Low-yield school vs. small class size schools

[kittridge1141]

/

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Okazaki Frag Grenade]

Hi!

I am working on my school list right now and I am confused which schools to apply because I have been ruling out low-yield schools.

http://www.usnews.com/education/bes...ools-that-are-most-competitive-for-applicants

But when I compared matriculation rate on MSAR, I noticed that some low-yield schools have higher matriculation rate than other schools because larger class size etc.

For example, Brown (1.75%), Tufts (1.84%), Jefferson (2.53%) although considered low-yield schools, have higher matriculation rate than Dartmouth (1.33%), UCI (1.65%), or Albany (1.37%). *I tried to compare schools with similar median stat.

Should I be more concerned about large application pool or low matriculation rate?
I have been ruling out low yield schools just because they are low-yield. Should I not?

You don't necessarily have to rule out low-yield schools if you're fine with paying the application/secondary fees and could reasonably see yourself going to one of those schools. Just be realistic of your chances and have other schools on your list that will be more favorable to you (e.g. smaller applicant pool, IS, stats below yours, etc).

I interviewed at 3 "low-yield" programs this past cycle, so it's not always a bad idea to apply (n=1 though)

 

[kittridge1141]

You don't necessarily have to rule out low-yield schools if you're fine with paying the application/secondary fees and could reasonably see yourself going to one of those schools. Just be realistic of your chances and have other schools on your list that will be more favorable to you (e.g. smaller applicant pool, IS, stats below yours, etc).

I interviewed at 3 "low-yield" programs this past cycle, so it's not always a bad idea to apply (n=1 though)

sorry what do you mean n=1?

 

[aalphieee]

An n of 1 is not a large enough data set to make any assumptions off of. Basically, don't take their experience as an indicator for what your own will be.

 

[kittridge1141]

An n of 1 is not a large enough data set to make any assumptions off of. Basically, don't take their experience as an indicator for what your own will be.

Ahhh I see, thank you for the explanation!

 

[Lucca]

To me, yield in terms of the possible return of applying to a school (an II or an acceptance) is a function of:

1) Do my stats and applications align with this school? Is this school a reasonable match for my application? This does not have to be a solely numerical calculation but should include things like fit and mission.

2) are there any non-application related circumstances that could make this school inaccessible for me? For example, Brown takes most of its class from the Brown undergrad program so the school is low yield for anyone not in that program. Public Texas schools have very strong in state bias so applying to them is low yield for most (non high stat) applicants. HBMCs are obviously going to take more AAs and other minorities at a higher rate than ORMs. Etc, etc.

3) Do I really really want to go there? Typically this refers to the "reach" category of schools like Harvard or Hopkins which are low yield for just about everyone (minus the superstar cohort) but even though the possibility of a positive return is so small, the return itself is very desirable and comes at low risk (in the worst case, you spend a few hundred bucks and they say no but at least you know for sure what the outcome of applying would have been) so you may apply to the school anyway in spite of it being technically "low yield" for your particular application. Your whole list should not be made up of these schools (nor should they be the majority) but whether you add them and how many is dependent on your financial situation and the depths of your hope (or, alternatively, "F* it, why not") reserves.

To answer your question directly: I don't think those two metrics (class size and matriculant yield) are particularly important in and of themselves, only in conjunction with the other three categories I listed can you make a complete judgement when constructing a school list.

 

[kittridge1141]

To me, yield in terms of the possible return of applying to a school (an II or an acceptance) is a function of:

1) Do my stats and applications align with this school? Is this school a reasonable match for my application? This does not have to be a solely numerical calculation but should include things like fit and mission.

2) are there any non-application related circumstances that could make this school inaccessible for me? For example, Brown takes most of its class from the Brown undergrad program so the school is low yield for anyone not in that program. Public Texas schools have very strong in state bias so applying to them is low yield for most (non high stat) applicants. HBMCs are obviously going to take more AAs and other minorities at a higher rate than ORMs. Etc, etc.

3) Do I really really want to go there? Typically this refers to the "reach" category of schools like Harvard or Hopkins which are low yield for just about everyone (minus the superstar cohort) but even though the possibility of a positive return is so small, the return itself is very desirable and comes at low risk (in the worst case, you spend a few hundred bucks and they say no but at least you know for sure what the outcome would have been of applying) so you may apply to the school anyway in spite of it being technically "low yield" for your particular application. Your whole list should not be made up of these schools (nor should they be the majority) but whether you add them and how many is dependent on your financial situation and the depths of your hope (or, alternatively, "F* it, why not") reserves.

To answe your question directly: I don't think those two metrics (class size and matriculant yield) are particularly important in and of themselves, only in conjunction with the other three categories I listed can you make a complete judgement when constructing a school list.

Thank you for ur insight! That was so thoughtful and really helpful 🙂

 

[The Knife & Gun Club]

Where do you see matriculation rate on MSAR? Are you just dividing number of apps by number of seats?

