College admissions and "demonstrated interest"

Signaling is important, says a recent article in the Chronicle of Higher Ed: The Dynamics of Demonstrated Interest

"This year, American University received a record 17,000 admissions applications, a 13 percent increase over last year.

.... as colleges become more selective, they often find themselves competing with institutions a rung or two higher on the ladders of selectivity and desirability, at least for the top students.

Although there's prestige in this kind of association, there's also uncertainty. How many applicants would turn down a super-selective, big-name college to attend a somewhat less-selective, less-famous one? How do you know whether a student considers your college a top choice or a "safety school"? How does an applicant's sense of "fit" with a college relate not only to matriculation, but also retention?

"In recent years, such questions have prompted American's admissions team to look more closely at "demonstrated interest," the popular term for the contact students make with a college during the application process, such as by visiting the campus, participating in an interview, or e-mailing an admissions representative. In theory, it's a way to measure the likelihood that an applicant will matriculate—and succeed if they do.

"The practice is not new, but its importance has grown at some selective colleges in this era of ballooning applications and economic uncertainty. From 2003 to 2006, the percentage of colleges rating demonstrated interest as a "considerably important" factor increased to 21 percent from 7 percent, according to an annual survey by the National Association for College Admission Counseling. Since then, that number has held steady (another 27 percent of colleges now deem it "moderately important"). ...

"Recently, American has created more opportunities for students to do just that. The admissions office has broadened its recruitment strategies to include online chats for prospective applicants. Participation is noted in each student's file. ...

"Demonstrated interest often dovetails with another strategy for managing uncertainty: the waiting list. This year, American offered a spot on its waiting list to about 2,000 students, a seemingly large number considering that the university had accepted approximately 7,300 students for its freshman enrollment target of 1,450.

"Applicants who received waiting-list invitations from American fit a range of descriptions. Some were less competitive than the applicants the university accepted, but others were top-notch students who did not seem like a good fit for the university. In some cases, the reason was a lack of demonstrated interest, Ms. Alston says."

National Kidney Foundation: End the Wait

Here's a press release from the NKF: NKF Names Co-Chairs for END THE WAIT! Exec Committee

"Transplant surgeon Dr. Francis L. Delmonico and non-directed kidney donor Bill Singleton were named the first co-Chairs of the END THE WAIT! Executive Committee, the National Kidney Foundation (NKF) announced June 4.

NKF launched the END THE WAIT! initiative at the start of 2009 to address the urgent need to increase the number of organs available for transplantation in the United States.

"The END THE WAIT! initiative is a virtual call-to-arms that the current system of organ donation and transplantation is not sustainable to fulfill the needs of our patients. In collaboration with other major organizations in the kidney care, donation and transplant communities, we are leading this charge to address the inconsistent practices across the United States that are no longer acceptable," said John Davis, National Kidney Foundation CEO. “We know that Dr. Delmonico's vast professional experience as one of the nation's preeminent transplant experts and Mr. Singleton's personal experience as a living donor will help provide the knowledge and perspective needed to move our ambitious agenda forward and implement our END THE WAIT! recommendations.”

END THE WAIT! recommendations focus on improving the donation process, eliminating barriers to donation, instituting best practices and increasing living and deceased donation.

The recently-passed Healthcare Reform Bill prohibits insurance companies from denying medical coverage to those with pre-existing conditions. In the past, living kidney donors had been viewed as having a pre-existing medical condition by some insurance companies and denied medical coverage. Certainly, such practices constitute barriers to donation and eliminating that was one of the END THE WAIT! recommendations," Davis added.

“We will continue to fight for patients to receive comparable care from one region of the country to another, for example by maximizing programs such as paired kidney donation that are not currently accessible to all patients,” said Dr. Delmonico, transplant surgeon at Massachusetts General Hospital and Professor of Surgery at Harvard Medical School. “Others priorities will focus on removing disincentives to living donation, including covering all donation-related expenses.”

“The list of Americans now waiting for organs continues to increase each day,” said Singleton, a long-time NKF volunteer and former board member who became a kidney donor in December 2009 as part of the largest kidney exchange in the world to date. “I'm committed to helping other potential donors learn more about the process. I know we can help educate people and remove barriers through END THE WAIT!”

College waiting lists and double depositing

An article on congestion in college admissions: The Dirty College Admissions Trick.

"Why are waitlists so long this year? Marc Zawel on the increasingly common practice of "double depositing," and how a few bad apples could land you in waitlist limbo all summer long."
HT: Steve Leider

Money and medicine in Britain's National Health Service

The London Times reports NHS bars woman after she saw private doctor

"A WOMAN has been denied an operation on the NHS after paying for a private consultation to deal with her severe back pain.
Jenny Whitehead, a breast cancer survivor, paid £250 for an appointment with the orthopaedic surgeon after being told she would have to wait five months to see him on the NHS. He told her he would add her to his NHS waiting list for surgery.
She was barred from the list, however, and sent back to her GP. She must now find at least £10,000 for private surgery, or wait until the autumn for the NHS operation to remove a cyst on her spine. "

The managing of waiting lists for scarce resources is a tough business.

The WSJ on the football draft and market design

Writing in the Sports section of the Wall Street Journal, Reed Albergotti considers the NFL player draft, and some possible alternatives.
Why the NFL Draft Drives Economists Crazy
Fixed Costs, Variable Talent and Changes in the College Game Make Big Mistakes Unavoidable; Time for an Auction?

