No, of course they shouldn’t be insulted when you imply that the reason they were accepted was that they were richer than your child or possibly a minority. What could possibly be offensive about that?
And why would it be worthwhile to continue to point out facts to someone so outraged their child was rejected that they continue to state (wrong) guesses as fact?
I would agree these revised opinions 100%
@TheVulcan Congrats to your son! Absolutely impressive!
I also applaud Caltech and MIT for their admissions policies. They are not afraid of competition and do not cater to elites.
Hmmm. Let me get this straight: It is supposed to follow that because Chicago did not accept a kid who had no intention of actually coming to it, and thereby created a space for acceptance of some other kid they thought might actually come, this can only mean that “they are playing the rankings game like few others.”
That doesn’t compute. Rejection hurts, but it ought to leave one’s logical faculties intact.
He did not have no intention of coming.
@makemesmart and @ThoughtProcess1 , bare assertions don’t constitute arguments, no matter how confidently made.
@Vulcan , it sounds like he would only have come to Chicago had both his two preferred schools rejected him. Chicago probably glommed on to this and could see he wasn’t a good fit. Why does that rankle so much? There’s no need to draw such dire conclusions from it. I note that @tarleton 's child was accepted EA at all schools. That should tell you that Chicago is willing to enter the competition for a certain kind of high stats STEM applicant when they feel the kid has the Chicago attitude toward liberal education. That’s the Chicago niche, like it or not. Maybe they got it wrong in the case of your son. However, it’s pretty evident to me that you think all that is hoakum. Isn’t it possible your son didn’t entirely buy it as well and that that came through in his application? Schools, like people, are pretty good at intuiting who actually loves them and who talks a pretty game but isn’t quite their type. Anyhow, why not declare victory and leave it at that?
@marlowe1, I enjoy reading your replies, even if we disagree:-)
This is an anonymous board, I don’t know you, and you don’t know me. We have really nothing to prove to each other, or anyone here - but trust me, we declared victory well before we heard from UChicago, even with other applications still in the hopper.
You clearly love UChicago, and I respect that. But one can love the school and question its admission policies at the same time.
Institutions can predict their yield with good accuracy, so there is no huge problem with admitting strong candidates that are likely to attend their first choice instead, unless you are trying to manage your ranking.
The reason I engage here is because I know there will be people reading this thread next year trying to understand if UChicago’s EA is the right choice for them.
Stats by themselves indicate drive, intelligence, hard work and often economic status, but not brilliance.
I think you are humble bragging. Be happy your son got in to two great universities which look for very specific things. Chicago is an equally great university that focuses on other attributes. You speculate, but my high school friend went to MIT, received his outstanding thesis award there, his PhD, now is tenured research at MIT. Pretty smart guy. Also does admissions there. He says they look for very specific things. And more stat driven than well rounded students. He also looks for empathy.
Incidentally he didn’t get admitted to the same university’s I did. Was his stats too low then? This was before ED or EA. And he was taking advanced college math courses by his sophomore year in high school.
Your sons stats are wonderful but stats don’t make an admissions decision. MIT and CalTech more so.
Another friend won the Westinghouse award (check out how many Nobel prize winners - 13, Fields, McArthur etc won it also). Tenured at Harvard, Princeton and MIT. Also interviews. Says Harvard looks for more rounded except in pure theoretical sciences. If one wins the Siemens or the renamed Westinghouse/Intel, sure that’s a ticket in no doubt as it shows an early indicator of creatine brilliance. . But there is only one winner.
So there are many kids that have super impressive scores, grades, etc but aren’t fits everywhere. The essays reveal much. You seem to be thinking that’s the unique key. And denigrating Chicago for presumably cheating your son. There’s many many perfect stat kids.
And incidentally those often aren’t the ones that become superstars later, either in academia or business. Bill Gates anyone? Einstein?
These people have flashes of brilliance and insight. Leadership qualities. High school test scores and GPA’s are learnable and available through hard work to smart kids. But it takes something beyond that to make a dent in this world.
So be super proud of your son. I am really impressed by his success myself. He deserves it. But please don’t put down others who got in to Chicago and think your son deserved to get admitted to Chicago because that’s just wrong. The ones who got in fit better. They deserve it too.
And Chicago is just as fine a university as either MIT or CalTech.
What does this even mean? How could this guy be not a good fit? Too good for Chicago?
This is a private college and of course it can do many things its own way. Nothing wrong with taking in rich kids if that is what UChicago is looking for or if it needs at least a part of its body to be from elites. If UofC thinks that ED/ED2/EA/RD brings the best, so be it. But at least be honest about who these different tracks are designed to select.
Rejections hurt, of course, but they hurt more once one understands the machinery behind it.
I agree in general with @arbitrary99 comments in #407 (with the general statements about different colleges or even individual AO looking for specific characteristics). Except here some try to push the idea that ED somehow selects those special types (those brilliant? better rounded? those that will leave a dent?) What I can’t figure out is how exactly ED does that?
As a side note, I am not aware of any leadership positions Einstein held in high school clubs and likely he would have been rejected from UofC EA round because his stats were too high.
