<p>Campus publication, "The Daily Sophist," reporting: The</a> Daily Sophist | Stories | Exclusive: Acceptance Rate May Be Under 9 Percent This Year</p>
<p>I’m just gonna be over here, crying at my plummeting chances</p>
<p>So depressing</p>
<p>-kisses early action-</p>
<p>Remember Sammy Jenkis, Remember Sammy Jenkis, Remember Sammy Jenkis…</p>
<p>I have a question/idea. Traditionally, deferred EA students have had about a 10% chance of being accepted. Now obviously this year RD chances are going to be lower than 10%, so do you guys think that deferred students chances will drop with it or will continue to hover around 10%?</p>
<p>Oh dear. Panicking. A lot.</p>
<p>[University</a> of Chicago to Send Record Number of Rejection Letters - DNAinfo.com Chicago](<a href=“http://www.dnainfo.com/chicago/20130313/hyde-park/university-of-chicago-send-record-number-of-rejection-letters]University”>University of Chicago to Send Record Number of Rejection Letters - Hyde Park - Chicago - DNAinfo)</p>
<p>I love UChicago.</p>
<p>Ugh based on truth123’s article, uchicago will seek a class of 1400. With Pierce closing and the massive size of the class of 2016, this is FAR FAR too large a class. </p>
<p>As the class of 2016 was 1500+, the class of 2017 should be around 1300-1350, to keep the average per class size around 1400 total. </p>
<p>Admitting too many this year with a big dorm closing is an awful idea.</p>
<p>At a meet and greet of accepted students, Nondorf said it would be 9.5% overall. I think he has more credibility. I was there btw, not quoting another source.</p>
<p>Also this article is obviously hyperbolic. I mean it says hundreds of thousands of students applied…it was 30k.</p>
<p>It’s definitely the regular decision rate, not overall if it is really under 9.</p>
<p>@LearningLover</p>
<p>They probably meant tens of thousands.</p>
<p>For a regular acceptance of 9%, the class size (assuming a yield of 47%) would be over 1475, which is just not happening. An overall acceptance rate of 9% would mean a class size of around 1270, which I don’t see happening either. The under 9% probably refers to regular acceptance rate (I would guess it would be in the mid 7s), and the overall acceptance rate will probably be ~9.5% (less than 2900 acceptances overall).</p>
<p>The Sophist article doesn’t quite pass the smell test. Anyone who thinks about it for a few minutes would tell you that the overall admission rate this year was going to be in the 10%-11% range. They have a few less than 30,400 applications. Last year, they admitted 3,300 and change, and that was too many. Before last year, they had been admitting 3,500-3,600 each year. So one certainly expects them to admit fewer than 3,300 (a little less than 11% overall) this year, but fewer than 3,000 (just below 10% overall) seems really unlikely, and 2,700 ( just below 9% overall) kind of ridiculous, except as a stunt. </p>
<p>(By “stunt”, I mean sending out an artificially low number of acceptance letters, publicizing the low admission rate, while planning to admit 100+ students off the waitlist. It has been done before, but not by Chicago, and it’s not exactly a class move.)</p>
<p>10.5% of applications, or about 3,200 acceptances, seems like a really likely number. It really ought to be a little less than that. But I will be really, really surprised if, when the dust clears and the official number comes out in the fall (i.e., after waitlist activity is factored in), the overall acceptance rate was a lot lower than 10%.</p>
<p>And I did all of that without any confidential sources in Admissions. All of the information is public.</p>
<p>Now, a 3,200-admission, 10.5% overall rate kinda-sorta translates into a “below 9%” RD admission rate, but only if you aren’t very smart or you don’t like the University of Chicago. Early admissions were about 1,400 out of 10,300 early apps. That would mean RD admissions of about 1,800 out of 20,100 regular apps. Just below 9%! Except the RD pool isn’t just the 20,100 regular apps, it’s also the (unspecificed, but probably at least 2,000, and maybe 5,000 or more) EA apps that were deferred to the RD round. The real RD admission rate is likely to be somewhere between 7-8%. Which is, of course, below 9%, but might also be called “below 8%”.</p>
<p>JHS:</p>
<p>I think it depends entirely on the size of the class UChicago wants. With 1525 in the Class of 2016 AND Pierce closing, I think it’s reasonable (and probably good) to have the Class of 2017 at around 1300. </p>
<p>If the target is 1300, it’s conceivable that the final admit rate (with waitlist included) is about 9.5% - or 2900 people total. Put another way, I think it’s reasonable that UChicago’s overall yield will be about 44%, which, if the target is 1300 students, means a 9.5% accept rate. </p>
<p>It all depends what the size of the class should be. Personally, I’m in favor of being very conservative, especially because demand for a UChicago degree seems to be rising, but space is diminishing (at least for the next few years). Sticking more students in New Grad and I-house is not a suitable answer.</p>
<p>What is wrong with I-House?</p>
<p>From what I know, these are make-shift solutions as the College deals with over-enrollment. I-house was not supposed to be a college dorm, and neither was the New Grad dorm (which was for grad students). I think it’s a contravention of UChicago’s goal of providing a rich college atmosphere to simply plug holes like this. The situation could be ameliorated easily - don’t admit as many people.</p>
<p>My daughter lives there and it is indeed great, with a rich college atmosphere. She is very happy as the others kids living there. Single rooms, multicultural events, music concerts, famous speakers, etc. In the lobby of your house. Very rich indeed.</p>
<p>I understand both Cue7 and JHS views. But, as I have predicted in an earlier post, the overall admission rate will be around 9.2%-9.5%. I could be wrong and the actual rate could be less than 9%…</p>
<p>…having said this, I empathize for those “students” that Chicago will deny admission to… those who are “diamonds in the rough” and the “not so perfect” candidates…the ones throughout Chicago’s history that have blossomed at Chicago to go on to GREAT accomplishments.</p>
<p>That’s great, but apparently the administration thinks the experience should be better or even more cohesive. That’s why, from what I know, I house and new grad are seen as temporary solutions. Once the new dorm is built, students should be moved out of these areas. That says something about how the admin values these spaces. </p>
<p>Personally, I think the university missed opportunities with housing - at least for first and second years, they could’ve created higher caliber spaces, but funding has been a problem.</p>