@DadUndaunted : That appears the norm now at most selective privates. 45-50% through ED and then of course they report the RD admit stats to internal and external media to impress different constituencies with the lowest numbers possible. I love looking at school news publications each year when each selective (and even many non) school brags about its often slightly lower admit rate and slightly higher admit stats and the silly people in the comment columns at “some” schools riding these waves of faux and superficial success (yes because adding 10 points to an already insane score range is just something to be excited about) are all sheepishly like: “Wow, look at how much smarter our school has gotten in just 3 years!” or when things don’t go as well “oh no! We’re losing ground.”.
And of course most faculty will report no differences in performance (or the desire to challenge students more in their courses) within that time period or within the last decade for that matter. It is often a big show to put on and has gotten kind of embarrassing if you ask me how folks have bought into the hype. I actually am pleasantly surprised when I look at the comment sections of schools like Chicago and the readers (I suspect some are students) are much more nuanced, cynical, and even critical because they know it really isn’t improving the academic environment much (the students at Chicago were arguably just as talented when the score average was not around 1500/1600 M/V and applications were 1/2 the volume (maybe as recently as 2006-2008 this was the case). And I am certain the intellectual and academic environment has not changed though some are concerned about the former which is strange since one would typically think higher scores = more intellectualism). It is allowing them to keep up appearances and some students are mature enough to know this and acknowledge it instead of being unrealistic in thinking that in a year or two, upon switching admissions deans, the school is suddenly much more awesome to more people than it was before . The admissions office couldn’t be doing anything. The prospective students in America just suddenly woke up lol.
This whole situation saddens me. Again, luckily Chicago was already unusually strong academically before it left the concept of having niche applicants, but for schools that did the same before or after, I cannot really say the same. Again, if those places want to truly be noticed (also as R-1 universities, building a more extensive and successful research infrastructure is important for prestige among academics and ability to recruit very top talent to programs), they should put more money into making UG academic programs and intellectual environment more serious and less into “show business” (the pageant contest that is elite college recruitment and admissions strategy). You can fool and distract many HS seniors and their parents, but not everyone is as impressed with those tactics.