Uchicago Official Early Action Class of 2012 Results

[phuriku]

<p>

Addressing point #1, I would say that the simple fact, as one poster pointed out, that there are many more Asian posters on the UChicago boards than there are in the student body at large skews the data fatally. Again, I don’t have the exact numbers of how many Asians/Whites/Black/Latino there are on CC, but this simply reinforces the point that there is no way that we can reliably argue that posters to CC are statistically and reliably representative of the student body at large.

</p>

<p>I’ve addressed this. There’s actually a pretty big Asian student body at UChicago, if you’ve ever visited. I’d say 1 in 3 is Asian (counting internationals). But as I’ve said before, even if we assume that the CC crowd is atypical, it should be obvious that this atypicality should be constant over time, which means that we can compare the two groups over time.</p>

<p>

Addressing point #2, yes, you can use a sample group of 2 if you’d like, but it would still give you an extraordinarily high standard deviation. Saying that one can reasonably draw a statistically reliable conclusion from a sample ratio of 100:4500 based on a highly questionable assumption (that the CC posters are representative of the Chicago student body), simply doesn’t hold any water.

</p>

<p>I’ve addressed this. Any statistician will tell you that 100/4500 is a reasonable sample, just as 1000/300000000 is a reasonable sample. Your statistical argument doesn’t hold.</p>

<p>

Moreover, there is the further assumption that the acceptance criteria have somehow changed over a time based on comparisons over 2 consecutive years. Again, working with a data set of 2 (2 entering classes, back to back) would leave you with an enormous standard deviation.

</p>

<p>But this doesn’t make sense… I’m not comparing gradual change of admissions policies over time. I’m saying that there has been a significant change from last year to this year based on Zimmer’s new fetishes.</p>

<p>

You would need to compare entering class data over a much longer period of time to draw reliable conclusions. This would be an incredibly difficult exercise to prove and until one actually does some serious and clever data mining, there is no way that we can accept such a charge on anecdotal evidence.

</p>

<p>I’ve addressed this. There may not be a way to prove it, but it’s pure good-old rational common sense.</p>