Yield rates, some surprises

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Comparing yield rates of ED and EA schools doesn't make a lot of sense if you're trying to get a sense of where students would attend if they had a CHOICE among multiple schools.

To compare UChicago, where the vast majority of the class is admitted ED and thus compelled to attend, to MIT, where all admits have the choice to attend or not, seems odd. IMO, MIT's 85% yield is far more remarkable than Chicago's 88%.

they are "compelled to attend" because they chose to apply ED. why are kids applying ED if they don't want to attend?

Exactly. ED is like saying I choose you over all possible other. Way more indicative of desirability than saying "I choose you among the offers I have." I really don't get why people are arguing that it somehow doesn't "count" but yield without ED does.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It looks like UChicago has something funky going on. They don't report their early decision data at all.

+1 it’s how they maintain a low acceptance rate. By accepting 75-80% of the class through ED1, ED2, and waitlist (forced commit waitlist which is basically ED3), UChicago can accept less overall students since they have so few accepted in RD. On the completely other end of the spectrum, Duke only accepts ~40% of their class through ED which is lower than every other elite school, which means they’re not afraid of losing tons of students to HPSM in RD each year. I respect the schools that use ED less heavily like Duke and Columbia.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Notre Dame obviously the most impressive here: no ED and a brand of EA that is less restrictive than that of SCEA schools (you can apply to other EA schools at Notre Dame).

60% is a great number but stop with the "obviously most impressive." ND applicants are "obviously" extremely self-selecting. The kids I've known who have applied already know it's their #1 or near top choice. And many have "known" that since kindergarten.

Agreed. It has a cult following, not that there anything wrong with that.

You realize this thread is about yield, right? By saying things like “cult following” and “self-selective” you are not making a point; you are just using other phrases to describe high yield.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This list should have three sections. First, all schools that have ED1 and ED2, with their yields. Second schools that offer only one ED round and their yields and third schools that do not offer any EDs and their yield. It will also be useful to know what percentage of students are taken via binding decision. I think Chicago takes close to 90% ED1 and ED2.

No, it goes like this:
ED1 and ED2
ED1 only, SCEA, and in-state apps to state universities (a built in yield)
Georgetown and Notre Dame EA
Unrestricted EA but don’t tell you by XMas (in time to apply ED2)
Unrestricted EA and they tell you by XMas
No EA but rolling
No EA at all, no rolling, RD only

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This list should have three sections. First, all schools that have ED1 and ED2, with their yields. Second schools that offer only one ED round and their yields and third schools that do not offer any EDs and their yield. It will also be useful to know what percentage of students are taken via binding decision. I think Chicago takes close to 90% ED1 and ED2.

No, it goes like this:
ED1 and ED2
ED1 only, SCEA, and in-state apps to state universities (a built in yield)
Georgetown and Notre Dame EA
Unrestricted EA but don’t tell you by XMas (in time to apply ED2)
Unrestricted EA and they tell you by XMas
No EA but rolling
No EA at all, no rolling, RD only

You cannot put SCEA on the same level as ED. SCEA is not binding. The main differentiation is between binding and non-binding.

[Anonymous]

“I respect the schools that use ED less heavily like Duke and Columbia.”

I respect the schools that don’t use ED at all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:“I respect the schools that use ED less heavily like Duke and Columbia.”

I respect the schools that don’t use ED at all.

I think there are only two on the list? Notre Dame and USC do not have ED at all. Are there any others?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Notre Dame obviously the most impressive here: no ED and a brand of EA that is less restrictive than that of SCEA schools (you can apply to other EA schools at Notre Dame).

60% is a great number but stop with the "obviously most impressive." ND applicants are "obviously" extremely self-selecting. The kids I've known who have applied already know it's their #1 or near top choice. And many have "known" that since kindergarten.

Agreed. It has a cult following, not that there anything wrong with that.

You realize this thread is about yield, right? By saying things like “cult following” and “self-selective” you are not making a point; you are just using other phrases to describe high yield.

We all know why ND has a higher yield. Not sure what your point is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:“I respect the schools that use ED less heavily like Duke and Columbia.”

I respect the schools that don’t use ED at all.

I think there are only two on the list? Notre Dame and USC do not have ED at all. Are there any others?

There are many schools on the original list that the OP was using that don’t offer ED. I can’t speak for the selectively ranked listing which was invented by the same OP.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This list should have three sections. First, all schools that have ED1 and ED2, with their yields. Second schools that offer only one ED round and their yields and third schools that do not offer any EDs and their yield. It will also be useful to know what percentage of students are taken via binding decision. I think Chicago takes close to 90% ED1 and ED2.

