Yield Protection

[DocMom1]

I recently heard musings about medical schools which, in efforts to protect their matriculation yields (i.e. # of offers/# of matriculants), deny interview or admission offers to applicants who they think would receive interview and admission offers at more 'elite' institutions.

Hearing this prompted the following questions which I thought might generate interesting discussion:

(1) What tangible benefit(s) does having a high yield percentage confer to a medical school?

(2) To what extent does this actually occur?

(3) If someone with impressive numbers (3.9+/34+) and extracurricular experiences specifically desires to go to her of his state school or a low ranked school, what can he or she do to prevent being denied an interview or offer due to yield protection policies?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[drizzt3117]

I recently heard musings about medical schools which, in efforts to protect their matriculation yields (i.e. # of offers/# of matriculants), deny interview or admission offers to applicants who they think would receive interview and admission offers at more 'elite' institutions.

Hearing this prompted the following questions which I thought might generate interesting discussion:

(1) What tangible benefit(s) does having a high yield percentage confer to a medical school?

It's a waste of time to interview people with no interest in the school. Interviewers, be they med students, PhDs, or MDs, are busy people and taking time out of their schedule is tough.

(2) To what extent does this actually occur?

All the time. State schools and schools with lower admission stats in desirable locations like GT, BU, GWU, etc, are especially known to do this.

(3) If someone with impressive numbers (3.9+/34+) and extracurricular experiences specifically desires to go to her of his state school or a low ranked school, what can he or she do to prevent being denied an interview or offer due to yield protection policies?

You should express strong interest in your secondaries and/or write letters of interest that are well-written and have good reasons for being interested.

 

[NeuralNetwork]

It's a waste of time to interview people with no interest in the school. Interviewers, be they med students, PhDs, or MDs, are busy people and taking time out of their schedule is tough.



All the time. State schools and schools with lower admission stats in desirable locations like GT, BU, GWU, etc, are especially known to do this.



You should express strong interest in your secondaries and/or write letters of interest that are well-written and have good reasons for being interested.

/thread

 

[eHombre]

My thoughts:

1) A lower acceptance rate, which is loosely tied to the matriculation rate, gives a higher score on the student selectivity portion of the USNews research ranking. However, it's only 1% of the overall ranking, so schools may overvalue it as a mechanism to move up the rankings. That said, I think the matriculation rate might have a bigger indirect effect on the Peer Assessment score, which surveys admissions deans or other administrators, and that portion of the ranking is 20% of the overall score.

http://www.usnews.com/education/bes...l-school-rankings-methodology-2012_print.html

2) I absolutely think that yield protection occurs, though not in the way that most people think. It's not as if there's an "upper cutoff" for GPA/MCATs, but it's more about fit. A school like Georgetown, for instance, with its community service focus would be unlikely to interview/accept an applicant with lots of research but little volunteering, with or without a 3.9/38. In addition, I think that I remember LizzyM saying (correct me if I'm wrong) that some mid-tier schools may cast a more skeptical eye at the "Why us?" secondary question if your scores are above their 90th percentile, especially if you're OOS.

3) To avoid this fate, you need to emphasize in your secondary application and in your interview how you would fit the mission of the school. If you're an in-state resident and have done volunteering work in your state's communities, your in-state public school will love that. If you really are set on that school, you could even pump it in a more generic way in your PS. Later on, you could send a few updates/letters of interest to let them know how much you love love love the school

Edit: Also, what drizzt said.

 

[DocMom1]

It's a waste of time to interview people with no interest in the school. Interviewers, be they med students, PhDs, or MDs, are busy people and taking time out of their schedule is tough.



All the time. State schools and schools with lower admission stats in desirable locations like GT, BU, GWU, etc, are especially known to do this.



You should express strong interest in your secondaries and/or write letters of interest that are well-written and have good reasons for being interested.

Based on your reasoning, it would seem that yield-protection policies would be put into play in determining who gets to interview rather than in determining who gets admitted post-interview. Is this correct? I have heard that schools deny admission to already interviewed applicants on these grounds; what incentive do medical schools have for doing this if the precious time of their interviewers has already been 'wasted'?

 

[DocMom1]

My thoughts:

1) A lower acceptance rate, which is loosely tied to the matriculation rate, gives a higher score on the student selectivity portion of the USNews research ranking. However, it's only 1% of the overall ranking, so schools may overvalue it as a mechanism to move up the rankings. That said, I think the matriculation rate might have a bigger indirect effect on the Peer Assessment score, which surveys admissions deans or other administrators, and that portion of the ranking is 20% of the overall score.

http://www.usnews.com/education/bes...l-school-rankings-methodology-2012_print.html

2) I absolutely think that yield protection occurs, though not in the way that most people think. It's not as if there's an "upper cutoff" for GPA/MCATs, but it's more about fit. A school like Georgetown, for instance, with its community service focus would be unlikely to interview/accept an applicant with lots of research but little volunteering, with or without a 3.9/38. In addition, I think that I remember LizzyM saying (correct me if I'm wrong) that some mid-tier schools may cast a more skeptical eye at the "Why us?" secondary question if your scores are above their 90th percentile, especially if you're OOS.

