For high stats applying to yield-protecting schools, go TO or submit lower single sitting?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry to be dense but is there as efficient way to find out which schools yield protect? I understand the concept but not how to find out which schools actually do it.

I look at Scattergrams and for some schools, the very top applicants are waitlisted and the acceptances start lower down. My kid is at a large public so there’s ample data. You can often see where that college’s sweet spot is - like they think they can get the 1450/4.6 kids but not the 1570/4.8 ones. I also check the CDS to see whether they consider demonstrated interest so that if they do, my kid will know to show the love.

The bolded students would absolutely be admitted if they applied ED.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP you are overthinking this. I also think “yield protection” is largely a DCUM thing. Posters here can’t fathom the idea that their kids aren’t good enough, so they blame rejections and waitlists on yield protection.

Bingo. Succinct and correct.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP you are overthinking this. I also think “yield protection” is largely a DCUM thing. Posters here can’t fathom the idea that their kids aren’t good enough, so they blame rejections and waitlists on yield protection.

Good heavens you need to read more. Google yield protect and the schools you are interested in. Start reading books on college admissions. Go read on same on College Confidential and Reddit and other sources.

Yes, because anonymous sites full of trolls are absolutely legitimate and always trustworthy. Good heavens, indeed.
DP

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry to be dense but is there as efficient way to find out which schools yield protect? I understand the concept but not how to find out which schools actually do it.

I look at Scattergrams and for some schools, the very top applicants are waitlisted and the acceptances start lower down. My kid is at a large public so there’s ample data. You can often see where that college’s sweet spot is - like they think they can get the 1450/4.6 kids but not the 1570/4.8 ones. I also check the CDS to see whether they consider demonstrated interest so that if they do, my kid will know to show the love.

The bolded students would absolutely be admitted if they applied ED.

In many cases, yes. But if they don’t, some schools will yield protect them. So it can hard for these high stats kids to find reliable back ups to their lottery schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I wished my son had tried TO at Case Western.

And no, I don't think my kid is special, but when you see kids with way lower grades, less course rigor, and way way lower scores getting in you have to wonder what's going on.

How would you know what their grades, course rigor, and scores are? Are you taking the word of anonymous posters?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP you are overthinking this. I also think “yield protection” is largely a DCUM thing. Posters here can’t fathom the idea that their kids aren’t good enough, so they blame rejections and waitlists on yield protection.

Good heavens you need to read more. Google yield protect and the schools you are interested in. Start reading books on college admissions. Go read on same on College Confidential and Reddit and other sources.

What books and peer-reviewed articles is this mentioned in?

Selingo book discusses LTE. Likelihood to Enroll that colleges factor in in determining whether to admit an applicant. He discusses the importance of yields to colleges at length.

Here’s a quote:

“ In a tsunami of applicants who are qualified on the surface, what matters at this point are the elements that differentiate students, or if they are particularly good overall, the chances they will ultimately choose Davidson—what admissions officers call LTE (likelihood to enroll). It’s an acronym used frequently in discussions during regular decision. The more admissions officers dissect an applicant’s intentions now, the better they’ll fare in April when multiple schools are competing for the attention of the students they accepted. It’s another way a college’s agenda—in this case keeping its yield rate up—shapes admissions decisions.”

To be clear, this quote is from the Selingo book. Why are people calling bs on yield protection?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP you are overthinking this. I also think “yield protection” is largely a DCUM thing. Posters here can’t fathom the idea that their kids aren’t good enough, so they blame rejections and waitlists on yield protection.

Good heavens you need to read more. Google yield protect and the schools you are interested in. Start reading books on college admissions. Go read on same on College Confidential and Reddit and other sources.

What books and peer-reviewed articles is this mentioned in?

Selingo book discusses LTE. Likelihood to Enroll that colleges factor in in determining whether to admit an applicant. He discusses the importance of yields to colleges at length.

Here’s a quote:

“ In a tsunami of applicants who are qualified on the surface, what matters at this point are the elements that differentiate students, or if they are particularly good overall, the chances they will ultimately choose Davidson—what admissions officers call LTE (likelihood to enroll). It’s an acronym used frequently in discussions during regular decision. The more admissions officers dissect an applicant’s intentions now, the better they’ll fare in April when multiple schools are competing for the attention of the students they accepted. It’s another way a college’s agenda—in this case keeping its yield rate up—shapes admissions decisions.”

