How do schools decide who to pull from the waitlist?

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.

Pluto98

Full Member
2+ Year Member
Joined
Oct 28, 2019
Messages
339
Reaction score
481
What is the order in which this occurs? Obv all schools are different, but what are some common systems out there? For example, are applicants on a ranked waitlist ranked during their initial committee meeting or later on? How does the adcom re-evaluate who to pull from the waitlist (considering the interview might have happened 8 months ago and the interviewers cant really speak much about the applicant)? Do certain groups tend to have higher chances of getting off the waitlist because schools use the waitlist to "round out the class" (This could be gender, residency/state, or URMs for example).

I heard that last year there was less WL movement than anticipated? Any thoughts on what might happen this year?

Members don't see this ad.
 
What is the order in which this occurs? Obv all schools are different, but what are some common systems out there? For example, are applicants on a ranked waitlist ranked during their initial committee meeting or later on? How does the adcom re-evaluate who to pull from the waitlist (considering the interview might have happened 8 months ago and the interviewers cant really speak much about the applicant)? Do certain groups tend to have higher chances of getting off the waitlist because schools use the waitlist to "round out the class" (This could be gender, residency/state, or URMs for example).

I heard that last year there was less WL movement than anticipated? Any thoughts on what might happen this year?
- Probably school dependent, but one system is as you described ('rounding out the class' - which incidentally is the system my school uses). Based on those who are planning or have committed to enroll, a school will decide which demographics, experiences and/or skills are underrepresented. Offers are then made to help fill in these gaps. Applicants are scored before the interviews by screeners, after the interviews by interviewers (with comments typically provided), in addition to after a more thorough review of the application by the committee. A rough rank list is then formed based on the weighted aggregate of these scores.
- In cases where there is a wide discrepancy between scores, the dean will evaluate and make a final determination.
- Given the new 'traffic rules', schools were anecdotally more conservative with giving out acceptances early on. I suspect that this year will be similar at most schools with there being relatively more waitlist movement (compared to the pre-traffic rule years). The amount of waitlist movement will (not surprisingly) vary by school.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 users
- Probably school dependent, but one system is as you described ('rounding out the class' - which incidentally is the system my school uses). Based on those who are planning or have committed to enroll, a school will decide which demographics, experiences and/or skills are underrepresented. Offers are then made to help fill in these gaps. Applicants are scored before the interviews by screeners, after the interviews by interviewers (with comments typically provided), in addition to after a more thorough review of the application by the committee. A rough rank list is then formed based on the weighted aggregate of these scores.
- In cases where there is a wide discrepancy between scores, the dean will evaluate and make a final determination.
- Given the new 'traffic rules', schools were anecdotally more conservative with giving out acceptances early on. I suspect that this year will be similar at most schools with there being relatively more waitlist movement (compared to the pre-traffic rule years). The amount of waitlist movement will (not surprisingly) vary by school.


Thanks for your response!

You mentioned that post interview, applicants are subjected to a "more thorough review of the application by the committee". In practice, how does this actually occur? It seems like a full read of one's application would take about 30 minutes. Are all committee members reading each app for 30 minutes? That seems way too excessive (if an adcom meets once every three weeks for example, and reviews 36 total applicants, that would mean each member spends 18 hours reviewing applications which is excessive). I understand that at most schools, the interviewers typically present the applicant but how does the rest of the committee actually review the application?

Last year, I heard that while less acceptances were initially given out, WL movement was less because each applicant tended to receive less acceptances compared to previous years. Also, do letters of interest or intent matter for the WL? I understand that they could help if you already received an acceptance to a "better school" but if the schools are pretty close together (i.e accepted with full tuition merit scholarship at northwestern but want to attend penn or accepted at columbia but want to attend stanford)?
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Members don't see this ad :)
We just have a ranked waitlist. The faculty/adcoms come to a consensus on where each candidate sits in the list, and when it’s time to start pulling people we just go down the list in order, giving each person a chance to accept/decline.