In an accompanying graphic, he writes "Harvard researchers Lucas Coffman, Itai Ashlagi, and Itay Fainmesser came up with an alternative based on an idea called a simultaneous ascending auction."

Along the way, the article has some nice things to say about market design.
"Thanks to market design, medical-school students are matched with hospitals through a complicated computer algorithm. Governments use "communal auctions" to distribute things like cellular bandwidth to telecommunications companies. Even the New York City public schools have used market economics to ensure parity in its school-choice system. "
...
"Three researchers at Harvard Business School—who studied under Alvin Roth, a Harvard professor and a pioneer in market-design theory—have proposed an alternative to the NFL draft.
Under their plan, all 32 teams would be given seven picks. They would have to abide by a spending cap that would go higher to lower—with the worst team (based on its record the previous season) having the most money to spend. When the bidding opened, the most sought-after players would draw multiple bids. Teams could then raise their bid as high as they'd like for a player they coveted.
Theoretically, a team could get any player it wanted—so long as it was prepared to pinch pennies on everyone else. Meanwhile, a team that didn't want to break the bank on any particular player could pick up lots of useful parts by spreading its money around evenly. Teams could also thrive by focusing on the bidding and looking for bargains.
"I think that it would significantly help teams get the right guys," said Lucas Coffman, one of the study's authors. If nothing else, Mr. Coffman said, the auction format might be more exciting than the draft, which allows for long gaps between picks.
In any case, there's some evidence the draft could be the next fix for a league that fixes everything. One NFL executive said patience is running thin. "There's a huge trail littered with guys who got the big dollars but were a bust," this person said."

Postscript: Luke Coffman, Itai Ashlagi, and Itay Fainmesser were all on a differently organized labor market this year, and will be at Ohio State, MIT Sloan, and Brown next year.

For another take on the design of the NFL labor market, by another recent Harvard grad Gregor Matvos, see his paper "Renegotiation Design: Evidence from NFL roster bonuses."

Update: Luke Coffman points out that the allocation of tickets to attend tonight's NFL draft could use some market design, and he points me to this, on Craigslist.
Experienced line sitter available to get tickets for NFL Draft - $75 (Midtown)
"I am an experienced line sitter who has worked many events. I am always on line early to secure tickets. I will be available to stand in line for tickets for the 1st 2 nights of the NFL Draft at Radio City Music hall. The procedure is as follows I will line up the evening before to get my wristband and will be back on line in order to get the tickets at 5:15 the day of the draft. The gates at Radio City will open at 6 p.m. each night. My charge for this service is $75 per ticket I can also bring people with me to secure extra tickets if you need more than 1, Please reply with the night(S) you want tickets for and how many tickets you need. Round 1 will be held Thursday night April 22nd and rounds 2-3 will be held Friday April 23rd. "

Waiting lists

A pessimistic story in the NY Times about college admissions waiting lists, which are long this year: For Students, a Waiting List Is Scant Hope

"The admission process is a complicated dance of supply and demand for colleges. And this spring, many institutions have accepted fewer applicants, and placed more on waiting lists, until it becomes clear over the next few weeks how many spots remain.
M.I.T., which had a 6 percent increase in applicants, increased its waiting list by more than half, to 722. Last year, it accepted fewer than 80 from that list. Yale, which had a slight dip in applications this year yet still admitted fewer than 8 percent of applicants, placed nearly 1,000 others on its waiting list, an increase of more than 150. Dartmouth increased its list by about 80, to 1,740."
...
"Like its competitors, Duke does not rank students on its waiting list. Instead, decisions about who will rise to the top are often a function of what the admissions office perceives as deficiencies in the next freshman class. There might be, for example, a surplus of aspiring engineers and not enough potential English majors, or too few students from Florida. Or there might be an unexpected shortage of oboe players.
While Mr. Guttentag encourages students on the waiting list to send him a one-page letter — or a video of 60 seconds or less — letting him know how strongly they wish to attend, and why, they can do little to improve their chances. "...

"Since waiting list offers went out in late March, Mr. Guttentag and his colleagues have been deliberating whether to end the suspense for at least several hundred who are on it — those who probably have little hope of coming off.
Another reason the list is so long this year, he said, is that he and his colleagues were so overwhelmed by the volume of applicants that they ran out of time.
“What we could have done, had we had another week,” he said, “was to look at everybody on the waiting list and say, ‘Do they all need to be on?’ ”
“Of all the priorities,” he added, “that was not in the top two or three.” "

Harvard's mysterious Z-list

One of the more unusual routes to admission at Harvard is the Z-list, which the Crimson writes about this week. Z-Listed Students Experience Year Off: Undergrads take mandatory gap year before coming to Harvard

Last year I wrote about it here: Harvard's "Z-list," waitlist admission with a difference .

It's that mandatory year off that makes the Z-list unusual (students who enter from the Z-list must delay a year and can't attend another school while they wait).

The mystery is to whom this admissions option is offered, and who chooses to accept. There's some signaling going on here, and some sorting.

Who gets deceased-donor kidneys? Thinking about changes in the rules.

A lot of thought and politics goes into changing the rules for which patients get which kidneys, how long they wait, and how much that should play a role in the allocation decision, as opposed to other criteria having to do with how well each kidney fits each patient, what is the age difference between deceased donor and recipient, etc.