It has also been implied that EA applicants are not interested in UofC or that they are simply trying to reach “elite” social status. Why such conclusions?
Harvard and MIT do not have ED so things are different over there.
Still waiting for any semblance of an argument from you, @ThoughtProcess1 .
@TheVulcan , it is not a matter in my mind of defending an admissions policy reflexively because I’m a Chicago patriot. I like its effects for specific reasons in a matter I care about - perpetuating Chicago-style culture. That is not something most of the world is required to care about, of course, but it is a legitimate goal of admissions policy. For those who don’t like it there’s a wide world of other institutions out there.
Still don’t quite get why you feel the need to issue this warning about EA. Its existence did no harm to your son. If your point is that for another kind of kid, who has Chicago as first choice, EA is not the best strategy, that’s true but known by all. If your point is that no kids are accepted EA, that’s simply wrong: there are indeed some kids who do not have Chicago as a first choice who should apply EA and keep their options open. Finally, if the point is that high-stat STEM-inclined unhooked kids should not apply EA, that could be partly true - if those applicants do not have an interest in Chicago’s liberal arts culture.
Perhaps I have read you wrong, but you seemed to go much further than any of these caveats and qualifications. You seem to want to call EA out as a sham and a delusion. Your right to do so, but expect pushback.
@ThoughtProcess1
I was referencing Einstein as an example of someone who wouldn’t be admitted due to low stats. Even after he wrote his seminal papers he had a hard time getting a junior professorship.
“ We consider Einstein a gifted genius, and indeed he was, but early on in his life he didn’t really show any promise. He failed his entrance exam into University (he had to study for the exam again for a year and then go back to retake it and still barely passed) and was not particularly good in any other subjects other than physics. On numerous occasions, he needed the help of his friends to figure out his theories. And once accepted into college he hardly attended class. On all accounts, he was mediocre.”
ED just shows a bigger commitment to the school. Maybe it’s good for yield. But we all want people that everything else being equal want to be there.
I don’t like the entire early process as it doesn’t especially benefit the student. I’d rather know all my options. When I applied I got to choose. Now I’d have to pick one first. And if one is risk averse maybe they don’t reach as much. Make hey believe like TheVulcan it’s all about the numbers versus a more wholistic view. It’s tough on kids. Especially as their friends may get admitted early and they still don’t know where they will go.
Much is imperfect but I told my kids there are so many great universities and colleges. Going to a “lessor prestige” one doesn’t foreclose any options in life.
@arbitrary99 I agree with your last 2 paragraphs. Regarding Einstein I doubt he would have had bad SATs. In the past, entrance exams were different and still are in Europe/China. If he learned calculus at 12 I would assume he would not have troubles solving quadratic equations or finding extrema.
There are those who are applying EA to UChicago (thus forfeiting other schools’ REA) thinking it increases their chances over RD, whereas it in fact hurts them (0.5% acceptance for deferred EA candidates).
And UChicago, being very rankings-conscious, has a vested interest in maintaining this misconception.
I’m sorry but your logic completely escapes me here.
The applicant chooses which to apply to early and it’s the REA school that won’t let both be applied to at the same time, not Chicago.
The applicant should decide whether getting restricted is worth the bump. If so apply there. Or if prefer Chicago apply there. Compare acceptance rates.
Then compare deferred REA acceptance rare to deferred EA
Acceptance rate if one worries about getting deferred instead
You are mixing up comparisons.
However I’ve written all I will on this. I think you are being very unfair to UChicago and it’s all based on your son getting rejected. Look at the glass half full that he’s going to a better fit for him and be really excited! My fit would be better at UChicago and I would never apply to MIT so everyone is different. When school starts you and he won’t care. He sounds great and I’m sure will have a wonderful time at MIT. Wearing the brass rat ring is impressive though I don’t see it often.
Once again, congrats to him.
And to everyone admitted to Chicago. Really really amazing.
Everything you said above applylies to MIT and CIT EA too
“Those who apply EA to MIT/MIT (thus forfeiting REA)thinking …, whereas in fact it hurts them ( 190/6500 deferred admitted RD at MIT)”
Your conclusion seems to be different for Chicago vs MIT/CIT on the same fact.
MIT/CIT have about the same admission rates for EA and RD rounds. They do not use them as yield management tools. They are exceptions to the rule.
On the other end of the spectrum is UChicago with its four admissions rounds and no transparency as to their use.
I agree with @arbitrary99 that early admissions are, at most institutions, a gimmick that is not there for the students’ benefit.
Yield management is an evil practice.
You have no idea if there was any yield management here or if your son just wasn’t a fit. You are guessing and hardly an unbiased source.
@TheVulcan
Just like MIT/CIT, Chicago’s EA rate is similar to RD rate @3-4% per class 2023 reports. Chicago EA deferred has 1-2% acceptance rate during RD round while MIT has around 3%.
They all the same and for the same purpose. Your son made conscious choice and applied to all three EAs, got in two and deferred in one. Could be just luck. Don’t read too much into it.
I wasn’t talking about my son. I know it’s hard to believe, but we honestly don’t mind he didn’t get in. As I said ahead of time, I would be surprised if he did.
I am taking about using multiple admissions rounds as a yield management tool.