Sometimes people will send an update/LOI that moves them up or down a bit on the list a bit.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
I know one case where twins applied to same instate public school and one with higher stats was given admission and second one was waitlisted. Twin who got admitted withdrew and went to different school and second one was admitted from WL. My guess is it's due to 'rounding out the class' . Both went to sameT10 school and did same major but have different ECs. The one with lower stats have stronger research experience.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Thanks for your response!

You mentioned that post interview, applicants are subjected to a "more thorough review of the application by the committee". In practice, how does this actually occur?

Every school is different but one way is for all committee members to be given access to the application and the freedom to read as much or as little as they please before weighing in with a categorization/score. If an application has a synopsis by the original reviewer(s) plus commentary by each interviewer, it might take 5 minutes to read those and make a judgment. In other cases, someone might want to go a bit deeper. One can get through 24 applications in 2 hours at 5 minutes per.

Last year, I heard that while less acceptances were initially given out, WL movement was less because each applicant tended to receive less acceptances compared to previous years. Also, do letters of interest or intent matter for the WL? I understand that they could help if you already received an acceptance to a "better school" but if the schools are pretty close together (i.e accepted with full tuition merit scholarship at northwestern but want to attend penn or accepted at columbia but want to attend stanford)?

If each applicant has fewer offers, then there are fewer schools getting let down by someone they made an offer to. However, if schools are making fewer offers, they may be more likely to have a hole to fill if one of the few offers they make is turned down. That can also lead to more waitlist movement.

In the unlikely event that a school gets a late turn down (let's say someone accepts offer at columbia and then gets off the waitlist at stanford leaving columbia to fill a vacancy three weeks before school starts) the medical school left in the lurch want to fill the slot as quickly as possible. Potential students on that school's waitlist are dropping like flies as they make commitments, sign leases, etc at at other schools. In those cases, I think, a letter of interest can go a long way. Also a school doesn't want to wait around for a week with the offer being considered only to be turned down and the need to fill the seat now with only 2 weeks until school starts. Also, every offer turned down counts against the school's yield and for some that is a point of pride so they want to make as few offers as possible while still filling the class with the best applicants they can get.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 7 users
Every school is different but one way if for all committee members to be given access to the application and the freedom to read as much or as little as they please before weighing in with a categorization/score. If an application has a synopsis by the original reviewer(s) plus commentary by each interviewer, it might take 5 minutes to read those and make a judgment. In other cases, someone might want to go a bit deeper. One can get through 24 applications in 2 hours at 5 minutes per.



If each applicant has fewer offers, then there are fewer schools getting let down by someone they made an offer to. However, if schools are making fewer offers, they may be more likely to have a hole to fill if one of the few offers they make is turned down. That can also lead to more waitlist movement.

In the unlikely event that a school gets a late turn down (let's say someone accepts offer at columbia and then gets off the waitlist at stanford leaving columbia to fill a vacancy three weeks before school starts) the medical school left in the lurch want to fill the slot as quickly as possible. Potential students on that school's waitlist are dropping like flies as they make commitments, sign leases, etc at at other schools. In those cases, I think, a letter of interest can go a long way. Also a school doesn't want to wait around for a week with the offer being considered only to be turned down and the need to fill the seat now with only 2 weeks until school starts. Also, every offer turned down counts against the school's yield and for some that is a point of pride so they want to make as few offers as possible while still filling the class with the best applicants they can get.


Among the top schools, which tend to value letters of intent the most? I know they are highly valued by WashU, Mayo but would they also be valued at the "tippy top" like harvard, hopkins, stanford? In a letter of intent, would you specifically name which schools you have already been accepted to or just say "peer institutions". For example, telling Harvard you would commit to enroll even though you already got a full tuition merit scholarship at Chicago.

Does any of this change if waitlists are ranked vs unranked? Are specific groups more likely to get in off the waitlist simply because the school needs to fill out more URM spots for example?
 
They call you if they call you... thats all you gotta know. Its really up to them on how they call.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Among the top schools, which tend to value letters of intent the most? I know they are highly valued by WashU, Mayo but would they also be valued at the "tippy top" like harvard, hopkins, stanford? In a letter of intent, would you specifically name which schools you have already been accepted to or just say "peer institutions". For example, telling Harvard you would commit to enroll even though you already got a full tuition merit scholarship at Chicago.