John Faherty at the Arizona Republic has written an informative account of the ongoing debate: New rules change who gets donated kidneys

"Dr. Kenneth Andreoni, chairman of the United Network for Organ Sharing Kidney Transplantation Committee, has been working to develop a better way to distribute kidneys since 2004.
"The current allocation system went in decades ago," Andreoni said. "It was based on good science, but it was a different time."
The system was built to balance utility with fairness.
For utility, doctors required that donated kidneys and recipients be a close biological match. It was the only way to ensure that the recipient's body wouldn't reject the organ, wasting a precious donation.
For fairness, they established a waiting list. The people on the list the longest were first in line for the next matching kidney.
But in the 1980s and 1990s, things began to change. Better anti-rejection drugs helped a recipient accept a kidney even if they weren't a perfect match. Before long, the allocation system that was supposed to balance utility - the likelihood of a successful transplant - with fairness - time on the waiting list - was out of whack.
All that mattered was the wait time.
Frustration grew among transplant doctors. Without the criteria of a tissue match, the system was no longer using science to make the best choices.
Doctors were sometimes putting healthy young kidneys into recipients with only a few years left to live."
...
"The committee is recommending at least two key elements that are almost certain to be part of the new system.
• The first is dialysis time. The current waiting-list system is less fair than it seems, Andreoni said, because some doctors list patients early, at the first sign of kidney failure, while other doctors wait until after other treatments to list their patients. This puts patients in the second group at a disadvantage.
A dialysis-time list would put all patients on equal footing. The longer you have had to endure the treatment, the sooner you can get a kidney.
• The second element is a complex grading system called the Donor Profile Index. Doctors would measure the quality of a donated kidney to determine how well it will work and how long it will last. Then, they would give that kidney to the patient who would most benefit from it.
That means factoring, to a still-undetermined degree, who would get the most use of a new kidney - who would live the longest.
"Right now, whoever is next in line gets the kidney," Andreoni said. "It does not make the best use of the organ." "


Of course, changes like this, when allocating a scarce resource, involve benefits from some people, but not for everyone.

"With the proposed changes to the allocation system, a patient like Ramirez will be more likely to receive a kidney from a younger person, and probably sooner.
"It's a conundrum. A change would be a really good thing for me," she said. "But if I was older, I might be angry. Maybe they have been waiting for a long time." "

That's what makes some changes politically hard. Sometimes phasing such changes in over time may ease the path.

Update: for those of you who don't click on comments, Michael Giberson said... Why not favor patients with an unmatched donor, and so use deceased donor kidneys to trigger a exchange chain. ?

Mixing the deceased donor kidneys with the kidney exchange pool also involves some complicated political issues, since deceased donor organs are regarded as a shared public resource, but live donor kidneys are of course private property.

But in New England we have permission to do something like what Giberson has in mind, called list exchange: see
Roth, Alvin E., Tayfun Sönmez, M. Utku Ünver, Francis L. Delmonico, and Susan L. Saidman, ''Utilizing List Exchange and Undirected Good Samaritan Donation through 'Chain' Paired Kidney Donations," American Journal of Transplantation, 6, 11, November 2006, 2694-2705.

Here's the first paragraph of the abstract of that paper:
"In a list exchange (LE), the intended recipient in an incompatible pair receives priority on the deceased donor waitlist (DD-waitlist) after the paired incompatible donor donates a kidney to a DD-waitlist candidate. A nondirected donor’s (ND-D) kidney is usually transplanted directly to a DD-waitlist candidate. These two established practices would help even more transplant candidates if they were integrated with kidney paired donation (KPD)."

The paper goes on to report an early NDD chain conducted at the New England Program for Kidney Exchange that passed through the exchange pool, i.e. that included patients with incompatible donors in the middle, with the final link being a donation to someone on the DD-waitlist. We have also done exchanges that may be closer to what Giberson suggests, in which a deceased donor kidney goes to someone in the kidney exchange pool, whose incompatible donor gives to someone else in the pool...whose donor gives to someone on the DD-waitlist.

Behavioral game theory on the MA Turnpike

A recent story in the Boston Globe sounds like a behavioral economics seminar on transaction costs: why are a third of the tolls on the Massachusetts Turnpike still paid (more slowly and expensively) in cash, rather than using the (now free) transponders?
Some still slow to make the move to Fast Lane: 1 in 3 tollpayers paying at booth
"The Massachusetts Turnpike Authority has made strides in signing people up to use Fast Lane, with 66 percent of tolls now paid electronically, up from 62 percent in January. But the 34 percent who use cash, and pay higher tolls at booths inside Greater Boston to do so, remain a bit of a mystery."
...
"The survey LeBovidge conducted found that the biggest hurdle to signing up more people used to be cost, accounting for about 75 percent of the abstainers. About 7 percent worried about handing personal data to the Turnpike Authority or having their movements tracked. Some remaining drivers - not reflected in the survey - come from out of state and might not have an E-Z Pass account usable in Massachusetts. Other commuters do not have a checking account or credit card.
...
"If they wait in cash lanes enough times, most technophobes get converted. Fast Lane usage at the Allston-Brighton booths rises to 86 percent during morning rush hour into Boston. Massive traffic jams also do the trick: The Easter backup helped drive signups to 45,905 in May, compared with 10,875 during the same month last year."

