I’ve been really bored lately, so I’ve spent the past couple of days compiling a list of the number of acceptances/waitlists/rejections for each school. In the end, I took off a couple of schools that either one or two people applied to. Also: I didn’t record any decision of somebody put down “waiting on …”. Also: Don’t take this list too seriously, because it’s only coming from one list where not everybody posted!
I would really like to take another couple of weeks and figure out how many people got into multiple GLADCHEMMS or HADES schools and then make another thread with info involving people who applied to multiple, and how that had an effect on their decisions… :-?
@bc12345 Oh I see. For some reason when the schools write those emails, they give you numbers that don’t really make sense. My acceptance letter from MX said that they had 1100 applicant for 100 spots… that’s a 9% acceptance rate, which obviously isn’t true. The same thing happened with Choate and Milton in their letters…
@nico.campbell Don’t forget that schools admit more than the number of spots because they factor their yield in. So, if MX wanted to fill 100 spots and they had a 65% yield, they would actually admit 165 people, which would be a 15% admit rate.
@HMom16 That makes more sense! So if Lville has ~200 spots, they accept roughly 330 students if they have a 65% yield. That would also explain @bc12345 's email from Lville. So rather than writing the actual acceptance rate for MX or Lville, they wrote not the percent that they accepted, but the number of spots divided by the number applicants.
@nico.campbell My calculation is actually wrong (165x.65=107.25) - but you get the idea. Unless we know their expected yield, knowing the number of applicants and the number of spots, doesn’t give the true picture…
@HMom16 Oh yeah I didn’t even notice :)) maybe MX made a mistake with me… I believe that they would need to accept 154. As for the Lville calculation, they would need to accept 308 if they had a 65% yield.
You should assume nothing. The users on College Confidential are not a representative subsection of boarding school applicants as a whole. Additionally, the CC sample size is too small to be statistically meaningful. However, it’s a fun parlor game.
@skieurope Exactly! It is a fun game :)>- . Obviously we are not an accurate representation of the boarding school applicants all over the world, but it’s kind of fun to see how our small sample size did on M10, you know?