Does any of this change if waitlists are ranked vs unranked? Are specific groups more likely to get in off the waitlist simply because the school needs to fill out more URM spots for example?
I think they try to keep both URM and ORM ratios to their liking and use that to pick from waitlist.
 
I think they try to keep both URM and ORM ratios to their liking and use that to pick from waitlist.

Also male/female, particularly if the locker rooms are of similar size; an imbalance by gender can create a hardship for students who end up in overcrowded facilities.

Each school is different and things change within schools as leadership changes and the school's decision-makers learn from experience and the externals change (such as the changes in AAMC reporting policies).
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
What is the order in which this occurs? Obv all schools are different, but what are some common systems out there? For example, are applicants on a ranked waitlist ranked during their initial committee meeting or later on? How does the adcom re-evaluate who to pull from the waitlist (considering the interview might have happened 8 months ago and the interviewers cant really speak much about the applicant)? Do certain groups tend to have higher chances of getting off the waitlist because schools use the waitlist to "round out the class" (This could be gender, residency/state, or URMs for example).

I heard that last year there was less WL movement than anticipated? Any thoughts on what might happen this year?
At my school it's stats-based.

A fair number of schools also like choosing people based upon distance. If one lives close by, one is more likely to attend.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
At my school it's stats-based.

A fair number of schools also like choosing people based upon distance. If one lives close by, one is more likely to attend.
huh. Do not like that.
I think distance is a better indicator, or do you mean stats based as in ppl who are likely to not go to an MD school?
 
Members don't see this ad :)
Stats as in the higher, the better. And make sure you're sitting down, but we are netting people with MD caliber stats.
Ofc, I just didn't wanna think that its still high stats being the most important thing at the end of the day, thats why I was trying to tell myself its not...
Geez. So much for "hollistic" :eyebrow:
( ps I was standing and am still fine :p )
 
Geez. So much for "hollistic" :eyebrow:
( ps I was standing and am still fine :p )
It is holistic as in merely having high stats with nothing else most likely isn’t going to cut it but let’s not fool ourselves and act as if that means their main concern isn’t attracting the most competitive candidates (ie. Those with the highest stats)
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
It is holistic as in merely having high stats with nothing else most likely isn’t going to cut it but let’s not fool ourselves and act as if that means their main concern isn’t attracting the most competitive candidates (ie. Those with the highest stats)
Sure, but, idk.
I feel like once you interview the soft parts of your app should be more important but that's just me.
 
Sure, but, idk.
I feel like once you interview the soft parts of your app should be more important but that's just me.

I get where you’re coming from and I don’t necessarily disagree. It’s just probably harder to objectively rank applicants solely based on the “soft” parts of their app, especially post interview where I’m assuming everyone that is still being considered has met a certain level of clinical/non clinical experiences. If not going based on stats or specific demographic need what will they do, choose who gets in off of a wl based on the number of clinical hours or days spent volunteering?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 users
Ofc, I just didn't wanna think that its still high stats being the most important thing at the end of the day, thats why I was trying to tell myself its not...
Geez. So much for "hollistic" :eyebrow:
( ps I was standing and am still fine :p )
in my example stats were not high. 3.3 GPA (but 3.9 masters GPA and high MCAT ) ORM
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Among the top schools, which tend to value letters of intent the most? I know they are highly valued by WashU, Mayo but would they also be valued at the "tippy top" like harvard, hopkins, stanford?
Mayo is tippy toppy. It has the number 1 ranked hospital in the nation.
 