One reason this is an interesting problem is that it's not just about individual choice, there's an element of behavioral game theory in this kind of slow learning. Cash payers produce congestion--negative reinforcement--for other cash payers. When lines at the toll booths get really long, even the EZ Pass users have to wait on line to get to the toll booths. So slower payers provide a negative externality to everyone on the busiest days.

In a forthcoming paper in the QJE, Amy Finkelstein raises the possibility that those cash payers may also provide a small positive externality by being more politically sensitive to changes in the tolls: EZ-Tax: Tax Salience and Tax Rates.
"Abstract: This paper examines whether the salience of a tax system affects equilibrium tax rates. I analyze how tolls change after toll facilities adopt electronic toll collection (ETC); drivers are substantially less aware of tolls paid electronically. I estimate that, in steady state, tolls are 20 to 40 percent higher than they would have been without ETC. Consistent with a salience-based explanation for this toll increase, I find that under ETC, driving becomes less elastic with respect to the toll and toll setting becomes less sensitive to the electoral calendar. Alternative explanations appear unlikely to be able to explain the findings."

So the next time you are stuck on the Mass Pike behind a long line of drivers waiting to pay their tolls, try to remember that there may be a small benefit to having the toll be so salient.

Where the wait for a parking permit is 8 to 10 years

In Rye, NY, that's apparently how long it takes to get a parking permit at the commuter rail station.

The NY Times reports that the recession has resulted in fewer commuters and empty parking spaces, but has not shortened the wait for a parking permit, since commuters are reluctant to give up their right to park (and cannot sublet them to those still working): Slump Opens Spaces at the Station

"From Ronkonkoma on Long Island to Darien, Conn., riders are doing double takes at the vacancies in the station lot, and the empty spots, in turn, have sparked efforts to free them up for parkers without permits. In Connecticut, there is even a push to let permit holders “rent” their permits.
...
But these empty spaces may be chimerical. It’s “look but don’t touch” for people like Mr. Blake because many permit holders, even if they have lost their jobs and no longer commute regularly, still hold tightly onto their permits. Jeanette DeLeo, an assistant in the city clerk’s office in Rye, said there has been no whittling of the waiting list in her town, and the reason is not hard to fathom.
“With a waiting list of 8 to 10 years, people will not give up their permits,” Ms. DeLeo said."

Liver Transplant for Jobs in Tennessee

The title of this post doesn't mean that people are donating organs in return for work, but that Apple's founder Steve Jobs has received a liver transplant. In Tennessee.

This reveals something about the regionalized waiting system for deceased donor organs in the United States, picked up in a WSJ article by Laura Meckler: Jobs's Transplant Highlights Differing Wait Times

"Apple Inc. CEO Steve Jobs's decision to travel to Tennessee for a liver highlights the significant disparities in transplant waiting times across the country -- the source of a longstanding controversy over the fairest way to distribute scarce organs.
For liver transplants, the wait is particularly agonizing. Kidney replacements can often be put off for years through dialysis, where a machine does the work of the kidneys. But there is no such treatment for liver disease.
There are 15,771 Americans waiting for a liver today, according to the United Network for Organ Sharing. Last year, 1,481 people died awaiting a donor.
Faced with a sometimes years-long wait, patients typically have only a few options. They can wait their turn at a home-state transplant center, knowing that their chances will improve as they get sicker; look for a friend or family member willing to undergo major surgery to contribute half of his or her liver; or seek out a hospital where the waiting times are typically shorter.
Those who travel out of state must be evaluated at the new hospital, but there is no prohibition to being on the wait list at more than one transplant center. UNOS doesn't keep statistics on how many people choose to travel out of state."
The story, incidentally, seems to be something of a scoop for the WSJ. Other newspapers are reporting the story on an "as reported in the WSJ" basis (apparently the transplant was two months ago). E.g. here is the Washington Post: Jobs, on Leave From Apple, Reportedly Had Liver Transplant

Update (6/23/09): Memphis Hospital Says It Did Jobs’s Liver Surgery.
"Methodist University Hospital in Memphis acknowledged Tuesday that it had performed a liver transplant on Steven P. Jobs, the chief executive of Apple."
...
"Methodist has one of the shortest waiting times of any liver transplant center in the country, according to a transplant registry operated by the Arbor Research Collaborative for Health and the University of Michigan."
...
"A scoring system, known as a MELD score, determines where a patient ranks on a transplant waiting list. The higher the score, the sicker a patient is and the higher the ranking. Any ties are decided by who has had that score the longest.
In its statement, Methodist said that Mr. Jobs had received a liver transplant because he was the patient of his blood type with the highest MELD score and thus “the sickest patient on the waiting list at the time a donor organ became available.” "

Further update (6/24/09): A CNN story discusses the regional allocation system, and how it favors those who are healthy and wealthy enough to be on waiting lists at multiple places around the country, under the provocative headline: Did Steve Jobs' money buy him a faster liver transplant?

Queuing to tee up at the Bethpage State Park Black Course

The USGA 2009 US Open golf tournament begins tomorrow, June 18. The host golf course is the Bethpage State Park Black Course. You have to be pretty skilled to qualify ("Entries are open to professional golfers and amateur golfers with an up-to-date men’s Handicap Index® not exceeding 1.4 under the USGA Handicap System™. ")

But if you just want the experience of playing on the same course as the top pros, the Black is a public golf course. You could just sign up for a tee time. Or could you? It turns out not to be quite so easy.

