For what it’s worth, I found this chart of UofC historical admission rates over the last 5 years. Apparently, somehow UofC managed to remain UofC for a long time before it got into the selectivity game.
That chart would be even more dramatic if it were taken back to the eighties, when admission rates were around 70 percent. What conclusions, if any, are you drawing from this, @TheVulcan ?
That, at a minimum, whatever is happening with admissions currently has very little to do with the special character of UofC.
It should be obvious to everyone that UChicago uses ED1 and ED2 to increase yield, and uses EA to increase the number of applications, but it isn’t, certainly to those on this board who would defend any policy coming from UChicago.
Bingo!
@TheVulcan Most EA applicants probably fail not because they are in the EA pool, but because they don’t do 2) and 3) in my earlier post (#439) convincingly enough. They then tend to interpret it as a rigged game. That’s not to say, it’s an easy thing to do. Making the case for 2) and 3) is not easy and is perhaps more difficult when you are in the EA/RD pool where it’s harder to signal your true intentions but it can be done. The sad fact though is many in those two pools can’t make the case and there are only so many spots left so if you don’t make an awfully good case, you will probably get denied
eventually.
In some sense Chicago is giving applicants multiple attempts to make that case with it’s deferral program. You consider it “kissing the ring”. To me it’s the college gently asking you to try and make the case one more time. Moving to the ED2 pool may be an important signal but doesn’t guarantee that any applicant will eventually make the case successfully
You may not know very much about what has been happening at the College during this period, Vulcan. This board has been devoted if not convulsed over many years by discussion of the changes at the College going back at least two decades. It is the central point in Dean Boyer’s history of the College and in his own efforts at reform of the more rebarbative features of the old College. That’s public information if you are really interested in getting to the bottom of any of this. It does not in any way justify the sort QED conclusion you have drawn - and lurking behind that conclusion the related conclusions as to manipulation, juicing the numbers, evil protecting of yield and selectivity, etc, as stated in this thread.
@1NJParent I think your analysis stops short of providing a full explanation. My Dad has taught me an useful way to think about these things. Ask the question “Why is that” five or more times to try and uncover the real reason
So, assuming you are right, Why does Chicago STILL care about yield and number of applications?
It clearly can’t be for the US News rankings because those metrics don’t matter any more
There we go again with “It should be obvious…”. Those words always preface a weak or non-existent argument. An old prof of mine called them the “forcible feeble” beginning and always put a red line through them with the comment, “Nothing is obvious in this world. Make the case.”
I also can’t refrain from observing that the source you quote has a rooted hostility to the U of C and frequently comes on to tell us this in the same high and mighty terms, without argument, as you have just cited and apparently accept as authority.
What EA or SCEA is for:
Once had a lunch a couple years back with another parent whose kid got into a very good T40 school. The parent kept referencing to the fact the kid was deferred SCEA at Harvard to show how brilliant and close he was. Per data published by Harvard, in SCEA round, it accepts ~ 15%, rejects ~ 10% and DEFER 75%. How special it is to be deferred by Harvard. Anyone thinking of stats/ranking management?
For some, it’s Hail Mary pass; for some it’s bragging point; for some is shopping around. It exists everywhere. Why only find fault with UChicago EA, and only after decision was out?!
May last post on this thread: Vulcan’s case is exactly the reason why people always advise kids whose stats check the boxes: write an essay that makes your case. It is that important
Vulcan’s case is also proof that SAT and GPA is not all there is to it. There is luck. There is human error on both sides. And it’s just one of many really awesome schools with an under 10% acceptable rate. There are others out there.
First-time poster so your patience is appreciated.
My daughter got in EA to UChicago last week. She is completely unhooked. I was not that familiar with stats before she applied, and from reading this thread, it looks like a pretty unusual admission. Does anyone have a grasp on how many kids generally get in EA? Are we talking 200 or less? (I realize stats are few and far between)
A rather basic thing to point out about the chart is that it hardly captures the effect of ED, which was only introduced for the class entering in 2016. The downward trajectory in the admissions rate had been going on for many years before anyone began to complain that the present structure was designed solely to game the numbers. The numbers have continued more or less on their present slope thereafter. If the chart leads to any conclusion at all it is that there was a continuous growth in the popularity of the College unrelated to the présent Admissions régime.
@marlowe1, so you don’t think it is the result of a coördinated effort?
(I really do enjoy your messages)
@mamacookie - congrats to your daughter on her significant accomplishment. Your daughter’s admission is additional evidence that UChicago looks beyond stats or demographics in order to admit the best candidates.