  • Haha
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Ofc, I just didn't wanna think that its still high stats being the most important thing at the end of the day, thats why I was trying to tell myself its not...
Geez. So much for "hollistic" :eyebrow:
( ps I was standing and am still fine :p )
Or course stats are important. They are the most important metric hence why the higher your stats the better your chances of getting in. Medical schools invest 6 figures into their students and they're ensuring that money is being put to good use.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Every school is different but one way is for all committee members to be given access to the application and the freedom to read as much or as little as they please before weighing in with a categorization/score. If an application has a synopsis by the original reviewer(s) plus commentary by each interviewer, it might take 5 minutes to read those and make a judgment. In other cases, someone might want to go a bit deeper. One can get through 24 applications in 2 hours at 5 minutes per.



If each applicant has fewer offers, then there are fewer schools getting let down by someone they made an offer to. However, if schools are making fewer offers, they may be more likely to have a hole to fill if one of the few offers they make is turned down. That can also lead to more waitlist movement.

In the unlikely event that a school gets a late turn down (let's say someone accepts offer at columbia and then gets off the waitlist at stanford leaving columbia to fill a vacancy three weeks before school starts) the medical school left in the lurch want to fill the slot as quickly as possible. Potential students on that school's waitlist are dropping like flies as they make commitments, sign leases, etc at at other schools. In those cases, I think, a letter of interest can go a long way. Also a school doesn't want to wait around for a week with the offer being considered only to be turned down and the need to fill the seat now with only 2 weeks until school starts. Also, every offer turned down counts against the school's yield and for some that is a point of pride so they want to make as few offers as possible while still filling the class with the best applicants they can get.
Where does the yield come in as a determinant? Last time I checked, USnews doesn't use yield as a ranking criteria.
 
Where does the yield come in as a determinant? Last time I checked, USnews doesn't use yield as a ranking criteria.
They might not report yield directly but you can easily find a schools acceptance rate/number of acceptances. That and the number of matriculants is all you need to calculate a schools yield
 
They might not report yield directly but you can easily find a schools acceptance rate/number of acceptances. That and the number of matriculants is all you need to calculate a schools yield
But if that data has no impact on ranking, why would they care?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Ofc, I just didn't wanna think that its still high stats being the most important thing at the end of the day, thats why I was trying to tell myself its not...
Geez. So much for "hollistic" :eyebrow:
( ps I was standing and am still fine :p )
"Holistic review of applications" is NOT a magic totem to can cure all ills. A bad interview is a bad interview, and each school has particular criteria that they judge candidates by.
 
Sure, but, idk.
I feel like once you interview the soft parts of your app should be more important but that's just me.
Yeah, that's just you, but it wouldn't be you if you had a 3.95/420, but didn't interview particularly well and did not have any advantage over someone with a 3.5/510!!
 
"Holistic review of applications" is NOT a magic totem to can cure all ills. A bad interview is a bad interview, and each school has particular criteria that they judge candidates by.
Oh, you mean that ' bad interview" folks get put on the WL. I thought this was like where bad interviews get a post-II R and then there's WL for people who just missed the A my bad.
 
Even if it isn’t used to generate direct ranks, perception is everything, especially with the Uber-elite schools
Also, I think in the old days it was used to in the ranking criteria, and old habits die hard.
 
Yeah, that's just you, but it wouldn't be you if you had a 3.95/420, but didn't interview particularly well and did not have any advantage over someone with a 3.5/510!!
Well, for DO schools that 3.5/510 person has slightly above stats so IDK do they need to have an advantage over a 3.4/506 when the 3.4/506 person has better EC's, had a better interview, etc.
 
Oh, you mean that ' bad interview" folks get put on the WL. I thought this was like where bad interviews get a post-II R and then there's WL for people who just missed the A my bad.
Well, perhaps I should have wrote "weak interviews".
But like it or not, my Dean is a stats guy, and he'll pull people based upon stats over anything else.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Well, perhaps I should have wrote "weak interviews".
But like it or not, my Dean is a stats guy, and he'll pull people based upon stats over anything else.
laksdjflkdsad then why even interview lower stats candidates? Ugh.
Actually I would like some insight on that as I prepare for my state school interview for which I am < avg for stats for IS. I'm serious.
I try to tell myself is bc on paper my EC's/essays/LOR showed that I would make the type of doctor they want their school to produce and so they like me as a potential physician and not just a pair of stats but it's hard! I keep feeling like I don't deserve it!
 
laksdjflkdsad then why even interview lower stats candidates? Ugh.
Actually I would like some insight on that as I prepare for my state school interview for which I am < avg for stats for IS. I'm serious.
I try to tell myself is bc on paper my EC's/essays/LOR showed that I would make the type of doctor they want their school to produce and so they like me as a potential physician and not just a pair of stats but it's hard! I keep feeling like I don't deserve it!
Because the poeple with the lower starts don't necessarily have stats that will keep them out of med schools. If they were too low, they wouldn't be interviewed.