Just as markets can unravel, so can queues. A reliable symptom is people waiting on line overnight, especially if they have to wait for more than one night. Getting a tee time at this particular famous public (i.e. not rationed by price) golf course on Long Island seems to qualify: Parking All Night at Bethpage, Hoping to Drive. Note the well developed rules for regulating the queue, which include a rule meant to prevent the substitution of capital for leisure.

"Bethpage has five public golf courses: Black, Red, Blue, Yellow and Green. But the bulk of tee times for the courses, particularly the famed Black, can be hard to get through the phone-reservation system, which has 70,000 registered users. At least one company floods the system each night with hired callers, then resells the times as part of golf packages.
Yet there is one way to ensure a time at Bethpage Black, a major-championship course with $50 fees during the week, $60 on weekends, and double that for non-New Yorkers: get to the parking lot and spend a night. Maybe two. Maybe more."
...
"A sign there explains the complex rules of the “Walk Up Car Line.” Most important is that someone must be at the car for part of every hour. For the Envoy, on this Saturday afternoon, that person was Steve Atieh, 25, from Basking Ridge, N.J., who planned to play the Black course with two brothers and a friend.
They teed off 39 hours after arriving, about 11 hours after their car battery died while the radio broadcast a Yankees game."
...
"Steve Tomasheski was sitting in space No. 3 when someone offered $1,000 for it. He declined, afraid to disappoint his playing partners. Please do not tell his wife."
...
"At 7 p.m., Michael Azzue, an assistant supervisor at Bethpage, arrived in a cart. “Who’s No. 1?” he said, shouting. Azzue attached a plastic bracelet around Atieh’s wrist. At least one person from every car must be present when a supervisor arrives between 6 and 9 p.m. That person must be one of the golfers the next morning, to prevent hiring a nongolfer to do the waiting, which used to happen."

Apparently it is repugnant to pay someone to wait in line for you, although the story suggests that there is some demand for this, and people who arrive a little late (and before the monitoring kicks in) sometimes buy places from early arrivals.

Endnote: "Success has many fathers...", here's a story on a dispute about who really deserves the credit for designing the course. (Credit is a subject worth a discussion in its own right. In my experience, success in complex design projects often does have many fathers, with lots of people contributing in critical ways.)

Harvard's "Z-list," waitlist admission with a difference

Even Harvard gives favorable attention to legacies (children of alums), you are no doubt shocked to learn. But, right around this time of year, as offers are made off the waiting list, some of those alumni children, and others with certain special late-season Harvard offers, are being given a potentially hard choice: The Back Door to the Yard Z-list: A legacy-heavy special admissions program .

The Z list students are admitted after a year delay, on the unusual condition that they don't attend college anywhere else in the intervening year. The Crimson story (from several years ago) described the program, and found that it included a substantial proportion of legacy students. (emphasis added):

"This group of students, known within Byerly Hall as the “Z-list,” are plucked off the waitlist any time from May to August—after they have accepted offers of admission at other universities—and informed that if they are willing to take a year off, they can enroll at Harvard the following September.Harvard admissions officers say they choose to “Z” students—it’s a verb—when there is a consensus that the College cannot bear to reject them but there is simply no bed available for them immediately after they graduate high school.“There’s no formula to this and there’s not much in common [between Z-list students],” says Director of Admissions Marlyn McGrath Lewis ’70-’73. “It makes us feel we made some effort to get them here.”But if you talk to enough of these students whom the admissions office makes a special effort to bring to Cambridge, you’ll find they do have something in common: Their parents went to Harvard."
...
"Other top colleges have special admissions programs in which applicants are asked to take time off or enroll elsewhere and then transfer, but no other Ivy requires students to take a year off and gets them to come in such high proportions—a testament to the College’s perennial superiority in admissions.And if a year off makes students more mature and better able to contribute to the College, then the Z-list allows Harvard to placate powerful parents without diluting the quality of its class."
...
"“A very high percentage are alumni cases,” agrees Susan G. Case, a college counselor at Milton Academy, which in some years has sent Harvard a quarter of the Z-list all by itself. “There isn’t necessarily an academic pattern, but it’s usually institutional needs. That’s a phrase they use internally.”"

Waiting lists and late college applications

Students who may be waiting to see if they will be offered positions from some colleges' waiting lists should also be aware that other colleges are still accepting applications.