This quote is about marginal students getting a nudge into the admit pile if they demonstrate interest, not denying top students because they might not enroll.

[Anonymous]

Would imagine this might work at Michigan or Wisconsin or similar?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP you are overthinking this. I also think “yield protection” is largely a DCUM thing. Posters here can’t fathom the idea that their kids aren’t good enough, so they blame rejections and waitlists on yield protection.

Exactly. Unless they reviewed entire applications, cover to cover, there is no basis for this "yield protection" theory.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP you are overthinking this. I also think “yield protection” is largely a DCUM thing. Posters here can’t fathom the idea that their kids aren’t good enough, so they blame rejections and waitlists on yield protection.

Good heavens you need to read more. Google yield protect and the schools you are interested in. Start reading books on college admissions. Go read on same on College Confidential and Reddit and other sources.

What books and peer-reviewed articles is this mentioned in?

Selingo book discusses LTE. Likelihood to Enroll that colleges factor in in determining whether to admit an applicant. He discusses the importance of yields to colleges at length.

Here’s a quote:

“ In a tsunami of applicants who are qualified on the surface, what matters at this point are the elements that differentiate students, or if they are particularly good overall, the chances they will ultimately choose Davidson—what admissions officers call LTE (likelihood to enroll). It’s an acronym used frequently in discussions during regular decision. The more admissions officers dissect an applicant’s intentions now, the better they’ll fare in April when multiple schools are competing for the attention of the students they accepted. It’s another way a college’s agenda—in this case keeping its yield rate up—shapes admissions decisions.”

This quote is about marginal students getting a nudge into the admit pile if they demonstrate interest, not denying top students because they might not enroll.

There’s a bunch of other stuff written about that. DI can be a component of LTE but it doesn’t have to be. Plus consider the role of econometric modeling in determining LTE. It’s not just DI.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP you are overthinking this. I also think “yield protection” is largely a DCUM thing. Posters here can’t fathom the idea that their kids aren’t good enough, so they blame rejections and waitlists on yield protection.

Exactly. Unless they reviewed entire applications, cover to cover, there is no basis for this "yield protection" theory.

What about the econometric modeling algorithms?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Would imagine this might work at Michigan or Wisconsin or similar?

Honestly I think people should stop talking about “stats” and look at the full application. My Asian DD was admitted to Michigan with a 1570 and a rigorous course load with all A’s. Also to other great publics. Her essays and application package was really good, I thought. She had a compelling narrative which is what I think is needed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Would imagine this might work at Michigan or Wisconsin or similar?

Honestly I think people should stop talking about “stats” and look at the full application. My Asian DD was admitted to Michigan with a 1570 and a rigorous course load with all A’s. Also to other great publics. Her essays and application package was really good, I thought. She had a compelling narrative which is what I think is needed.

Congrats to her! I agree. It's all of the elements, not just test scores and grades.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP you are overthinking this. I also think “yield protection” is largely a DCUM thing. Posters here can’t fathom the idea that their kids aren’t good enough, so they blame rejections and waitlists on yield protection.

Exactly. Unless they reviewed entire applications, cover to cover, there is no basis for this "yield protection" theory.

What about the econometric modeling algorithms?

That has nothing to do with denying high stat kids. Does the exact term "yield protection" exist anywhere in reputable articles or books?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP you are overthinking this. I also think “yield protection” is largely a DCUM thing. Posters here can’t fathom the idea that their kids aren’t good enough, so they blame rejections and waitlists on yield protection.

Exactly. Unless they reviewed entire applications, cover to cover, there is no basis for this "yield protection" theory.

What about the econometric modeling algorithms?

One factor: Act and Sat scores. Eg: “ • ACT SCORE, SAT SCORE: discrete variables reflect- ing the competence level of the applicant. These vari- ables are represented by the ACT and/or the SAT scores. This feature might be a good predictor since students usually would rather enroll in colleges whose student population has a similar competence level.” From Conference on Educational Data Mining

One company advertises the factors it can consider in its algorithms it sells to colleges. It includes student ability.