It's a seller's market...that said, candidates shake up the game by deciding to go elsewhere. That's why all schools from Harvard to John a Burns, Albany to Yale, have to dip into thier wait lists.

Stop taking this personally. If you do well, you get an outright accept at a DO school.
 
laksdjflkdsad then why even interview lower stats candidates? Ugh.
Actually I would like some insight on that as I prepare for my state school interview for which I am < avg for stats for IS. I'm serious.
I try to tell myself is bc on paper my EC's/essays/LOR showed that I would make the type of doctor they want their school to produce and so they like me as a potential physician and not just a pair of stats but it's hard! I keep feeling like I don't deserve it!

A school wouldn’t waste an interview slot on you if they didn’t think you had what it took to pass through med school + represent them well as a graduate
 
  • Love
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
laksdjflkdsad then why even interview lower stats candidates? Ugh.
Actually I would like some insight on that as I prepare for my state school interview for which I am < avg for stats for IS. I'm serious.
I try to tell myself is bc on paper my EC's/essays/LOR showed that I would make the type of doctor they want their school to produce and so they like me as a potential physician and not just a pair of stats but it's hard! I keep feeling like I don't deserve it!

You are at a disadvantage going in with a below average stat. It's just a fact. You need to blow them away to have a real shot.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Because the poeple with the lower starts don't necessarily have stats that will keep them out of med schools. If they were too low, they wouldn't be interviewed.

It's a seller's market...that said, candidates shake up the game by deciding to go elsewhere. That's why all schools from Harvard to John a Burns, Albany to Yale, have to dip into thier wait lists.

Stop taking this personally. If you do well, you get an outright accept at a DO school.
When did I say it was personal? My stats are good for DO, and I already have admitted to myself that my stats are low for my state MD school. Ik that, I was asking what the rationale behind interviewing someone like me is anyway.
I'm just trying to tell myself I have a shot so I can be confident for the interview, like psyching myself up. Frankly, I'm honored that they even gave me the time of day :rofl:
You are at a disadvantage going in with a below average stat. It's just a fact. You need to blow them away to have a real shot.
Tru. That's why I'm mentally prepared for a WL ( my state school only does A's or WL's for IS candidates post-interview).
 
When did I say it was personal? My stats are good for DO, and I already have admitted to myself that my stats are low for my state MD school. Ik that, I was asking what the rationale behind interviewing someone like me is anyway.
I'm just trying to tell myself I have a shot so I can be confident for the interview, like psyching myself up. Frankly, I'm honored that they even gave me the time of day :rofl:

Tru. That's why I'm mentally prepared for a WL ( my state school only does A's or WL's for IS candidates post-interview).
you are invited for an interview because you are probably one of the 600 people among applicants who can potentially make a good member of the class. However, where you stand among those 600 people is a completely different story.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
you are invited for an interview because you are probably one of the 600 people among applicants who can potentially make a good member of the class. However, where you stand among those 600 people is a completely different story.
But they must believe that the interview has a chance of making me go up the ladder, right? That's why they spent a slot on me?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
But they must believe that the interview has a chance of making me go up the ladder, right? That's why they spent a slot on me?
certainly. That's why you need to prove that despite your stat, you are a strong candidate.
 