The Common Application .org has posted a list of 67 of their members who are still accepting applications (including the University of Chicago):
Augsburg College, Berry College, Canisius College,Carroll College, Cazenovia College, College of Mount Saint Vincent, College of Santa Fe, College of St. Benedict-St. John's University, Colorado State University, Converse College, Creighton University, Culver-Stockton College, Curry College, Dominican University of California, Franklin Pierce University, Green Mountain College, Gustavus Adolphus College, Hofstra University, Illinois College, Illinois Institute of Technology, Keystone College, Lasell College, Lawrence Technological University, Loyola University New Orleans, Lynn University, Manhattan College, Marquette University, New England College, Nichols College, Notre Dame de Namur University, Oglethorpe University, Pacific University, Prescott College, Regis College (Massachusetts), Regis University (Colorado), Rollins College, Russell Sage College, Sacred Heart University, Sage College of Albany, Salem College (North Carolina), Seton Hall University, Seton Hill University, Southern New Hampshire University, St. Lawrence University, St. Norbert College, SUNY Fredonia, SUNY Oswego, TCU (Texas Christian University), The College of Idaho, Thiel College, Thomas College, University of Chicago, University of Dallas, University of La Verne, University of Maine, University of Maine at Machias, University of Massachusetts Boston, University of New Haven, University of Tampa, Utica College, Valparaiso University, Wabash College, Webster University, Westminster College (Missouri), Westminster College (Utah), William Jewell College, Xavier University

Waiting lists from the colleges' point of view

May 1 was the deadline by which students admitted to colleges were supposed to send in their acceptances, so, later this week, when all the mail is in, colleges will finally be in a position to see how many students they might like to admit from their waiting lists.

Unlike rejection letters, which break off a relationship, letters informing candidates that they are waitlisted are meant to influence future behavior. One important goal of the waiting list letter is to encourage those who are most likely to attend if given a (late) offer to signal their willingness in a way that might reliably identify those who will accept an offer from the waiting list if one is offered. That way, if the college has to hurry to fill its places from its waiting list, it can make offers to those most likely to come.

Rice University's FAQ about their waiting list is interesting both for what it reveals and what it conceals:

"What is an "alternate?" What is the "waiting list?"
Your application received strong enough support from the Admission Committee to be approved for admission. However, Rice's small size (only 850 new students) prevents us from admitting all such students. As an “alternate” to the class you are given the opportunity to be placed on the “waiting list.” Students on the waiting list are considered for positions in the class that remain unfilled in May and June.
How many students are on the waiting list?
No one knows yet. Only students who respond affirmatively by May 1, 2009 will be on the waiting list. Not all of the students offered this opportunity will choose to remain an alternate, so the actual size of the waiting list will not be known until May.
How many offers will be made to wait-listed students?
The number of available spaces cannot be determined until after all admitted students respond to our offer of admission by May 1. If fewer than 850 students accept our offer of admission by that date, we will make offers from the waiting list to fill the class in May or June. Over the last four years, 174 students have been admitted from the wait list.
Is the waiting list rank-ordered?
No. All wait-listed students will be reviewed for all available spaces.
Is it appropriate for me to accept an offer of admission from another school while I wait to hear from Rice? What about other waiting lists?
Yes. All schools expect students to commit to one (and only one) school by May 1. However, students may remain on any school’s waiting list throughout the summer. The only rule is that you must withdraw your admission deposit from a school once you accept another school’s offer – you may commit to only one school at a time.
If admitted from the waiting list, how will I be notified?
Students admitted from the waiting list are contacted by telephone. Be sure we have the home phone number and cell phone number (if available) where you can be reached throughout the months of May and June. If you are planning a trip away from home, send a contact number where you can be reached to riceapps@rice.edu.
...
What can I do to increase my chances of admission?
You should update your file in writing via mail or email, informing us of your interest in Rice or spring term accomplishments.
...
It is our goal to send an update to all wait-listed students by June 1, 2009. The waitlist process will be concluded by July 1."

Update (5/8/09): A Crimson story has some information on Harvard's waitlist plans: Yield Holds Steady For 2013 :
"The first round of waitlist deliberations will run from today until the 19th. Fitzsimmons said that “at least 85 if not more” will be taken off the list in the coming weeks, as the office is still waiting to hear from some admitted students. The admissions office aims to have all decisions out by July 1, Fitzsimmons said. He added that it is possible that students admitted off the waitlist will begin hearing as early as today, but more should find out by the middle of next week. The number of students admitted from the waitlist will depend in part on the number of students who choose to defer their offers of admission for a year. So far, 31 students have elected to defer, a number that the admissions office expects to rise. This number is usually between 30-50 students and does not seem to be affected by any particular variable, Fitzsimmons said, though he added it was possible that the bad economy could cause fewer people to defer this year. "

College admissions waiting lists: advice on signaling

I last wrote about College admissions waiting lists on March 31, when the most selective colleges were just sending out their acceptances, rejections, and waitlist decisions. Now there is an interregnum, until the May 1 deadline for students to decide which college acceptances to accept. Only after that will colleges know how many students have accepted and rejected them, and hence how many empty places they still have, and how many admits they can make from their waitlist.

Most colleges don't want the waitlist process to drag on too long. But the waitlist process is potentially lengthy, since students admitted from the waitlist need some time to decide, and if some of these ultimately decline, then new students must be admitted from the waitlist later, and so on. So what colleges can do is give some preference to students on the waitlist who they think are more likely to accept an offer. For this reason colleges ask students who are offered a position on the waiting list to actively indicate that they wish to remain on it (this removes from consideration those who have already been accepted to a college they know they prefer). But it also leaves some scope for students to give further indications of their interest, and many colleges explicitly encourage this.

For example, the MIT Admissions Office blog on waitlists says
"If you are still interested in MIT, you should stay in contact with us. A letter, a phone call, notes from people who know you well... these are good things to provide. Please always be very nice in all of your interactions with us! Keep us up to date all the way through May 1 and beyond if you remain interested."