3) To avoid this fate, you need to emphasize in your secondary application and in your interview how you would fit the mission of the school. If you're an in-state resident and have done volunteering work in your state's communities, your in-state public school will love that. If you really are set on that school, you could even pump it in a more generic way in your PS. Later on, you could send a few updates/letters of interest to let them know how much you love love love the school

Edit: Also, what drizzt said.

Very interesting. Thanks for your insights.

 

[drizzt3117]

Based on your reasoning, it would seem that yield-protection policies would be put into play in determining who gets to interview rather than in determining who gets admitted post-interview. Is this correct? I have heard that schools deny admission to already interviewed applicants on these grounds; what incentive do medical schools have for doing this if the precious time of their interviewers has already been 'wasted'?

Because schools don't want to promise seats to people who have no intention of coming, meaning they have to waitlist or reject people that actually want to come. Some people (myself included) didn't even consider going to schools I was waitlisted at when I had the luxury of other good acceptances. Why not just move on with your life if you have other good options? Furthermore, you can run into the problem that MCW ran into a few years ago when they ended up not having enough people accepted into their class after people withdrew 5/15 and had to unreject people that'd been previously rejected to fill their class.

 

[NeuralNetwork]

Based on your reasoning, it would seem that yield-protection policies would be put into play in determining who gets to interview rather than in determining who gets admitted post-interview. Is this correct? I have heard that schools deny admission to already interviewed applicants on these grounds; what incentive do medical schools have for doing this if the precious time of their interviewers has already been 'wasted'?

Nevermind, what drizzt said

 

[eHombre]

Based on your reasoning, it would seem that yield-protection policies would be put into play in determining who gets to interview rather than in determining who gets admitted post-interview. Is this correct? I have heard that schools deny admission to already interviewed applicants on these grounds; what incentive do medical schools have for doing this if the precious time of their interviewers has already been 'wasted'?

Yeah, as drizzt said, most of those type of applicants get waitlisted post-interview, not rejected outright. With enough love letters, convincing the administration that it wouldn't be "wasting" an acceptance offer, the applicant might later come off the waitlist.

 

[SilentSoldier]

Because schools don't want to promise seats to people who have no intention of coming, meaning they have to waitlist or reject people that actually want to come. Some people (myself included) didn't even consider going to schools I was waitlisted at when I had the luxury of other good acceptances. Why not just move on with your life if you have other good options? Furthermore, you can run into the problem that MCW ran into a few years ago when they ended up not having enough people accepted into their class after people withdrew 5/15 and had to unreject people that'd been previously rejected to fill their class.

This really happened, and recently? Crazy

 

[drizzt3117]

This really happened, and recently? Crazy

Yeah I think it was for the class before mine, 2011, or maybe the year before, I don't know exactly, but it was a big deal on here when it happened.

I'm pretty sure the people who had acceptances probably told them to GFT but I guess it'd be a nice surprise if you were in the process of planning to reapply.

 

[1TB4RKSB4CK]

So they consider the little guys with the meager 3.5-3.6 and 33 MCAT?
Okay I'm good with that!

 

[ppfizenm]

So they consider the little guys with the meager 3.5-3.6 and 33 MCAT?
Okay I'm good with that!

Actually I think middle of the pack is a pretty bad place to be. Not good enough for upper tier schools, too good for lower tier schools. There are handfuls of schools with stats at the extremes but only a few in the middle.

 

[eHombre]

Actually I think middle of the pack is a pretty bad place to be. Not good enough for upper tier schools, too good for lower tier schools. There are handfuls of schools with stats at the extremes but only a few in the middle.

... And those are the schools that get >10,000 applications.

 

[eHombre]

There seems to be a trend right now where schools protect yield by waitlisting large numbers of interviewees and limiting overacceptances. As more and more waitlisted applicants withdraw, by the time April rolls around the remaining applicant pool is more likely to accept the school's offer of admission. From the school's perspective, it's only the accepted students who can hurt your yield, not the waitlisted ones.

 

[Bartemius]

Yeah I think it was for the class before mine, 2011, or maybe the year before, I don't know exactly, but it was a big deal on here when it happened.

I'm pretty sure the people who had acceptances probably told them to GFT but I guess it'd be a nice surprise if you were in the process of planning to reapply.

How exactly did that work at MCW? Did the unrejected people have to interview or did they manage to fill the class just with the people they'd rejected post-interview?

 

[SBR249]

Furthermore, you can run into the problem that MCW ran into a few years ago when they ended up not having enough people accepted into their class after people withdrew 5/15 and had to unreject people that'd been previously rejected to fill their class.

Can you provide a link? I'm definitely interested in reading up about this instance.

