Emory University's dismal yield

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What's with the LAC yields being so low? I thought Williams/Amherst/Swarthmore were Ivy-equivalent? The whole analogy that they're competing with each other and thus bring down each other's yield doesn't make a whole lot of sense when four of the Ivies make the top 4 on this list despite having a lot of cross-applicant similarity.

Are LACs losing their reputation among the best and brightest?

Most parents are increasingly not willing or cannot afford to pay for LACs at $70K a year, plain and simple. None of my 3 DCs attended the top 10 ones they were accepted by once more affordable options were available, such as less prestigious LAC with significant merit $ or state flagship.

We are just starting the college admissions process, and this sounds right to me. We are feeling good about our child's prospects for admission at some solid schools, but total cost including merit aid will be the key factor. I don't know anything about Emory, but places like Amherst that don't offer merit aid aren't even going to be on our list vs other good schools that are known to offer lots (Case Western, Brandeis, Denison). Just don't believe there's enough difference between them to shell out an extra $40-80K over 4 years.

You got it. Many families in the "donut hole" must consider merit because they won't get a dime of financial aid and many don't want to saddle their kids with years of college loans. Our DS was not able to to do ED because of this exact reason and also knew that any school that didn't offer merit was off the table from the beginning of our process. We live in what is considered an upper middle class area and this was a major component for a lot of my kids peers.

I think parents in our position (make too much for need-based aid but have several kids and can't afford full price LACs) are wising up, and some big changes are afoot over the next 5 years.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What's with the LAC yields being so low? I thought Williams/Amherst/Swarthmore were Ivy-equivalent? The whole analogy that they're competing with each other and thus bring down each other's yield doesn't make a whole lot of sense when four of the Ivies make the top 4 on this list despite having a lot of cross-applicant similarity.

Are LACs losing their reputation among the best and brightest?

top LACs are not exactly Ivy equivalents any more. There are many top LAC kids trying to transfer to Ivies every year. The change has to do with the fact that LACs in general have lost ground compared to research universities in public perception. This is also why Brown and Dartmouth have slipped in desirability and standing over the past 2 decades - they are the most LAC-like Ivies. Back in the 70s,80s,early 90s they were both considered the best ivies after HYP. This hasn't been the case for the past 20-25 years though. Penn and Columbia, which are both the consumate research universities, have risen to take their place.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What's with the LAC yields being so low? I thought Williams/Amherst/Swarthmore were Ivy-equivalent? The whole analogy that they're competing with each other and thus bring down each other's yield doesn't make a whole lot of sense when four of the Ivies make the top 4 on this list despite having a lot of cross-applicant similarity.

Are LACs losing their reputation among the best and brightest?

top LACs are not exactly Ivy equivalents any more. There are many top LAC kids trying to transfer to Ivies every year. The change has to do with the fact that LACs in general have lost ground compared to research universities in public perception. This is also why Brown and Dartmouth have slipped in desirability and standing over the past 2 decades - they are the most LAC-like Ivies. Back in the 70s,80s,early 90s they were both considered the best ivies after HYP. This hasn't been the case for the past 20-25 years though. Penn and Columbia, which are both the consumate research universities, have risen to take their place.

You are a very sad human being.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What's with the LAC yields being so low? I thought Williams/Amherst/Swarthmore were Ivy-equivalent? The whole analogy that they're competing with each other and thus bring down each other's yield doesn't make a whole lot of sense when four of the Ivies make the top 4 on this list despite having a lot of cross-applicant similarity.

Are LACs losing their reputation among the best and brightest?

top LACs are not exactly Ivy equivalents any more. There are many top LAC kids trying to transfer to Ivies every year. The change has to do with the fact that LACs in general have lost ground compared to research universities in public perception. This is also why Brown and Dartmouth have slipped in desirability and standing over the past 2 decades - they are the most LAC-like Ivies. Back in the 70s,80s,early 90s they were both considered the best ivies after HYP. This hasn't been the case for the past 20-25 years though. Penn and Columbia, which are both the consumate research universities, have risen to take their place.

You are a very sad human being.

You are immature for hurling insults at someone who just laying out facts. Just cause you get butthurt by facts doesn't mean they are not true. Which part do you disagree with?

[Anonymous]

Understand the difference between facts and conjecture?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What's with the LAC yields being so low? I thought Williams/Amherst/Swarthmore were Ivy-equivalent? The whole analogy that they're competing with each other and thus bring down each other's yield doesn't make a whole lot of sense when four of the Ivies make the top 4 on this list despite having a lot of cross-applicant similarity.

Are LACs losing their reputation among the best and brightest?

top LACs are not exactly Ivy equivalents any more. There are many top LAC kids trying to transfer to Ivies every year. The change has to do with the fact that LACs in general have lost ground compared to research universities in public perception. This is also why Brown and Dartmouth have slipped in desirability and standing over the past 2 decades - they are the most LAC-like Ivies. Back in the 70s,80s,early 90s they were both considered the best ivies after HYP. This hasn't been the case for the past 20-25 years though. Penn and Columbia, which are both the consumate research universities, have risen to take their place.

