Yale c/o 2017 Applicants (2013-2014 cycle) Forum

[midwest17]

I'm just gonna say that I think the whole "applying early doesn't help at Yale" thing is BS. I mean, they start letting people in, filling up spots, leaving fewer for everyone else. The only way I could explain it would be if they were willing to up the class size if they got more quality applicants.

Asha gives the professors a curve on the 2-4 grading scale. Assuming that the curve stays consistent, then it probably only matters when you apply relative to other strong candidates. But I'm guessing that that's relatively evenly distributed, and that Asha does some work to even out the piles.

[vuthy]

Uh, I'm no stats guru. But the way I interpreted it: say you apply in December and you have an 8% chance of being accepted to Chicago. Had you applied in November, you would have a (8% + (78.8% of 8%) ) = 14.3% chance of being accepted to Chicago. Applying in October would give you a (14.3% + (78.8% of 14.3%) ) = 25.6% chance of being accepted. Am I thinking about this the right way? This still seems super high, but with a bias towards large magnitudes, this just makes a stronger case that Yale does not advantage earlier applicants.

I'm not sure that's what he's saying. I think he's saying that in any given earlier month (Sept vs Oct, or Oct vs. Nov) at Chicago, for example, you have a 78.8% better chance of being admitted. I don't think it gets compounded the way you're describing.

But either way, there are tons of problems with this analysis (some of which he acknowledges, some of which he doesn't).

(1) It comes from self-reported LSN data. We like to believe that data is at least somewhat representative as a sample, but we have no way of knowing. And all it would take to blow up the model is something like 10-15 missing applicants with very different numbers.

(2) The Sept. 30/Oct. 1 problem that he talks about. Basically his model draws a line at change in month, but change in month could be just one day. So to say there's a huge boost for applying one day earlier is ridiculous.

(3) What he doesn't talk about is that there's a selection bias problem. While we don't know for sure if this is true, it's possible (I would say likely) that early applicants are stronger applicants. Among other things, they are more likely to be applicants who are not retaking the LSAT, which means they are applicants who don't need to retake the LSAT. Also, for lack of a better term, they are applicants who have their shit together. They got their letters lined up, personal statements written, etc. all nice and early. Obviously that doesn't guarantee that they are better applicants, but it certainly raises the likelihood that some of them are.

TL;DR - There may be a boost for applying early but that regression analysis, to me, doesn't do much to support the hypothesis.

[cee cee]

Agreed on all points.. and most of these he mentions himself. I wasn't really arguing for the validity of the data, I posted it more as a "hey look, this guy found almost implausibly large boosts for all schools except YLS"

[kartelite]

Agreed on all points.. and most of these he mentions himself. I wasn't really arguing for the validity of the data, I posted it more as a "hey look, this guy found almost implausibly large boosts for all schools except YLS"

If schools' goals are to maximize the "expected quality" of their incoming class and to have higher yield, it doesn't make any sense to have different standards for early vs. late applicants unless you think that it's an indicator of likelihood of attendance, which it generally isn't as most people put all their apps out at the same time.

If a 172/3.75 candidate and 171/3.72 candidate both have the same likelihood of accepting an offer (all else equal), why would you want the second candidate?

Notice my first paragraph posited the assumption that the goal was to maximize the "expected quality" - anyone who's taken utility theory (sorry, former econ PhD student here, which I think should be mandatory training for adcoms) would realize that "risk averse" schools would be okay accepting slightly inferior applicants early on to make sure they don't get stuck with crappy (I mean this in the most politically-correct way possible) applicants later in the cycle. Nevertheless, it shouldn't be as bad as what the anecdotal evidence seems to suggest, and generally if applicant quality is lower than anticipated, standards should be lower for late-cycle applicants. Not surprisingly, YLS seems to be the only program that has figured this out.

[Kimikho]

Agreed on all points.. and most of these he mentions himself. I wasn't really arguing for the validity of the data, I posted it more as a "hey look, this guy found almost implausibly large boosts for all schools except YLS"

If schools' goals are to maximize the "expected quality" of their incoming class and to have higher yield, it doesn't make any sense to have different standards for early vs. late applicants unless you think that it's an indicator of likelihood of attendance, which it generally isn't as most people put all their apps out at the same time.