That is, just as in the initial admissions process, there is room for signaling.
The Boston Globe reports how signals of interest to colleges at this stage occupies the attention of some students and admissions offices: Students hope to beat college waiting list.
"... in the elbows-out world of college admissions, savvy hopefuls, often with the help of private advisors and aggressive high school counselors, are launching full-scale campaigns to spring themselves from the list.
In-the-know seniors are writing letters assuring admission deans that if admitted, they will go. They're e-mailing updates on their second-semester senior grades, spring awards, and other academic breakthroughs. (There's no room for senioritis if you're on a waiting list.)
And they are placing one, just one, well-timed phone call, a step that can spur an admission officer to pull the student's file and disclose whether there is something else he or she can do to boost the chance of admission.
"It's too bad if students don't know to follow up," said Tom Parker, dean of admission and financial aid at Amherst College, which expects to take about 35 students from its list of 1,000. "If you're going to get off the wait list, you're really going to have to demonstrate a significant interest."
Not that this is something many colleges publicize when they inform applicants that they have landed in admissions limbo. While admission deans admit they can be lobbied, they insist that, technically, they do not require any additional information. And schools are quick to say that they do not penalize students who fail to follow up, especially if they come from low-income communities where high school counselors are often overwhelmed.
"We wouldn't want to overlook a student who doesn't know she can even do that," said Jennifer Desjarlais, dean of admission at Wellesley College.
But all things being equal, especially as the swooning economy has added a new volatility to the admissions process, students can vault to the top of the pack by writing a letter about why a college is their number one choice and promising to attend if accepted, said deans at numerous colleges."

Of course, some signaling strategies convey negative information:
"While demonstrating interest and presenting updates often helps in the final rounds of evaluations, tread carefully. Go too far, admission deans warn, and you will snuff out your chances.
Do not stalk admission officers, camp out in front of their office, or flood their inboxes with daily e-mails. ("That's like the kiss of death," said Richard Nesbitt, director of admission at Williams College.)"

The NY Times blog on college admissions advises one parent of a waitlisted daughter:
"In terms of pursuing her wait-list offer, she should send an e-mail to the regional admissions officer stating her strong and unqualified interest (being straightforward and unequivocal: if admitted I will enroll, etc). We also think it is important to send a letter to the admissions office with any recent accomplishments. In the letter it is helpful for the admissions committee to be able to discern genuine interest by reiterating why you think the school would be such a good match.

So...if there's a waiting list you are waiting for, and you haven't done so already, send an email to the admissions office. And then, to quote the final line from the MIT admissions blog
"... be patient. There won't be any waitlist news until after May 1."

College admissions: waiting lists

Today is the day when the most highly selective (i.e. lowest percentage of admits) colleges will inform students who they have decided to admit in their regular admissions cycle. (The Ivies are due to announce at 5PM Eastern time, Stanford and some others tomorrow...most less selective colleges and universities have already announced...).

The prospects for college admissions this year sound a little confusing, at least in the NY Times: I'll start with a longish quote that gives the gist of their analysis, and then follow with some comments of my own.

For Top Colleges, Economy Has Not Reduced Interest (or Made Getting in Easier)
"Representatives of Harvard, Stanford, Dartmouth, Yale, and Brown, among other highly selective institutions, said in telephone and e-mail exchanges in recent days that applications for the Class of 2013 had jumped sharply when compared to the previous year’s class. As a result, the percentage of applicants who will receive good news from the eight colleges of the Ivy League (and a few other top schools that send out decision letters this week) is expected to hover at – or near – record lows.
"Bill Fitzsimmons, dean of admissions and financial aid at Harvard since 1986, said that the 29,112 applications Harvard received this year represented an all-time high, and a 6-percentage point increase from last year. He said the percentage of applicants admitted would be 7 percent, down from 8 percent a year ago. Dartmouth said that the 18,130 applications it received was the most in its history, too, and that the 12 percent admitted would be its lowest.
"Stanford said that the 30,350 applications it received represented a 20 percent increase, and that while it estimated a 7.5-percent admission rate, which would be its lowest, it declined to specify a final figure until later in the week.
"Yale, Brown, Columbia, Cornell and Princeton declined to release their final admission rates in advance of sending out most of their decision letters via e-mail at 5 p.m. eastern time on Tuesday. But Brown said it had received 21 percent more applications, overall, compared to a year ago; Yale was up 14 percent; Columbia was up 13 percent and Cornell was up 3 percent. Princeton said that, as of January, it had tallied a 2 percent increase in applications, but anticipated the pool had gotten even larger since then. At the University of Pennsylvania, the number of applications increased by 4 — to 22,939, from 22,935.
"However, applications to highly selective colleges were not up universally. Many of the best-known liberal arts colleges had fewer applications this year."

The reduced applications to liberal arts colleges are probably good news for the high school seniors who made those applications. But it is much less clear that the increased numbers of applications to selective universities will be such good news for those universities (or quite such bad news as the story anticipates for their applicants). In particular, while there may be record numbers of high school graduates this year, it seems likely that they are also applying to more universities than they have in the past.

This may be recession related, as people look for more competing financial aid offers. But it may also just be everyone's reaction to being told by their high school guidance counsellor that this year may be unusually competitive, so that no one can count on getting in at the schools they traditionally expected to go to. That is, if everyone else is applying to more universities, and if additionally, in reaction, universities are going to admit a smaller percentage of applicants, then a rational response is to apply to more schools yourself.