You are a very sad human being.

You are immature for hurling insults at someone who just laying out facts. Just cause you get butthurt by facts doesn't mean they are not true. Which part do you disagree with?

These are your simplistic opinions, not facts. And no civilized adult uses words like “butthurt”.

[Anonymous]

if emory's yield is so low and kids who go there view it as a safety school, then why is their endowment so large?

they would have issues getting alums to donate, no?

[Anonymous]

Emory is a fantastic university. Have you visited? Wow.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:if emory's yield is so low and kids who go there view it as a safety school, then why is their endowment so large?

they would have issues getting alums to donate, no?

Alums in general don't tend to be elastic donors. Emory has the benefit of support (hundreds of millions) from several historically associated foundations and family wealth vehicles. $100M from one large family office beats $750 from each of 1,300 individual alums.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:if emory's yield is so low and kids who go there view it as a safety school, then why is their endowment so large?

they would have issues getting alums to donate, no?

Alums in general don't tend to be elastic donors. Emory has the benefit of support (hundreds of millions) from several historically associated foundations and family wealth vehicles. $100M from one large family office beats $750 from each of 130,000 individual alums.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Emory is a fantastic university. Have you visited? Wow.

yes we've visited - it is what it is. a solid safety for smart north eastern kids who get shut out of the top places.

At my firm we look at emory grads and big 10 grads the same.

[Anonymous]

On the contrary, I think LACs do see the yield effect. More so than the Ivies.

From my experience, Williams is not the most desirable LAC a la Harvard. In cross admits, it loses 40-55% against Amherst and Swarthmore, and on the West Coast to Pomona. Harvard only really competes against Stanford, but wins considerably against Yale and Princeton (as well as the other Ivies).

The net effect of that is that when students are admitted across numerous LACs, there isn't one clear choice that they go to which takes the yield win. So the yields get scattered.

Because this fundamentally boils down to the likelihood of cross-admit, schools with a higher acceptance rate (along with their peers) see lower yields. Not too many students get into all 4 of Brown, Dartmouth, Columbia, or UPenn, or even many. The fact that LACs have higher acceptance rates means that you'll see more students admitted to multiple among Amherst, Swarthmore, Wesleyan, Williams, Bowdoin, etc. The acceptance rate difference is almost 1.5-2x larger, so that influences the RD yield.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What's with the LAC yields being so low? I thought Williams/Amherst/Swarthmore were Ivy-equivalent? The whole analogy that they're competing with each other and thus bring down each other's yield doesn't make a whole lot of sense when four of the Ivies make the top 4 on this list despite having a lot of cross-applicant similarity.

Are LACs losing their reputation among the best and brightest?

top LACs are not exactly Ivy equivalents any more. There are many top LAC kids trying to transfer to Ivies every year. The change has to do with the fact that LACs in general have lost ground compared to research universities in public perception. This is also why Brown and Dartmouth have slipped in desirability and standing over the past 2 decades - they are the most LAC-like Ivies. Back in the 70s,80s,early 90s they were both considered the best ivies after HYP. This hasn't been the case for the past 20-25 years though. Penn and Columbia, which are both the consumate research universities, have risen to take their place.

You are a very sad human being.

You are immature for hurling insults at someone who just laying out facts. Just cause you get butthurt by facts doesn't mean they are not true. Which part do you disagree with?

These are your simplistic opinions, not facts. And no civilized adult uses words like “butthurt”.

No they are not simplistic opinions or conjectures, they are facts supported by numbers. Look at the RD yield rates shown on this very thread for example. Also look at the performance of these schools in all the various college rankings. (I think WashPo published a compete ranking last year and they are some others on CC). Look at the list of dream colleges on Princeton Review. look at the super-low LAC yields. Btw every year tons of top LAC candidates transfer to ivies. Just because you do not like what the facts suggest, it does not mean they are any less true.

[Anonymous]

What do you mean "tons"?

The retention rate at Williams, Amherst, Swarthmore, Harvey Mudd, and Pomona was 98% for the most recent year. Only two elite universities have higher yields at 99%- Yale and UChicago. Other elite LACs are in the 95-97% range. Most of those retention drops are from leave of absences for health/academic reasons, in which the student returns later. Williams cites that of the 2% who don't return the next year, only 15% of them outright transfer to a different school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What do you mean "tons"?

The retention rate at Williams, Amherst, Swarthmore, Harvey Mudd, and Pomona was 98% for the most recent year. Only two elite universities have higher yields at 99%- Yale and UChicago. Other elite LACs are in the 95-97% range. Most of those retention drops are from leave of absences for health/academic reasons, in which the student returns later. Williams cites that of the 2% who don't return the next year, only 15% of them outright transfer to a different school.

+1 PP invests an inordinate amount of time sharing her ill-informed opinions on this thread. Some village must be missing its idiot.