Acceptance Rate of 18%

Colleges and Universities A-Z University of Chicago ✅
1

<p>As reported on the examiner.com website:</p>

<p>
[quote]
One of the stand out universities that rocked the regular admissions trends is the University of Chicago. The school had a record-breaking 42% increase in applicants for the class of 2014. They accepted 18% of the students, compared with 27% last year. Perhaps more compelling is the comparison between this year and 1993 when the acceptance rate was 77%. It’s safe to assert that the University of Chicago has outdone almost any other school in history as far as their application statistics.

[/quote]
</p>

2

<p>Yes. The exact acceptance rate is 18.4%.</p>

<p><a href=“http://www.chicagomaroon.com/assets/2010/4/2/admissions_half.jpg?1270417015[/url]”>http://www.chicagomaroon.com/assets/2010/4/2/admissions_half.jpg?1270417015&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

3

<p>If anyone is interested in the full breakdown:</p>

<p>Total Applicants: 19370
EA Applicants: 5883
RD Applicants: 13487</p>

<p>Total Applicants Accepted: 3564
EA Applicants Accepted: 1671
RD Applicants Accepted: 1893</p>

<p>Total Acceptance Rate: 18.4%
EA Acceptance Rate: 28.4%
RD Acceptance Rate: 14.0%</p>

<p>The RD acceptance rate was quite frankly ridiculous this year, compared to both the EA acceptance rate and previous year’s acceptance rates. I suppose the admissions office didn’t foresee that huge surge in applicants. However, considering how great Chicago is as a school, I think it’s right where it needs to be.</p>

4

<p>sorry tant and with apologies to all the great applicants who didn’t get places, the RD accept rate was even lower. the analysis above does not factor in students who were deferred EA and reconsidered in the regular pool. haven’t seen the figures, but if we guess say 2,500 were deferred the RD rate would be around 11.8%.</p>

5

<p>Fair enough, but I don’t think those students who were deferred should count as two separate applicants. Of course, you’re free to perceive the data in any manner you please.</p>

<p>Whatever the case, watch out, Ivies. UChicago is catching up. :)</p>

6

<p>chicagoboy is right. The numbers artificially inflate the RD acceptance rate, and understate the EA/RD gap, by excluding applications that are actually on the table when the RD decisions are made. If you say EA Applicants Accepted is 1671 (thus excluding deferred EA applicants who are accepted ED from that number), and RD Applicants Accepted is 1893 (including probably several hundred deferred EA applicants), then to get a meaningful RD acceptance rate you have to add deferred EA applicants back into the denominator. Of course, they don’t get counted twice in calculating the all-in acceptance rate of ~18%.</p>

7

<p>Looks like UChicago is headed for UPenn acceptance rate territory</p>

8

<p>They must have seriously underestimated the # of RD applicants. It’s really not fair for a school that offers early action.</p>

9

<p>Honestly, I think it would be better if Chicago had three options: SCEA, EA, and RD. Save the high accept rate for SCEA applicants, and have a slightly higher accept rate for EA apps than RD. (I don’t believe ED would be a good option, considering Chicago’s sometimes disappointing FA.)</p>

10

<p>Yeah, FA is the biggest reason that I probably can’t go to chicago. Although, it did give me significantly more money than Northwestern which was a little surprising.</p>

11

<p>Speaking of low acceptance rates, what’s the general consensus or thoughts on acceptance chances if you’re on the waitlist?</p>

<p>I know that it’s going to be incredibly low, but as a hopefuly UChicago waitlist, I’m really praying I’ll be accepted.</p>

12

<p>yeah im a chicagoo waitlist too and i hope i can get in…</p>

13

<p>

</p>

<p>It’s awfully hard to believe that. By the end of the first week in December, they would have had a ton of information to help project the number of RD applicants – actual applications, site registrations, scores sent, etc. I’m sure there are fluctuations at the last minute, but I’m also sure that they can predict the ultimate application total within a fairly narrow range before ED decisions are made final. I think what they did this year was deliberate, whatever the reason.</p>

14

<p>

</p>

<p>They’re going for an even lower acceptance rate, of course. Despite the dramatic ~50% increase in EA applications, they still took the same percentage of EA people. The reason? Those people will have plenty of time to give an answer regarding matriculation. The more people matriculate who were accepted early, the fewer people they need to take RD.</p>

15

<p>I’m with JHS, I think this may be an experiment to see if they can up the yield by wooing those EA kids for months!</p>

16

<p>^ Agree with that. While the acceptance rate continues to decrease, UofC needs to make sure its yield increases.</p>

17

<p>I agree with the last few posters: the unparalleled EA acceptance rate advantage (vis a vis the RD rate) this year must have been deliberate. Furthermore, I wouldn’t be surprised at all if they compare the matriculating students’ attributes and stats between the EA and RD groups and use this insight to put together the best possible student body and to manage their yield going forward as the acceptance rate continues to fall. </p>

<p>This kind of data gathering, analysis, and forecasting is an elementary step in business management. The admission office’s business is to put together the most competitive student body possible, so why wouldn’t they try to learn how to run their business based on past data? I do believe though that the this magnitude of the EA and RD acceptance rate discrepancy won’t be maintained next year: I think this year was a special case.</p>