Skip to main content

Yes, Your Yield Rate is Falling

A recent article in the Chronicle of Higher Education pointed out the things colleges are doing to bolster their yield rates.  This of course, raised an interesting question among many outside of higher education: What's a yield rate?

Colleges admit many more students than they want to enroll, of course.  But let's say you want to enroll a class of 1,000.  How many, exactly, do you need to admit?  Most of the students you admit will have more offers than the ones you send, and they can only enroll in one place. So, if you admit 2,000, you need exactly half of them to enroll, which would mean a yield rate of 50%.  If you're not confident you can get that kind of yield, you admit more: 2,500 with a 40% yield rate gets you that same number (40% of 2,500).  But with most institutions, yield rates are closer to 30%, so that means 3,333.  Or thereabouts.

Alas, many colleges are afraid of that admit rate (the percentage of applicants admitted) getting too high, because for many parents and students, a low admission rate is a proxy for quality: An admit rate of 15% means (to some) that an institution is better than one with an admit rate of 30%.  And so on.  Part of what they do is generate "softer" applications, via a variety of methods I've talked about many times, ad nauseam. But the problem is that you don't know precisely who a soft app is, so you can't just take the same number of students, because the soft apps (with lower propensity to yield) will bring down your yield rate.  So admit rates fall, but ultimately, so do yield rates.

Managing and reviewing more applications is expensive, and if you care greatly about that admit rate, you try to keep it as low as possible and still make your class, by raising the yield.  Looking at demonstrated interest is one way; using financial aid more strategically is another; and finally, good old fashioned tactical approaches are another still.  Many places use all three.

Here is what our wheel spinning and tail chasing has spawned: Thirteen years of increasing applications, increasing admit rates, and decreasing yield and draw rates (draw is a better measure of market position vis-a-vis competitors because it punishes you if you try to appear more selective at the price of yield).

The first view here shows colleges in groups, starting with all 1,432 public and private not-for-profit, four-year, degree granting colleges in the US that admit freshmen in the traditional Carnegie classifications (Baccalaureate, Master's and Doctoral, excluding Baccalaureate-Associates colleges). You can use the filters to look at any combination of variables you'd like to see how things have changed.

The second view (using the tab across the top) allows you to use the filter to select any single college. And, if you're like most people, the first ones you select will be the big names, who trends appear to move in the opposite direction of the industry as a whole.  Which means, that for all those institutions trying to look like they're in the RBL (REALLY Big Leagues), all your effort has put you farther behind.

What do you see? Leave a comment below.


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The Highly Rejective Colleges

If you're not following Akil Bello on Twitter, you should be.  His timeline is filled with great insights about standardized testing, and he takes great effort to point out racism (both subtle and not-so-subtle) in higher education, all while throwing in references to the Knicks and his daughter Enid, making the experience interesting, compelling, and sometimes, fun. Recently, he created the term " highly rejective colleges " as a more apt description for what are otherwise called "highly selective colleges."  As I've said before, a college that admits 15% of applicants really has a rejections office, not an admissions office.  The term appears to have taken off on Twitter, and I hope it will stick. So I took a look at the highly rejectives (really, that's all I'm going to call them from now on) and found some interesting patterns in the data. Take a look:  The 1,132 four-year, private colleges and universities with admissions data in IPEDS are incl

On Rankings, 1911, and Economic Mobility

If you're alive today, you have lived your whole life with college rankings.  Yes, even you.  You may not have knows you were living in the time of college rankings, but indeed, you have been, unless you were born before 1911 (or maybe earlier.)  If you're interested, you can read this Twitter thread from 2020 where I discuss them and include snippets of those 1911 rankings as well as those from 1957, written by Chesley Manly. You can read for yourself, or you can trust me, that in fact the rankings as we know them have been surprisingly consistent over time, and most people would have only minor quibbles with the ratings from 1911.  Perhaps that's because they have always tended to measure the same thing. But what if we did different rankings?  No, not like the Princeton Review where they make an attempt to measure best party school, or best cafeteria food, or worst social life.  Something more quantifiable and concrete, although still, admittedly, a hard thing to get rig

Freshman Migration, 1986 to 2020

(Note: I discovered that in IPEDS, Penn State Main Campus now reports with "The Pennsylvania State University" as one system.  So when you'd look at things over time, Penn State would have data until 2018, and then The Penn....etc would show up in 2020.  I found out Penn State main campus still reports its own data on the website, so I went there, and edited the IPEDS data by hand.  So if you noticed that error, it should be corrected now, but I'm not sure what I'll do in years going forward.) Freshman migration to and from the states is always a favorite visualization of mine, both because I find it a compelling and interesting topic, and because I had a few breakthroughs with calculated variables the first time I tried to do it. If you're a loyal reader, you know what this shows: The number of freshman and their movement between the states.  And if you're a loyal viewer and you use this for your work in your business, please consider supporting the costs