  • Love
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
When did I say it was personal? My stats are good for DO, and I already have admitted to myself that my stats are low for my state MD school. Ik that, I was asking what the rationale behind interviewing someone like me is anyway.
I'm just trying to tell myself I have a shot so I can be confident for the interview, like psyching myself up. Frankly, I'm honored that they even gave me the time of day :rofl:

Tru. That's why I'm mentally prepared for a WL ( my state school only does A's or WL's for IS candidates post-interview).
You're reactions all though this thread seem to be taking the concept as a personal affront. Last post on the subject. Just chill already.
 
  • Haha
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
You're reactions all though this thread seem to be taking the concept as a personal affront. Last post on the subject. Just chill already.
I think I have a naturally nervous affect even when I'm not nervous, this happens in real life too, it's so annoying. I'm not taking any of this personally, except for rationalizing how to make the most of my state MD II. That's all. I'm literally not freaking out about this.
 
I think I have a naturally nervous affect even when I'm not nervous, this happens in real life too, it's so annoying. I'm not taking any of this personally, except for rationalizing how to make the most of my state MD II. That's all. I'm literally not freaking out about this.
you need to overcome that in your interview for real!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users
Well, for DO schools that 3.5/510 person has slightly above stats so IDK do they need to have an advantage over a 3.4/506 when the 3.4/506 person has better EC's, had a better interview, etc.
So, are you saying that you get why above average stats provide an advantage for DO, but don't understand why the soft parts of an app aren't more important for MD, where your stats are below average?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
laksdjflkdsad then why even interview lower stats candidates? Ugh.
Actually I would like some insight on that as I prepare for my state school interview for which I am < avg for stats for IS. I'm serious.
I try to tell myself is bc on paper my EC's/essays/LOR showed that I would make the type of doctor they want their school to produce and so they like me as a potential physician and not just a pair of stats but it's hard! I keep feeling like I don't deserve it!
It's not about "deserve." You do deserve it, or you wouldn't have it. But don't kid yourself; you're not on a level playing field with someone with much better stats, better ECs, etc. Relatively speaking, all things equal, you have to do better on an interview than people whose applications are otherwise stronger than yours.

No pressure :), but that's the way it is. The fact that you received an II does not mean you are good to go as long as you don't screw up the interview. A ton of people all over the country are going to have perfectly fine interviews and not receive an A because when they go to committee they are going to lose out to people with better overall apps.
 
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: 4 users
So, are you saying that you get why above average stats provide an advantage for DO, but don't understand why the soft parts of an app aren't more important for MD, where your stats are below average?
No, I'm just saying Goro's example of his Do schools preferring higher stats is not something I'm taking personally bc I have good stats for DO. He was saying I was seemingly taking his comments personally and I was saying I'm not bc I'm most likely set for DO stats wise.
And for MD I was bringing up the example of being < avg there, and then wondering how to compensate or why they gave me an II in the first place.
It's not about "deserve." You do deserve it, or you wouldn't have it. But don't kid yourself; you're not on a level playing field with someone with much better stats, better ECs, etc. Relatively speaking, all things equal, you have to do better on an interview than people whose applications are otherwise stronger than yours.

No pressure :), but that's the way it is. The fact that you received an II does not mean you are good to go as long as you don't screw up the interview. A ton of people all over the country are going to have perfectly fine interviews and not receive an A because when they go to committee they are going to lose out to people with better overall apps.
True, true. But there other aspects to the app ( other than stats) that lead the II- essays/LOR/EC's. Those should be equally important after the interview itself as stats are.
 
No, I'm just saying Goro's example of his Do schools preferring higher stats is not something I'm taking personally bc I have good stats for DO. He was saying I was seemingly taking his comments personally and I was saying I'm not bc I'm most likely set for DO stats wise.
And for MD I was bringing up the example of being < avg there, and then wondering how to compensate or why they gave me an II in the first place.

True, true. But there other aspects to the app ( other than stats) that lead the II- essays/LOR/EC's. Those should be equally important after the interview itself as stats are.
my advice is don't analyze too much about it. Go there and enjoy your opportunity to make a case for why you will be a great doctor! II's are hard to come by and you got two!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
Yield is indirectly reported, matriculants/Acceptances.