 

[chronicidal]

Let me throw a wrench in this chain of support for waitlist-yield protection

For a couple who is applying simultaneously, a waitlist is hella awkward.
Say Jack gets into school P. Jack's girlfriend, Jill, gets waitlisted because P bets that Jill will end up going to another school. Besides, it doesn't hurt to waitlist someone, right?

Say both get accepted to school U. In terms of academics and location and whatever, however, both Jack and Jill prefer P.

But staying together is their number one priority. Come May 15, they can't decide that Jack will go to P and Jill will stay on the waitlist because there's a chance that she won't get accepted.

So they have to settle for school U. In this case, if the purpose of waitlisting Jill was yield protection, then it failed.

 

[calvnandhobbs68]

Let me throw a wrench in this chain of support for waitlist-yield protection

For a couple who is applying simultaneously, a waitlist is hella awkward.
Say Jack gets into school P. Jack's girlfriend, Jill, gets waitlisted because P bets that Jill will end up going to another school. Besides, it doesn't hurt to waitlist someone, right?

Say both get accepted to school U. In terms of academics and location and whatever, however, both Jack and Jill prefer P.

But staying together is their number one priority. Come May 15, they can't decide that Jack will go to P and Jill will stay on the waitlist because there's a chance that she won't get accepted.

So they have to settle for school U. In this case, if the purpose of waitlisting Jill was yield protection, then it failed.

Wow you're right schools should consider that because it happens so often.

 

[eHombre]

In this case, if the purpose of waitlisting Jill was yield protection, then it failed.

But does this actually happen? I would think that a clearly worded letter of intent from Jill to school P, combined with her SO's acceptance, should do the trick in this case.

 

[DocMom1]

True, but schools seem to act broadly based on statistics and aggregates.

 

[DocMom1]

Yeah, as drizzt said, most of those type of applicants get waitlisted post-interview, not rejected outright. With enough love letters, convincing the administration that it wouldn't be "wasting" an acceptance offer, the applicant might later come off the waitlist.

If the motivation is to save the time of interviewers, why would most of these applicants get waitlisted post-interview? Are they asking such applicants to beg for admission?

 

[eHombre]

If the motivation is to save the time of interviewers, why would most of these applicants get waitlisted post-interview? Are they asking such applicants to beg for admission?

For some of the schools? Yes, yes they are.

 

[drizzt3117]

How exactly did that work at MCW? Did the unrejected people have to interview or did they manage to fill the class just with the people they'd rejected post-interview?

The latter; MCW interviews a lot of people.

 

[drizzt3117]

Pretty sure schools dont have contingency plans for this, lol; furthermore unless she has a ring, schools won't care about SOs.

Let me throw a wrench in this chain of support for waitlist-yield protection

For a couple who is applying simultaneously, a waitlist is hella awkward.
Say Jack gets into school P. Jack's girlfriend, Jill, gets waitlisted because P bets that Jill will end up going to another school. Besides, it doesn't hurt to waitlist someone, right?

Say both get accepted to school U. In terms of academics and location and whatever, however, both Jack and Jill prefer P.

But staying together is their number one priority. Come May 15, they can't decide that Jack will go to P and Jill will stay on the waitlist because there's a chance that she won't get accepted.

So they have to settle for school U. In this case, if the purpose of waitlisting Jill was yield protection, then it failed.

 

[bassvp]

I know that when I interviewed at schools that accepted 3 times as many students compared to the amount that actually matriculate, you don't exactly leave with a great impression of the school. No school wants to be known as a backup school, accepting a bunch of folks with 35+ MCAT who realistically will never go there. I interviewed at one school that actually said "if we accept you, you should accept us, too". Sounded like a desperate plea for love to me. I think that you're a lot more likely to nab better applicants if you are a little more picky. Sad thing is that some truly qualified applicants will end up with zero acceptances as a result.

 

[LizzyM]

I know that when I interviewed at schools that accepted 3 times as many students compared to the amount that actually matriculate, you don't exactly leave with a great impression of the school. No school wants to be known as a backup school, accepting a bunch of folks with 35+ MCAT who realistically will never go there. I interviewed at one school that actually said "if we accept you, you should accept us, too". Sounded like a desperate plea for love to me. I think that you're a lot more likely to nab better applicants if you are a little more picky. Sad thing is that some truly qualified applicants will end up with zero acceptances as a result.

Here's the philosophy that is the opposite of "yield protection". I call it "kissing frogs". Let's say you need to fill 100 seats. You accept that many of the fabulous applicants will go elsewhere but you hope that 5 of the top 100 will choose your school and you can't predict which ones and you won't get them unless you make an offer. Then you acept another 100 hoping that 20 of that 100 will accept because, again, they are somewhat "out of our league". Finally, you make offers to 100 of which 75 might say yes and you have your class and it includes 25 students you would not have attracted if you only took the "average" applicants. However, you made 300 offers to get those 100 rather than making offers to 100, getting 75 and taking 25 sure things from the waitlist.