Skip to main content

Yes, your yield rate is still falling, redux (2021)

I've been creating this data visualization, or some form of it, for several years now.  I think it's most useful for higher education enrollment professionals who have to explain to people at their university why their yield rate is falling.  The short answer is that applications and admits are increasing faster than student populations: If a student today applies to an average of seven colleges, compared to four colleges twenty years ago, yield rate almost has to go down.  I'm sure AI will fix this, and all our problems, very soon.

But I've spoken to others who use this other ways: To work with students to talk about chances for admission; to show parents how things have changed in the past twenty years; or to help journalists understand the lay of the land.  Whatever you use this for, I hope it's instructive, and I hope you feel free to share it widely.

And if you work in a college or university and save yourself some time by using this, or if you work with clients on a for-fee basis, I appreciate your support of the software and webhosting costs of Higher Ed Data Stories.  You can buy me a coffee here to show your support (if you're a high school counselor, just ignore this request; you should always consider your use of the site cost-free and guilt-free).

There are four views of the data, using the tabs across the top.  

Overview shows applications, admits, and enrolling students on the bar charts; and admit rate, yield rate, and draw rates on the lines at the bottom.  Draw rate (yield rate/admit rate) is a better indicator of market power, for a lot of reasons I've discussed elsewhere; in short, you can manipulate admit rate, but draw rate is generally much harder to do. (Generally does not always mean "always.")  You can look up the data of a single institution, or select subsets of the university of colleges shown, which is about 1,500 four-year, public and private not-for-profit institutions that admit first year students and report admissions data (if your institution is open admission, that data is not reported to IPEDS which is where I got the data.)

By Gender shows admit rates for men and women, along with the totals.  If the admit rate is over 50%, differences are less pronounced, so the x-axis only goes that high.  Choose a year to show changes.

By Regions breaks out several values (choose one at top left) for public and private colleges and universities by region.  Again, choose a year, and limit the data using the filters at right.

And the last view, Table Format, shows the data looking like a spreadsheet for those of you who don't like charts (you know who you are.)  The filters work the same, and as the note indicates, you should limit the number of years you select to ensure the table is legible.

Let me know if you spot anything of interest.  Ask your IR office if your data seems wrong.

Thanks for reading.


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

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

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

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