This can be deceiving, especially for schools with small class sizes and newer schools since you do not know the number of acceptances granted. A couple good examples from my own experience;

FAU: They have 64 seats for ~4300 apps. So matriculation rate is ~1.5%...very low yield. But how many do they accept? I know from my interview that FAU accepts around 280 per year, so the acceptance rate is closer to 6.5% which is actually pretty good.

vs

Tulane: they have 181 seats for ~9,900 apps, so matriculation rate = ~1.8%. But they actually accept around 400, so the acceptance rate is 4.0%.

vs.

At Mayo (via the mayo website, not MSAR) the class may be 45 students out of 4347 apps, so matriculation rate of 1.0% (!) but the number of people turning down Mayo is close to nil. They accepted 79 students, so their acceptance rate is a staggeringly low 1.8%.

vs.

Virginia Tech: 42/3572= matriculation rate 1.2%. But as a heavily research focused school (>80% have substantial research experience such as an Undergrad/masters thesis or PhD), the acceptance rate of people that fit their desired profile is probably much higher. Unfortunately I dont have numbers to back this up but this is a common trend at many niche schools (puerto rican, Historically black, mission driven, etc).



Basically my point is that no 2 schools are identical and that it cant be distilled down to a single seats/applicants number. My advice is to look closely at all the schools you apply to, in order to see if you actually fit what they want and stand a realistic chance at acceptance.

 

[The Knife & Gun Club]

*Oh yea and look at in state vs out of state. Some schools could have an IS matriculation rating upwards of 30%, while having an OOS matriculation percentage of <0.01%

 

[LoveMed2015]

Also don't forget to look at accepted demographics. If a particular school serves a targeted applicant pool of which you are not, it probably is not worth your time having said school on your list. Also understand cohorts like WWAMI for UWash - MSAR may make it look like UWash takes a large percentage of OOS students, when in fact they are WWAMI, and ~ 10 students in reality were not IS or regional applicants for the previously seated class.

 

[Rainbow Zebra]

Yes, I almost didn't apply to Mayo due to low yield, and VCU for high volume of apps, but applied and interviewed at both. Didn't get accepted to Mayo, but did to VCU. Lots of schools are reporting an increase in apps, but not an increase in II. A curious trend in more competitive environment, which may explain why the average age of new med students is now 24. Need those 2 extra years to beef up the app. Worked for me, I don't think I was competitive at all out of undergrad (had the GPA, but not the long term commitment to ECs, which I fixed over gap years).

 

[kittridge1141]

Yes, I almost didn't apply to Mayo due to low volume, and VCU for high volume of apps, but applied and interviewed at both. Didn't get accepted to Mayo, but did to VCU. Lots of schools are reporting an increase in apps, but not an increase in II. A curious trend in more competitive environment, which may explain why the average age of new med students is now 24. Need those 2 extra years to beef up the app. Worked for me, I don't think I was competitive at all out of undergrad (had the GPA, but not the long term commitment to ECs, which I fixed over gap years).

Have you decided where you will attend?

 

[Goro]

Look, they're ALL low yield. Even my DO school. You have to target schools smartly, by looking whose median stats are closest to your own.

About 50% of applicants have no business ever setting foot on a medical school campus, except as standardized patients.

And while you're at it, take a stats course.

Hi!

I am working on my school list right now and I am confused which schools to apply because I have been ruling out low-yield schools.

http://www.usnews.com/education/bes...ools-that-are-most-competitive-for-applicants

But when I compared matriculation rate on MSAR, I noticed that some low-yield schools have higher matriculation rate than other schools because larger class size etc.

For example, Brown (1.75%), Tufts (1.84%), Jefferson (2.53%) although considered low-yield schools, have higher matriculation rate than Dartmouth (1.33%), UCI (1.65%), or Albany (1.37%). *I tried to compare schools with similar median stat.

Should I be more concerned about large application pool or low matriculation rate?
I have been ruling out low yield schools just because they are low-yield. Should I not?

 

[WedgeDawg]

Quoting myself from another post here:

A school should generally be considered low yield for any particular applicant if it meets any of the following critera:

• The applicant has scores outside the 10th or 90th percentiles without significant reason
• The applicant is OOS and the school is not OOS friendly (think UWashington, UC Davis, etc)
• The school receives an inordinately high volume of applicants (think GW or Drexel)
• The school interviews an extremely small pool of applicants (Brown)
• The school accepts an extremely small group of applicants (Mayo)
• The applicant does not fit the schools mission (a white applicant applying to Howard, etc)

 

[kittridge1141]

Quoting myself from another post here:

Thank you! This was really helpful 🙂

 

[Rainbow Zebra]

Have you decided where you will attend?

University of Michigan, I am instate, cheapest and best school I got in. GO BLUE!!!

I found MDAPPS for people with similar stats, and people in my state to be very useful.
Check it out. Cheers.

 

[kittridge1141]

University of Michigan, I am instate, cheapest and best school I got in. GO BLUE!!!

I found MDAPPS for people with similar stats, and people in my state to be very useful.
Check it out. Cheers.

congratulations!!