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

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

This could be a misread because high stat Asians probably more likely to enroll at Michigan if accepted (because more likely to be rejected from Ivy and similar). Would be fascinating if enrollment management software takes into account race as an econometric variable. Redlining all over again. If they don’t use race directly, they can triangulate it with other variables, zip code etc

We'll see if my kid is rejected from the two ivys she applied to on Ivy day, but she is already in at one hard to get into privates (T10). The odds of her getting in are not high, I agree. She is not different on paper (or likely in reality) from a bunch of other high stats Asian and non-Asian kids. Others probably have similar or better ECs and awards than her. I do think a difference may be that she took the application process very seriously and had every piece of data hang together to tell her story very effectively. I obviously dont know what others do, but I was impressed by her efforts. She looked at it like a persuasive essay project. I do think the application matters more than people realize.

Anyway, I dont think it will do any kid any good to submit worse scores than they have. They may want to emphasize something totally different in their application which will end up mattering more in the end.

Good luck to her. It's very disheartening that a young woman of color like your daughter has to worry about being penalized in this process because of who she is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We’re applying this strategy for VA Tech year. Definitely going TO. Love this thread.

My kid wanted to do that out of Langley and the CC told them that VTech expects to see scores from the strong NoVa publics.

That is completely contrary to what our experience has been. We already have had two waitlisted with gpa AND test scores at or above top 75%. Yes we have done the tours and demonstrated interest. Acceptance to UF, Ga Tech and others with lower acceptance rates. Va tech is the goldilocks of admission these days. Your application needs to be just right. Not too high, not too low.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We’re applying this strategy for VA Tech year. Definitely going TO. Love this thread.

My kid wanted to do that out of Langley and the CC told them that VTech expects to see scores from the strong NoVa publics.

That is completely contrary to what our experience has been. We already have had two waitlisted with gpa AND test scores at or above top 75%. Yes we have done the tours and demonstrated interest. Acceptance to UF, Ga Tech and others with lower acceptance rates. Va tech is the goldilocks of admission these days. Your application needs to be just right. Not too high, not too low.

No. You need the stats and a thoughtful application.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

This could be a misread because high stat Asians probably more likely to enroll at Michigan if accepted (because more likely to be rejected from Ivy and similar). Would be fascinating if enrollment management software takes into account race as an econometric variable. Redlining all over again. If they don’t use race directly, they can triangulate it with other variables, zip code etc

We'll see if my kid is rejected from the two ivys she applied to on Ivy day, but she is already in at one hard to get into privates (T10). The odds of her getting in are not high, I agree. She is not different on paper (or likely in reality) from a bunch of other high stats Asian and non-Asian kids. Others probably have similar or better ECs and awards than her. I do think a difference may be that she took the application process very seriously and had every piece of data hang together to tell her story very effectively. I obviously dont know what others do, but I was impressed by her efforts. She looked at it like a persuasive essay project. I do think the application matters more than people realize.

Anyway, I dont think it will do any kid any good to submit worse scores than they have. They may want to emphasize something totally different in their application which will end up mattering more in the end.

Congrats on the T10!


Why do you even care about the Ivies? Half of them rank lower than the school where you daughter won admission. Is there a particular program she wants?

[Anonymous]

Yield management has become more difficult under test optional policies. TO applicants are more likely to yield.

But, intuitively, I have a hard time with the idea that a high scoring applicant should apply TO for the purpose of gaming the yield algorithm.

Enrollment managers need better algorithms. They should be able to figure out how many high scoring applicants they need to admit in order to yield one. Looking at the past two years, they now should have at least some data.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yield management has become more difficult under test optional policies. TO applicants are more likely to yield.

But, intuitively, I have a hard time with the idea that a high scoring applicant should apply TO for the purpose of gaming the yield algorithm.

Enrollment managers need better algorithms. They should be able to figure out how many high scoring applicants they need to admit in order to yield one. Looking at the past two years, they now should have at least some data.

TO applicants are more likely to yield

Can you link to that, please?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

"Mueller says the data is used in more of an aggregate than individualized way, meaning econometric modeling is unlikely to harm strong candidates."
https://www.usnews.com/education/best-colleges/articles/how-admissions-algorithms-could-affect-your-college-acceptance

This is mainly in the financial aid context but your story goes on to say, “ "Sometimes these data points are used at the point of evaluation (when reading the application) and other times they are used at the point of shaping a class," Perez explains.”
The reality is that the companies selling it don’t choose how it’s used and the colleges aren’t going to tell us.

No, this is not used at a granular level for admissions decisions 99.9% of the time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

"Mueller says the data is used in more of an aggregate than individualized way, meaning econometric modeling is unlikely to harm strong candidates."
https://www.usnews.com/education/best-colleges/articles/how-admissions-algorithms-could-affect-your-college-acceptance

This is mainly in the financial aid context but your story goes on to say, “ "Sometimes these data points are used at the point of evaluation (when reading the application) and other times they are used at the point of shaping a class," Perez explains.”
The reality is that the companies selling it don’t choose how it’s used and the colleges aren’t going to tell us.

No, this is not used at a granular level for admissions decisions 99.9% of the time.

Cite?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yield management has become more difficult under test optional policies. TO applicants are more likely to yield.

But, intuitively, I have a hard time with the idea that a high scoring applicant should apply TO for the purpose of gaming the yield algorithm.

