere including into the 30% schools. The need for schools to fill all their departments and create diverse student bodies creates a ton of randomness that may feel like yield protection but really is just reflecting institutional needs.
Exactly!
And if your kid is applying as a STEM major at a school, even if overall acceptance rates are 30-40%, if the STEM acceptance rates are only 10-15%, it is a REACH. So you didnt' get "yield protected"---it's simply a reach school
Anonymous wrote:Any school that rejected a kid. Yield protection is a coping mechanism used by many on here when kids get rejected.
Correct. Yield protection is why my kid got denied by Harvard and Penn and waitlisted by UVA. Bastards.
No one says this.
Most big state schools don't yield protect. Schools with impressive yields don't yield protect. The next tier of competitive privates all yield protect. -private counselor
In your opinion which are the main schools in this category? Not an exhaustive list, just 6 to 8.
Anonymous wrote:I think there’s something else that people are forgetting- so many of the students that think they are being “yield protected” have academic and demographic profiles that are way over-represented in the applicant pool, ie UMC, STEM, east coast/west coast, affluent neighborhoods, etc. Universities are simply inundated with these types of students so it is disproportionately hard for these kids to get everywhere including into the 30% schools. The need for schools to fill all their departments and create diverse student bodies creates a ton of randomness that may feel like yield protection but really is just reflecting institutional needs.
you are not randomly getting princeton while being rejected at villanova.
But getting into Princeton and WL at Tufts? In at Northwestern and rejected at Emory? People constantly cry “yield protection” in these cases when they are very likely the result of the randomness of which the PP speaks.
Because both Tufts and Emory are still REACHES for almost everyone--with sub 20% acceptance rates.
So someone who is a good fit for Princeton might not be for Tufts. Or their essays were not as strong at tufts
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.
My 3.98UW/1520/8AP kid with good ECs got admitted (without having visited---just did everything online) and got the top Merit package 2 years back (of 42K/year). They were admitted EA, none of the "switch to ED2 and we will admit you". You just have to demonstrate why it's a top choice for you.
But case knows that 50%+ of their class wanted to attend a higher ranked school and more likely, one not based in Cleveland. But they also know most will not get into those 40-50K spots, so they do admit plenty of top students.
What they need to do is add a "WHY Case?" supplement, to help figure out who wants to attend.
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.
My 3.98UW/1520/8AP kid with good ECs got admitted (without having visited---just did everything online) and got the top Merit package 2 years back (of 42K/year). They were admitted EA, none of the "switch to ED2 and we will admit you". You just have to demonstrate why it's a top choice for you.
But case knows that 50%+ of their class wanted to attend a higher ranked school and more likely, one not based in Cleveland. But they also know most will not get into those 40-50K spots, so they do admit plenty of top students.
What they need to do is add a "WHY Case?" supplement, to help figure out who wants to attend.
Yes, that’s fine too. Whatever helps to eliminate the guess work. Applications are not free so very few students apply just for the heck of it. Maybe some good students are applying to these universities as a safety and there is nothing wrong with that. Rejecting them outright to protect yield is not fair for the students. Maybe the university should return the application fee in that case
Anonymous wrote:I don't think the top SLACS yield protect. DC got admitted (all RD) to Amherst, Pomona, Carleton, Davidson as well as 4 ivies (including one of the HYP, waitlisted at the other HYP applied to), USC, WashU, Boston U and some others. no rejections
You don’t think some of the most competitive colleges yield protect? Expert analysis.
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.
[There is nothing CWRU can do to get into the T25-30. Same goes for other schools in the T51-100. They are what they are.]
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.
[Kids with those scores who want to attend CWRU should apply ED. If they don't, it's because they're trying to better-deal CWRU. That's perfectly understandable, but it's also perfectly understandable for CWRU, which knows what they're doing, not to offer them admission.]
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.
[If you want to attend and don't want to "waste" your fee then apply ED.]
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