If a 172/3.75 candidate and 171/3.72 candidate both have the same likelihood of accepting an offer (all else equal), why would you want the second candidate?

Notice my first paragraph posited the assumption that the goal was to maximize the "expected quality" - anyone who's taken utility theory (sorry, former econ PhD student here, which I think should be mandatory training for adcoms) would realize that "risk averse" schools would be okay accepting slightly inferior applicants early on to make sure they don't get stuck with crappy (I mean this in the most politically-correct way possible) applicants later in the cycle. Nevertheless, it shouldn't be as bad as what the anecdotal evidence seems to suggest, and generally if applicant quality is lower than anticipated, standards should be lower for late-cycle applicants. Not surprisingly, YLS seems to be the only program that has figured this out.

Stop making economists look bad.

[kartelite]

Stop making economists look bad.

I know proofs scare lawyers but I'm not afraid to bust one out lol.

[Kimikho]

Stop making economists look bad.

I know proofs scare lawyers but I'm not afraid to bust one out lol.

...not everyone in ITT is a liberal arts major. That wasn't a proof. That was a paragraph. HTH.

[chuckbass]

Stop making economists look bad.

I know proofs scare lawyers but I'm not afraid to bust one out lol.

...not everyone in ITT is a liberal arts major. That wasn't a proof. That was a paragraph. HTH.

Woof

[kartelite]

Stop making economists look bad.

I know proofs scare lawyers but I'm not afraid to bust one out lol.

...not everyone in ITT is a liberal arts major. That wasn't a proof. That was a paragraph. HTH.

Thanks for letting me know, I do have a graduate degree in mathematics. I meant I could produce something a bit more rigorous. Not sure what ITT is.

[milkandcheerios]

I think Yale is one of my easier waits because I have no expectations of getting in. Also love how they tweet when there will be action.

very true. But then there's always that teeny tiny part of me that thinks "what if I get lucky....."

[The-Specs]

Can't believe that we haven't had any news on when axe is going to fall.

[pokemonsters]

Can't believe that we haven't had any news on when axe is going to fall.

Yeah it'd be nice to know one way or the other this month. Does Yale do holds whom they inform at the end of the cycle? If so, what are the odds of a held candidate being accepted?

[The-Specs]

Can't believe that we haven't had any news on when axe is going to fall.

Yeah it'd be nice to know one way or the other this month. Does Yale do holds whom they inform at the end of the cycle? If so, what are the odds of a held candidate being accepted?

No holds just waitlists in April.

[The-Specs]

Asha, please tweet us your plans.

Thank you.

[chizzy]

Asha, please tweet us your plans.

Thank you.

+1 i actually thought they would tweet about calls this weekend. last year, calls were going out by this time.

[fleurdelis2]

.

[The-Specs]

Finally submitted my application (at long last)! Now to join the waiting game with you guys

Welcome welcome.

[wtrc]

Guys guys guys guys guys, I finally have a draft of my 250! It's not great yet, but it's a draft. The hardest part is over. Woohoo!

[midwest17]

Guys guys guys guys guys, I finally have a draft of my 250! It's not great yet, but it's a draft. The hardest part is over. Woohoo!

Congrats! You can do it!

(19 days, everyone)

[blackbirdfly]

Guys guys guys guys guys, I finally have a draft of my 250! It's not great yet, but it's a draft. The hardest part is over. Woohoo!

Congrats! You can do it!

(19 days, everyone)

I hate the 250.

[koalacity]

Guys guys guys guys guys, I finally have a draft of my 250! It's not great yet, but it's a draft. The hardest part is over. Woohoo!

Congrats! You can do it!

(19 days, everyone)

I hate the 250.

[fivestarfolds]

There was a large wave of dings last year on Feb 8. I'm guessing that we'll be seeing that tomorrow or the next day? Maybe they do it on a Friday so that we have the weekend to process our sadness.

[heythatslife]

Last night I dreamt that I received a decision e-mail from Yale. When I opened it, it was a blank message.

[Sourrudedude]

Last night I dreamt that I received a decision e-mail from Yale. When I opened it, it was a blank message.

Hey, that's life.

[bbkk]

Have to stop this thread from sinking..

Just went complete last week.

Guys, STOP PROCRASTINATING AND GO FINISH YOUR 250!!!