But if this is the case, and if universities' preferences are correlated (as they must be, since they all like high grades and exam scores), then many universities will be admitting the same applicants. Since applicants can accept only one offer of admission, this may mean that the percentage of admitted students who accept their offers ("yield") will be unusually low for many elite universities. (Maybe not for Harvard.)

If that is the case, there should be an unusual number of admits from wait lists this year. Universities have likely prepared for this by putting lots of students on their wait lists. But still, there should be some movement on those lists this year.

So, if you are a high school senior on a wait list, stay cool.

''Not everything that is immoral has to be illegal'

The quotation in the title of this post is from Romanian Justice Ministry legal expert Valerian Cioclei, and it comes from the NY Times story Romania Weighs Decriminalizing Consensual Incest .

"Three European Union nations -- France, Spain and Portugal -- do not prosecute consenting adults for incest, and Romania is considering following suit.
...
"Incest is defined as sexual intercourse between people too closely related to marry legally. In the United States, all 50 states and the District of Columbia prohibit even consensual incest, although a few states impose no criminal penalties for it..."

Incest is surely one of the prototypical repugnant transactions, namely one that people don't like to have others engage in. Such repugnance is often reflected in law, but by no means always. (E.g. there is no law against going to the front of a long line at the supermarket checkout counter and asking a person near the front to sell you their spot, i.e. to move to the back of the line and let you into their place in return for a cash payment. But here's a story of an economist , Oz Brownlee, who, after trying to do that, decided that the best course of action was to leave the store without buying anything.)

A famous article by Jonathan Haidt (Haidt, J. (2001). The emotional dog and its rational tail: A social intuitionist approach to moral judgment. Psychological Review. 108, 814-834 ) begins with an example of consensual incest.
"Julie and Mark are brother and sister. They are traveling together in France on summer vacation from college. One night they are staying alone in a cabin near the beach. They decide that it would be interesting and fun if they tried making love. At very least it would be a new experience for each of them. Julie was already taking birth control pills, but Mark uses a condom too, just to be safe. They both enjoy making love, but they decide not to do it again. They keep that night as a special secret, which makes
them feel even closer to each other.
What do you think about that, was it OK for them to make love?

"Most people who hear the above story immediately say that it was wrong for the siblings to make love, and they then set about searching for reasons (Haidt, Bjorklund, & Murphy, 2000). They point out the dangers of inbreeding, only to remember that Julie and Mark used two forms of birth control. They argue that Julie and Mark will be hurt, perhaps emotionally, even though the story makes it clear that no harm befell them. Eventually,
many people say something like “I don’t know, I can’t explain it, I just know it’s wrong.” But what model of moral judgment allows a person to know that something was wrong, without knowing why?"

Haidt (and colleagues, particularly Paul Rozin) have studied the emotion of disgust, and think that a lot of moral judgements may be mediated by the disgust reaction (whose initial evolutionary significance is presumably to prevent us from eating spoiled food, etc.). This makes a lot of sense for incest (because evolution should help us avoid inbreeding, with the excessive concentration of recessive genes in offspring).

I suspect that many of the more clearly economic transactions that are or have been regarded as repugnant are less closely tied to hard-wired disgust. That is not to say that, as people who are culturally acclimated to find some kind of transaction repugnant (e.g. charging interest on loans was repugnant for centuries in Europe), we may not be able to recruit our disgust reaction to make sense of things we disapprove of. Just as not every repugnant transaction is against the law, they may not all originate with (or even activate in a secondary manner) feelings of disgust. (See my other posts on repugnant transactions for a variety of examples...)

Update: see an article on disgust and moral judgement in the March 2009 issue of The Jury Expert (a very task oriented journal focused on picking and persuading jurors): Grime and Punishment: How Disgust Influences Moral, Social and Legal judgments

College admissions decisions: signaling and waiting

Right now, American high school seniors who have applied to colleges are mostly waiting to hear where they will be admitted. (The major exceptions are seniors who applied and were admitted to a college through a single-application, binding early admissions program, in which they agreed in advance to attend if accepted.) Once the colleges make their acceptance decisions, it will be their turn to wait, to see which students will accept their offers. Because of the recession, there is more uncertainty than usual: In a Shifting Era of Admissions, Colleges Are Sweating.

So colleges are trying to determine which students are likely to come if admitted, and the signals that students send (and have sent) in this regard may turn out to be important in admissions decisions.


"Typically, they rely on statistical models to predict which students will take them up on their offers to attend. But this year, with the economy turning parents and students into bargain hunters, demographics changing and unexpected jolts in the price of gas and the number of applications, they have little faith on those models.
...
"In response, colleges are trying new methods to gauge which applicants are serious about attending: Wake Forest, in North Carolina, is using Webcam interviews, while other colleges say they are scrutinizing essays more closely."
...
"Colleges consider an amalgam of factors, comparing them to past trends, to predict whether a student will attend, including, for example, what high school he went to; the strength of his grades, scores and recommendations; how much financial aid he has been offered; and whether he plays the cello or wants to study ethnobotany or economics. (If he is a she, the equation looks different still.)
They consider how many phone calls, Web hits, campus visits and applications they have received. "


Hat tip to Neil Dorosin of the Institute for Innovation in Public School Choice (IIPSC).