Question about tables- where do waitlist offers and acceptances fit in? Are waitlist offers included in “offers?” Take Augusta University, ranked 88th, offers made 372, matriculated 230. Boston University, ranked 30th, 524 offers for 172 matriculants. So Augusta’s “yield” was 61%, BU’s was 32%. Most seem to be 40-60%, with top schools at the high end. Is the data pre “new rules”? Different schools must have different strategies- one school could initially offer only the number of class spots to students with stats comparable to their usual classes, high yield, then (old rules) look to see if a waitlisted applicant had had any acceptances, offer to the best available athlete with the least/no acceptances. This would be the realist style? This would give you the highest yield regardless of exclusivity of the school. BU has the rep of a solid “safety school” for elite applicants- seems like they play the game of a high number of high stat initial acceptances, (two to three times the number of spots?) knowing that most of these will go elsewhere. This is the dream high style? This gives a low yield. They risk the dreaded over enrollment problem. Would be interesting to see yield from initial acceptances, and same data from the waitlist. Again says more about individual school admissions style than school desirability.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Question about tables- where do waitlist offers and acceptances fit in? Are waitlist offers included in “offers?” Take Augusta University, ranked 88th, offers made 372, matriculated 230. Boston University, ranked 30th, 524 offers for 172 matriculants. So Augusta’s “yield” was 61%, BU’s was 32%. Most seem to be 40-60%, with top schools at the high end. Is the data pre “new rules”? Different schools must have different strategies- one school could initially offer only the number of class spots to students with stats comparable to their usual classes, high yield, then (old rules) look to see if a waitlisted applicant had had any acceptances, offer to the best available athlete with the least/no acceptances. This would be the realist style? This would give you the highest yield regardless of exclusivity of the school. BU has the rep of a solid “safety school” for elite applicants- seems like they play the game of a high number of high stat initial acceptances, (two to three times the number of spots?) knowing that most of these will go elsewhere. This is the dream high style? This gives a low yield. They risk the dreaded over enrollment problem. Would be interesting to see yield from initial acceptances, and same data from the waitlist. Again says more about individual school admissions style than school desirability.
It's kind of a moot point, given that the candidates who are most likely to come are already decided before any offer is given out. It's just a silly game that wastes all the energy and the end result is exactly the same. The only problem a school needs to worry about is over-enrollment. You can accept high stats right away and they turn down the offers or you can waitlist them and they withdraw from the list. What's the difference?? One example is Dartmouth. Their outstanding offers will never exceed the number of seats according to the policy stated to us during the interview. But the school still has an abysmal retention rate. No matter how you slice and dice it, if the amount of candidates who will pick the school is low to begin with, no matter what strategy you use, you will get a low yield.
 
No, I'm just saying Goro's example of his Do schools preferring higher stats is not something I'm taking personally bc I have good stats for DO. He was saying I was seemingly taking his comments personally and I was saying I'm not bc I'm most likely set for DO stats wise.
And for MD I was bringing up the example of being < avg there, and then wondering how to compensate or why they gave me an II in the first place.

True, true. But there other aspects to the app ( other than stats) that lead the II- essays/LOR/EC's. Those should be equally important after the interview itself as stats are.
... and they are. What you are implying by saying "should be equally important" is "stats should be ignored." The simple fact is that everything is important, to varying degrees at different schools.

I think UMass has something like a 50% post-II rate of As. That does not mean that half of all candidates blow their interviews. That means that the interview goes into the hopper along with everything else, decisions are made, and 50% receive an A. Candidates rise and fall based on interview performance, but, depending where they were going in, some rise and still don't get an A while others fall and still receive one. Unfortunately, you have no way to know where you are right now relative to all other IIs, so you have no way to know where you are going to stand after your interview.

It's probably safe to assume, based on your stats, that you're not at the top, but it's impossible to know whether you're at the middle or near the bottom. The good news is that it doesn't matter. You definitely have some chance, and you would go on the interview anyway, whether your specific post-II chance at an A is 50%, 100% or 5%, so just STOP WORRYING ABOUT THINGS YOU CAN'T CONTROL, do the best you can, and let the process play out!!!!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
Top