Enrollment managers need better algorithms. They should be able to figure out how many high scoring applicants they need to admit in order to yield one. Looking at the past two years, they now should have at least some data.

TO applicants are more likely to yield

Can you link to that, please?

Here is one random article:

"the share enrolling (the “yield rate”) ... is markedly higher among non-submitters (bottom of page 11, https://economics.yale.edu/sites/default/files/Forms/jack_kelly_senior_essay.pdf)

Google may pull up more articles. It makes sense, though enrollment managers didn't see it coming for high school class of 2021 and many schools ended up overenrolled that year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yield management has become more difficult under test optional policies. TO applicants are more likely to yield.

But, intuitively, I have a hard time with the idea that a high scoring applicant should apply TO for the purpose of gaming the yield algorithm.

Enrollment managers need better algorithms. They should be able to figure out how many high scoring applicants they need to admit in order to yield one. Looking at the past two years, they now should have at least some data.

TO applicants are more likely to yield

Can you link to that, please?

Here is one random article:

"the share enrolling (the “yield rate”) ... is markedly higher among non-submitters (bottom of page 11, https://economics.yale.edu/sites/default/files/Forms/jack_kelly_senior_essay.pdf)

Google may pull up more articles. It makes sense, though enrollment managers didn't see it coming for high school class of 2021 and many schools ended up overenrolled that year.

I mean, of course this is true. Some kid with crap test scores managed to con his way into a good school. Of course he's going to attend!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We’re applying this strategy for VA Tech year. Definitely going TO. Love this thread.

My kid wanted to do that out of Langley and the CC told them that VTech expects to see scores from the strong NoVa publics.

That is completely contrary to what our experience has been. We already have had two waitlisted with gpa AND test scores at or above top 75%. Yes we have done the tours and demonstrated interest. Acceptance to UF, Ga Tech and others with lower acceptance rates. Va tech is the goldilocks of admission these days. Your application needs to be just right. Not too high, not too low.

No. You need the stats and a thoughtful application.

Exactly. There seems to be a disconnect among some of these parents. Just having the high stats doesn’t entitle one to admittance - anywhere. My high stats kid got into VT but it was also his first choice school and he showed it - everything from applying ED to writing his essays about subjects relevant to VT. It was clear he wasn’t using them as a throwaway application, as some of these kids clearly are.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We’re applying this strategy for VA Tech year. Definitely going TO. Love this thread.

My kid wanted to do that out of Langley and the CC told them that VTech expects to see scores from the strong NoVa publics.

+1
Also a Langley parent and we were told the same thing. Kid admitted high scores to VT and was accepted.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

It doesn't matter, one of mine only took it once, scored 1590 but got waitlisted at all three Ivies he applied to. Everything else was top notch too. Only drawbacks were being Asian and attending a large hyper competitive suburban school. Fortunately, got into Amherst and merit scholarships offers from Vanderbilt, Rice and USC.

What does this have to do with the question OP asked? Your post is an odd mix of grievance (Asian discrimination) and not so humble brag.

I was thinking the same. Ivy admits are rare no matter the score. 1590 isn't a pass to Ivies non Asian or Asian. I get so sick of this discrimination accusation by people who placed too much value on a test.

And, what did any of this have to do with OP's question? Some people are so hung up on themselves.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We’re applying this strategy for VA Tech year. Definitely going TO. Love this thread.

My kid wanted to do that out of Langley and the CC told them that VTech expects to see scores from the strong NoVa publics.

That is completely contrary to what our experience has been. We already have had two waitlisted with gpa AND test scores at or above top 75%. Yes we have done the tours and demonstrated interest. Acceptance to UF, Ga Tech and others with lower acceptance rates. Va tech is the goldilocks of admission these days. Your application needs to be just right. Not too high, not too low.

No. You need the stats and a thoughtful application.

Exactly. There seems to be a disconnect among some of these parents. Just having the high stats doesn’t entitle one to admittance - anywhere. My high stats kid got into VT but it was also his first choice school and he showed it - everything from applying ED to writing his essays about subjects relevant to VT. It was clear he wasn’t using them as a throwaway application, as some of these kids clearly are.

+1 It's sad. Time for them to land the conspiracy theory helicopter.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We’re applying this strategy for VA Tech year. Definitely going TO. Love this thread.

My kid wanted to do that out of Langley and the CC told them that VTech expects to see scores from the strong NoVa publics.

That is completely contrary to what our experience has been. We already have had two waitlisted with gpa AND test scores at or above top 75%. Yes we have done the tours and demonstrated interest. Acceptance to UF, Ga Tech and others with lower acceptance rates. Va tech is the goldilocks of admission these days. Your application needs to be just right. Not too high, not too low.

No. You need the stats and a thoughtful application.

Exactly. There seems to be a disconnect among some of these parents. Just having the high stats doesn’t entitle one to admittance - anywhere. My high stats kid got into VT but it was also his first choice school and he showed it - everything from applying ED to writing his essays about subjects relevant to VT. It was clear he wasn’t using them as a throwaway application, as some of these kids clearly are.

+1 It's sad. Time for them to land the conspiracy theory helicopter.

I don’t have any kids who have applied yet. But it’s very clear from Scattergrams that some schools yield protect the very top applicants. It’s time for you to look at the data. That doesn’t mean all schools do yield protect (many do not) or that all parents are correct when they believe their child was yield protected. But some do and some are. I suspect it’s just one or two posters trying to gaslight people on here that it doesn’t exist.