Join for FREE,
and start talking with other members, weighing in on community discussions,
Also, by registering and logging in you'll see fewer ads and pesky
welcome messages (like this one!)
This whole race thing is absurd. The huge number of kids rejected from a school is an indication of a college's admissions failure.
It means that the college is not socially responsible, is not concerned about the quality of its admissions pool and it [sic] not conducting its admissions season in a socially responsible and ethical manner.
It means they are unsuccessful marketing their school to their target population and are creating a lot of noise instead.
A beter way to think about it is "University of Chicago solicited >28,000 applications from students that they rejected, thereby unnecessarily costing families approximately $280,000 (Including cost of scores-and does not include travel costs for visits).
That unnecessary cost for families is followed by having to muster up funds to pay for education.
The PR expense is also immense to the university.
All this BS hinders efforts to carefully match students to schools and causes unnecessary hardship.
The numbers game is totally irrelevant to the quality of the school and higher yield numbers says nothing about the quality or even popularity of the school since the most important variable is unknown-and that is which school was preferred over which others.
The choice of Chicago over Harvard, Yale and MIT means something entirely different than the choice of Chicago over NYU, U of Maine and St. Johns(NY) and it is impossible to differentiate on the basis of yield alone.
Any guesses that yield will hit 60%+ next year?
I think it will happen if and only if UChicago
1) improves its financial aid package
2) maintains its ranking performance
3) establishes its brand recognition