UChicago doesn’t provide stats by admission plan but there have been a variety of educated guesses on CC, so here is mine. Last year the combined EA/ED1 admit rate was around 7% on something like 15k applications and we know both those values because someone leaked to WaPo on the latter and Admissions disclosed the former to the early admitted students at the start of this year. So that’s about 1,050 total “earlies” - ie ED1/EA. Using proportions that they provided the first year they implemented ED which is about 2/3 ED1 and 1/3 EA, it looks like last year they would have admitted around 350 EA’s.
Do keep in mind that EA/ED1 admit #'s might vary from year to year (and probably do, which is why they no longer disclose the breakdown). In any given year, they are going to admit the strongest candidates, period, and will find plenty of them in both early pools AND in both “regular pools” (ie EA2/RD). Which pool(s) they end up drawing from might well vary by quite a bit; as the non-binding yield has increased in recent years and as the new dorm now adds significant capacity to the College, it’s no longer necessary to worry about “yield protection” so much. They just want the strongest class that can add the most to the university community now and long after they graduate 
A general note: Those who are complaining that EA or ED1 is unfair or non-transparent or whatever the complaint-du-jour is currently don’t understand that when you have 15,000 early applicants for EA and ED1, you are going to have a low admit rate, period. No way around that. UChicago’s early volume last year was more than twice that of Harvard’s and 50% higher than MIT’s. And ED didn’t cause that to happen - UChi’s increasing popularity did. Chalk it up to good messaging, but UChi has been “flavor of the decade” for a few years now, well before ED.
Your daughter must be a pretty sharp cookie, @mamacookie . Someone on this board may be able to take an educated guess, but it was a very good achievement under any circumstances. Brava!
The operating theory of some of us on this board is that to gain admittance as an unhooked EA you need to have not only superior metrics in general but some hard-to-define quality of being a Chicago type - inquisitive mind, thoughtfulness and independence, perhaps a streak of contrarianism, all communicated vividly and effectively in strong essays. Would you say that any of that describes your daughter? If not, what was the secret elixir? --Very nosy of me, feel free to ignore.
I’ll give you that, @TheVulcan . This could be the beginning of a beautiful friendship!
Vulcan I see your point, but the chart doesn’t appear to be right. While there’s no doubt that UChicago’s overall admission rate has been dropping, I’m pretty sure the UChicago line is wrong (putting aside the fact that the points on the lines do not intersect the years), because the 2014 admit rate (my son’s year) it was 8.8%. In fact, all the years appear to be wrong.
@TheVulcan at #453 - what you need to see is the chart with application volume. in 2008 it was around 10,000. By 2013 it had increased to 30,000. Common App helped, as UChicago joined that in 2010. Nondorf’s marketing also helped. But that explosion happened well before EA/ED1. UChicago only introduced ED for the 2016/17 app. cycle and application #'s actually FELL that year by 10%. They are currently in the mid-30k. They haven’t seen explosive growth either from ED or Test Optional. So the cynical narrative isn’t supported by the data.
ALL admissions offices want to see as many applications as possible because it means they get to be choosy. UChicago is no exception - now. But Admissions would make the case that they are finding much better-fit candidates now than back when admit rates were over 50% and yields under 30%. And they have the stats - retention rate, 4 year grad rates, alumnae giving, etc. - to back up their statement. None of that was impacted by introducing ED and lowering the EA rate, except that perhaps in the past they felt they missed too many “right fit candidates” in the early round who were discouraged about being deferred and went elsewhere. BTW, THAT is a main reason why the deferral rate is so low from early - they already knew that very few deferred admits choose UChicago in the regular round. Given what you have posted about your son, he is no exception to that trend. BTW, congrats to him because it’s a major accomplishment to be admitted early to two of the best research universities in the world. Hopefully he and you are celebrating more than bitchin’ about EA on this thread 
Thanks, @JBStillFlying. We really are:-)
I enjoyed reading all of your input. You might remember that my first entrance into this ill-fated thread 
was before decisions were released in response to your post post (#177).
For what it’s worth, son did communicate his “life of the mind” and “learning for the sake of learning” aspirations to all colleges he applied to in his essays, institutional missions be darned:-) Heck, he actually used UofC’s “life of the mind” mantra in his essays to other colleges, and he wrote his “Find X” essay about the beauty of mathematics, and used it for other colleges as well.
In fact, contemplating UChicago application helped him crystallize his academic ambitions, so it more than served its role.
We really have no complaints about how son’s application season turned out. He “applied sideways”, and it worked out, but we would have been just as proud of him if it did not.
https://mitadmissions.org/blogs/entry/applying_sideways
I am, however, frustrated for some of his friends (more than likely easy ED admits) for whom UChicago was clear first choice, but who felt choosing EA was commitment enough. I do think there is an element of obfuscation that exists around EA that is unfortunate and… unbecoming.
But in our mind, we separate the top universities’ admissions machinery with its own institutional priorities from the excellent academics they guard access to.