<p>College</a> sends admission decisions in milestone year for applications | UChicago News</p>
<p>The Daily Sophist leaked this a few days before the Uni announced
[The</a> Daily Sophist | Stories | Exclusive: Acceptance Rate May Be Under 9 Percent This Year](<a href=“http://dailysophist.com/stories/264-exclusive-acceptance-rate-may-be-under-9-percent-this-year]The”>http://dailysophist.com/stories/264-exclusive-acceptance-rate-may-be-under-9-percent-this-year)
[The</a> Daily Sophist | Stories | Confirmed: Acceptance Rate Is 8.8 Percent](<a href=“http://dailysophist.com/stories/266-confirmed-acceptance-rate-is-8-8-percent]The”>http://dailysophist.com/stories/266-confirmed-acceptance-rate-is-8-8-percent)</p>
<p>Well, I have to take back what I said previously about the administration. Admitting ~2700 means that, overall with perhaps some use of the waitlist, the college is shooting for a class of 2017 size of ~1300. </p>
<p>(I’m assuming a yield similar to last year - maybe around 47%, followed by some use of the waitlist to fill the final 60 seats or so.)</p>
<p>With pierce closing, a small class of 1300 works great. I’m very curious what the yield will be this year but, with positive momentum and generally good word of mouth out there about the school, I wouldn’t be surprised if it was around 47-48% this year. </p>
<p>Again, I don’t know how exactly this is happening, but the admin is transforming the school quite considerably, and for the better. 8.8% accept rate accelerates uchicago past all its peers (including brown, duke, and Dartmouth), and just barely behind princeton. Accept rate can be very misleading, but its a signalling factor eye-balled by many applicants. </p>
<p>Astounding how fast uchicago admissions has changed!</p>
<p>7% acceptance rate is ridiculous. Makes the whole process even more rewarding.</p>
<p>This is stunning, they admitted 600 less than last year. At least this shows that the administration is taking notice of the over-crowded housing and such, though I think even fewer students should have been admitted because the last two classes were too big and Pierce is being destroyed.</p>
<p>Congratulations to The University of Chicago!
I think they did the right thing by keeping the Class of 2017 smaller than that of the last couple of years.
If you think the admit rate is stunning now, wait till you find out the yield rate in a few months. I will not be surprised to see the Class of 2017 to be in excess of 1400, perhaps around 1,450. If that happens, you will be looking at the yield of 54.2%. That would be nothing short of amazing to have such magnitude of improvement in yield rate in such a short time. We shall see.</p>
<p>Does anybody know the uchicago’s reasoning behind not doing binding early action/early decision?</p>
<p>They lose applicants who aren’t 100% sure they want to go there. With nonbinding EA, a top top student can apply to UChicago and a bunch of other schools, but with ED, they will receive fewer apps.</p>
<p>MIT admitted 8.2% this year.</p>
<p>[1548</a> admitted frosh for the Class of 2017 - The Tech](<a href=“http://tech.mit.edu/V133/N12/admissions.html]1548”>http://tech.mit.edu/V133/N12/admissions.html)</p>
<p>@keaboo. Binding early decision usually benefits students that are financially well-off with maybe not-so-great application who want and need an “advantage”; single choice early action is a little better but still restricting for those TOP students who may also want to apply to their rivals; non-binding early action that Chicago, MIT, and Caltech use is probably the best of the three. I believe Harvard, Stanford, Yale, and Princeton should go to non-binding early action…</p>
<p>…at one time, Harvard had non-binding early action as well…</p>