Here’s another link, with more information. The other schools mentioned with similar very low limits, UNC and UF, are hardly what you would consider as public Ivies. Like I said, it’s all about the mission.
University of Florida joined the Common App just this year. Already a Top 10 Public, will be interesting to see what happens.
That was my impression from reading the 2024 EA decisions here on CC. Do you have a GT source for that?
So, approximately 70% of GT admits are Georgia residents. This obviously is not high enough, so there must be a Georgia law requiring 90%. However, at 90%, there will still be applicants “from Georgia [whose] parents pay taxes to Georgia [and who have] family roots in Georgia” who are rejected. So, does Georgia amend the bill to require 100% acceptance of Georgia residents? If not, well, how will the applicants “from Georgia [whose] parents pay taxes to Georgia [and who have] family roots in Georgia” feel?
@PuppyM Again, the proper stat is 59% in-state EA admits, 41% OOS EA admits. Everyone agrees that Georgia residents should have an advantage. The question is where you draw the line in the sand. The answer depends on whether you want GT to be a true public Ivy or just a banner in-state school. 90/10 would push it towards the latter.
@PuppyM First, the 90/10 rule is for Early Action only, not Regular Decision. Second, look at last year’s enrollment and this year’s EA numbers. I don’t think there’s a danger of GT going 100% in-state. Look at this year’s EA stats. Kind of eye-opening.
One day when you’re paying taxes and looking at paying $100’s of thousands for your kids education you might feel differently.
The bill is just being floated. The actual bill, if ever voted on, will most likely be altered. I doubt they can get 90/10.
Last Year
3,098 undergrads enrolled. 1,696 students were in-state (55%), 1,066 were OOS (34%), and 336 International (11%).
This Year EA
4,607 accepted. 1,929 in-state (42%), 2,338 OOS (51%), 340 International (7%).
I’ve posted before but here’s the best site for data. It’s very well done.
The “high stats” for in-state argument just doesn’t make sense - what it implies is that there shouldn’t be a single OOS student admitted if there’s another in-state student has “higher” stats - is it ACT/SAT score, how do you define “stats”?
This is from Rick Clark, dean of GT’s undergrad admissions. Written in 2017, it’s probably more applicable than then.
https://pwp.gatech.edu/admission-blog/2017/05/16/admission-its-not-fair/
Are you sure? Here’s what I get from GT’s data portal when I filter.
This Year EA
4,607 accepted total. 1,929 in-state (42%), 2,338 OOS (51%), 340 International (7%).
EA acceptance rate for In-State applicants was around 30%. For OOS/International it was about 8%.
@chmcnm The 41% OOS was from was the article, not the GT database, and did not distinguish between OOS and international. Thanks for the link. I stand by my remark that this kind of action will make GT more white and more male, and I think that is a loss for GT.
Male/female ratio at GT is already 60/40. Cant get much worse. Been to Georgia lately? I think just a hair over 50% identify as white only.
Can anyone provide the director of admissions comments about rumors that admissions are limited by zip code within Georgia ? Thanks in advance !
@chmcnm The LITE data is great! First off, almost 100% of EA applicants for both in-state and OOS were accepted for the summer session. Admittedly, the numbers are small (412 students). Lesson: if GT is your #1 school and you can swing it, make sure you select the summer option.
GT is accepting more OOS than in-state for EA, 2520 vs 1675 for the current EA round, fall-term only. But the historical yield for the OOS applicants is much lower than in-state, ~30% vs ~60%, so they must be aiming for a specific enrollment target. If OOS EA were reduced to 10%, together with the low OOS yields, you’d end up with a mostly Georgian campus; at the minimum, an all-Georgia EA enrollment round.
Yes I can, when the in-state acceptance rate is more than double that of OOS. Are the GA students that much more qualified as the rest of the country/world? Of your examples the one rejection has very little info besides uw gpa and act score. I would also say that the deferred in-state applicants have more than a 40% chance of RD acceptance. The reason for the decline for in-state acceptance rate is not OOS acceptance, but the increase in-state applications. Since 2011 in-state application have increased by ~2000 and the acceptance rate has dropped from 54% to 40%. It looks like they are trying to keep the split 60/40 for in vs OSS.
(removed)
Careful, the data portal percentages being reported for this year are based on the TOTAL number of applications (40K) not the number of EA applications (22K). The percentages are incorrect for just EA. It was 40% for in-state and 15% for OOS (including international) for EA. The actual numbers of accepted students are correct though. You can use them and the reported percentages to back calculate the number of application for OOS and in-state. (17,800 and 4800)
This is not correct GT EA OOS was 15%. See post #535.
@racereer Oops. You are right. I didn’t check the percentages.
Yup- the lite data is great— and was when I posted the link to it yesterday in post #459 ;). (granted I didn’t explain it but assumed folks would open and see it… )
@jym626 I found the interface to be kind of clunky, so I didn’t dig further, but I should have. Back to the point. GT already accepts every Georgia high school valedictorian and salutatorian. They already give a significant advantage to in-state students. There will always be a “high stats” Georgia student who won’t make it in. Where do you draw the line?