Harvard Questions Popularity Rankings

Although US News & World Report crowned Harvard the nation’s most popular college on a list released Monday, Dean of Admissions and Financial Aid, William R. Fitzsimmons ’67 questioned the methodology behind the rankings.

The list was arranged according to yield—the percentage of students who accept a college’s offer of admittance.

“Students decide yield,” said Robert Morse of the US News & World Report, “A high yield shows that acceptances are valuable, popular, or coveted.”

The ranking was not based on new analysis, said Morse, but on additional data that factored into their August issue on the nation’s best colleges. Harvard’s yield was 76.2 percent last spring, the highest of the 130 schools ranked in the top 50 percentile of US News’ list of best colleges.

Fitzsimmons, however, said he doubted the significance of yield as a indicator of popularity.

“I think yield is a very slippery figure in many ways, so I don’t think it’s a particularly accurate barometer for a variety of reasons,” said Fitzsimmons.

According to Fitzsimmons, some schools try to artificially inflate their yields by choosing students who they think are more likely to come.

Colleges may track—and take into consideration—factors such as the number of times students visit campus, whether or not those individuals have interviews during that visit, and whether or not applicants cite a school as their first choice, all of which determine how likely students are to accept admission offers.

Schools that do this sacrifice “long term quality”, according to Fitzsimmons.

Others factors, such as whether or not an institution has an early admissions program, also affect yield, said Fitzsimmons. Binding early acceptance clauses allow a college to guarantee the enrollment of a set percentage of their next class, while non-binding early action programs give colleges a few extra months to recruit accepted students.

Morse admitted that these factors were not taken into consideration when schools were ranked according to yield. Nonetheless, Harvard—which eliminated early action two years ago—still took the top spot.

This spring, several factors could influence Harvard’s yield, according to Fitzsimmons, It takes three to five years for changes in admissions policy to fully manifest themselves, he said, so last year’s expansion of financial aid and the elimination of early decision two years ago may or may not affect this year’s figures.

In addition, external issues such as the economy and what Fitzsimmons called the “Obama factor”—the increased prevalence of Harvard-affiliated figures on television and on Capitol Hill—may increase the yield.

“The downturn in the economy would make Harvard more attractive, there has never been a better time to have a great financial aid program,” said Fitzsimmons.

However, he also noted that in difficult economic times, there is a tendency for prospective students from modest backgrounds to attend college close to home.

“We will go out expecting a figure considerably higher than 76.2 percent in case yield rises. If yield goes, up we’re covered, if yield stays where it’s been, we simply take people off the waiting list,” Fitzsimmons said.

—Staff writer Jillian K. Kushner can be reached at kushner@fas.harvard.edu.