No, it goes like this:
ED1 and ED2
ED1 only, SCEA, and in-state apps to state universities (a built in yield)
Georgetown and Notre Dame EA
Unrestricted EA but don’t tell you by XMas (in time to apply ED2)
Unrestricted EA and they tell you by XMas
No EA but rolling
No EA at all, no rolling, RD only

You cannot put SCEA on the same level as ED. SCEA is not binding. The main differentiation is between binding and non-binding.

Disagree. We are talking about impact on overall yield, not what binds particular applicants. SCEA forces a first choice amongst the very top schools in the country. It is a yield mechanism. That way Harvard is not being picked over Stanford and vice versa. It is equivalent to ED in yield impact because, while the occasional SCEA admit won’t yield, it also handcuffs applicants more — not less — than ED, which allows EA applicants to also apply early to private schools. Indeed, for that reason, SCEA might even be more restrictive, in terms of yield outcomes, than a school with only one ED round. That would argue for putting SCEA on an even higher level.

Certainly SCEA is not on a lower level, as Notre Dame and Georgetown EA. Notre Dame and Georgetown place no restrictions on EA applications whatsoever.

[Anonymous]

NYU's yield is 49%. Remarkably high for an expensive school that doesn't give out a lot of merit aid.

[Anonymous]

Aren’t Chicago and Northeastern the only schools on this list with the trifecta of EA, ED1, and ED2?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This list should have three sections. First, all schools that have ED1 and ED2, with their yields. Second schools that offer only one ED round and their yields and third schools that do not offer any EDs and their yield. It will also be useful to know what percentage of students are taken via binding decision. I think Chicago takes close to 90% ED1 and ED2.

No, it goes like this:
ED1 and ED2
ED1 only, SCEA, and in-state apps to state universities (a built in yield)
Georgetown and Notre Dame EA
Unrestricted EA but don’t tell you by XMas (in time to apply ED2)
Unrestricted EA and they tell you by XMas
No EA but rolling
No EA at all, no rolling, RD only

You cannot put SCEA on the same level as ED. SCEA is not binding. The main differentiation is between binding and non-binding.

Disagree. We are talking about impact on overall yield, not what binds particular applicants. SCEA forces a first choice amongst the very top schools in the country. It is a yield mechanism. That way Harvard is not being picked over Stanford and vice versa. It is equivalent to ED in yield impact because, while the occasional SCEA admit won’t yield, it also handcuffs applicants more — not less — than ED, which allows EA applicants to also apply early to private schools. Indeed, for that reason, SCEA might even be more restrictive, in terms of yield outcomes, than a school with only one ED round. That would argue for putting SCEA on an even higher level.

Certainly SCEA is not on a lower level, as Notre Dame and Georgetown EA. Notre Dame and Georgetown place no restrictions on EA applications whatsoever.

NP. You are wrong. SCEA is not binding. You are free to apply and accept other schools. It's not the same as ED, which is binding -- 100% yield.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Aren’t Chicago and Northeastern the only schools on this list with the trifecta of EA, ED1, and ED2?

Northeastern's data is published. They only take in 34% of their class early decision I and early decision II. Having early action is of little relevance to yield.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This list should have three sections. First, all schools that have ED1 and ED2, with their yields. Second schools that offer only one ED round and their yields and third schools that do not offer any EDs and their yield. It will also be useful to know what percentage of students are taken via binding decision. I think Chicago takes close to 90% ED1 and ED2.

No, it goes like this:
ED1 and ED2
ED1 only, SCEA, and in-state apps to state universities (a built in yield)
Georgetown and Notre Dame EA
Unrestricted EA but don’t tell you by XMas (in time to apply ED2)
Unrestricted EA and they tell you by XMas
No EA but rolling
No EA at all, no rolling, RD only

You cannot put SCEA on the same level as ED. SCEA is not binding. The main differentiation is between binding and non-binding.

Disagree. We are talking about impact on overall yield, not what binds particular applicants. SCEA forces a first choice amongst the very top schools in the country. It is a yield mechanism. That way Harvard is not being picked over Stanford and vice versa. It is equivalent to ED in yield impact because, while the occasional SCEA admit won’t yield, it also handcuffs applicants more — not less — than ED, which allows EA applicants to also apply early to private schools. Indeed, for that reason, SCEA might even be more restrictive, in terms of yield outcomes, than a school with only one ED round. That would argue for putting SCEA on an even higher level.

Certainly SCEA is not on a lower level, as Notre Dame and Georgetown EA. Notre Dame and Georgetown place no restrictions on EA applications whatsoever.

NP. You are wrong. SCEA is not binding. You are free to apply and accept other schools. It's not the same as ED, which is binding -- 100% yield.

Reading comprehension is your friend: binding is not the point; what is relevant is the impact of these decision plans on yield. But even your SCEA
characterization is incorrect: SCEA binds applicants because it determines where they can and cannot apply.