<p>Does anyone know the official # of accepted students and # of waitlisted students?</p>
<p>Why have so many people been waitlisted this year…?</p>
<p>The whole universe was waitlisted</p>
<p>Yield protection. U of C’s popularity is gaining so fast and they understand that there are now so many cross admits with the top schools, they need to protect from having too many kids and overburdening their already burdened housing.</p>
<p>I was waitlisted too… so you’re saying a lot of people were?</p>
<p>I don’t think yield protection is the predominant cause of the sheer number of reject/wait kids. I think, however, that you have to look at the CC thread and ask yourself whether or not the data there is statistically significant with respect to the apparently high volume of waitlisted people. I think there may be three causes of the apparent discrepancy: 1. If one were rejected, one may feel less inclined to post; 2. Small sample size thus far; and 3. Many CC posters CARE about the schools they are posting in, suggesting their apps show interest in one way or another, and that the likelihood of waitlisting in general may be a quasi-consolation on behalf of the admissions dept.
That said, I can understand your request for the official information, johnson22, because it seems like the massive wave of waitlisted applicants (myself included) is what has become of the 2017 Uchicago round.</p>
<p><a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/university-chicago/1473695-2013-college-admit-rate-falls-8-8-u-c.html[/url]”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/university-chicago/1473695-2013-college-admit-rate-falls-8-8-u-c.html</a></p>
<p>I don’t think it’s yield protection. They’ve underestimated their yield several years in a row, resulting in larger classes than intended. For example, the class of 2016 was ~1525 students, whereas normally they aim for ~1400. So they’re probably being more optimistic in estimating yield this year while using the waitlist as a backup.</p>
<p>Everyone always posts on CC “Why did they waitlist so many people?” I’ve seen this on the Princeton page and elsewhere. CC is not a scientific or random or representational sample. People who get rejected don’t necessarily run to the computer and rush to tell the world about it. More than 30,000 people applied to UChicago this year. Even if 300 people post their results on here, that is less than 1% of the applicants. Also, UChicago didn’t accept many people from the waitlist last year, about 20 or 30. Very few people who are waitlisted will be accepted, I’m sorry to say…</p>
<p>It’s not yield protection. it’s more of control. They usually accept about 3,000 but this year they only accepted about 2,000, leading to more people being placed on the waitlist. So, if their yield remains constant (or hopefully) drops from previous years, they will indeed accept more people off the waitlist.</p>
<p>As others have said, for the past two years or so, they’ve had much higher yields than expected. So this isn’t yield protection - it’s kind of the opposite, actually. They can’t afford to keep putting undergrads in grad housing.</p>
<p>I am curious as to the percentage of waitlisted students. I know CC isn’t a representative sample of the applicant pool, but the majority of us here (at least so far) have been waitlisted.</p>
<p>TL;DR in advance: The yield they’re expecting is likely to be realistic; this means the class will fill almost entirely with no room for the WLed. U of C is still practicing yield protection because it’s a linear increase issue rather than threshold-passing one. Their willingness to accept WLed candidates who are very very strong, strong enough UChicago admissions expected they would get into Harvard and choose to go there, before May 1st proves this. In addition to trying to increase their yield, they want to drive their acceptances down, but rejecting too many people now would discourage people next year too much from applying. Additionally, the numerical chances of getting off the waitlist are QUITE slim, 9 times less likely than getting in RD.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>2,676 were accepted, not 2,000, meaning they expect a 56.1% yield (while 676 is not a large difference in an of itself, you suggested they were expected a 75% rate). With consideration for the fact that next year’s incoming class might be smaller than this year’s (1400 instead of 1500 because of over enrollment last year and the closing of a few dorms), they would seem to be predicting ~52%, which is even more realistic. Since this percentage is probably about right, they won’t necessarily have spots open up.</p>
<p>Stupiddorkyidiot, your logic doesn’t make sense. The fact that Chicago doesn’t have a lot of housing means they should minimize their enrollment, but they’re also clearly aiming to be as selective as possible to boost their national reputation… it’s not like they’re only trying to minimize enrollment, so they <em>especially</em> accept students they don’t think will come so housing won’t be taken up. This would be the true “opposite” of yield protection, and it isn’t happening. Also, the idea that since their yield is already high they aren’t concerned about it any more is laughable. Colleges will always want to be more competitive and better liked in the same way corporations won’t stop seeking profits because they’ve reached some arbitrary level, like 10 million dollars a year (or 52/56/even 75% yield). I know from experience with my high school that students have been taken off the wait list immediately (before the May 1st date) after expressing interest (usually they didn’t show enough enthusiasm in their essays); this was even as admissions was realizing they were overenrolled. </p>
<p>Up until this admissions cycle, the College Board’s Big Future school guide hosted statistics about UChicago’s waitlist. I just did a Google Cache search, but I can’t find the information anymore. I THINK it said that there were 5,000 spots offered and 3,500 accepted, but I’m also having a weird suspicion it might have been 8,000/5,000. Considering I don’t remember this very well, I know the number of waitlist acceptances they ended up extending with odd clarity: 41. I find it easy to imagine these were all individual yield protection cases, scenarios where the candidates were superior enough that Chicago definitely wanted them but was afraid they would just go to HYP, etc.</p>
<p>Basically, even if everyone on the WL has an equal chance of getting off, 41/3500 is 1.17%. If you have great stats, Chicago was a 50/50 or low reach for you, and don’t think you showed enough interest in your essays and/or you didn’t communicate with your rep enough, it’s worth it to show more (late) interest and hope. Otherwise, not really.</p>
<p>For the record, I was deferred then waitlisted (so I’m obviously trying to use the numbers to convince myself not to hope anymore), and ~17 other kids from my school applied RD. Almost all of them were also waitlisted, but this may just be because we have a good relationship with them, and they don’t want to scare our future students off from applying. This is probably true of their WLing at all private schools - if they’re going to become more selective, they can’t have total apps decrease because people think acceptance is too unlikely to try for.</p>
<p>I think you misinterpreted my post - I didn’t mean the “opposite” of yield protection as you described it. What I meant was that they KNOW their yield is going to be high, which means they’re admitting fewer students so they don’t have to scramble together last-minute housing. (In short: we made the same point in our posts. Mine just wasn’t worded as well as yours.)</p>
<p>@dynamic alright fam, just my opinion, i wasn’t arguing. and i said about 2,000 not 2,000 exactly…</p>
<p>Does anyone know how many students were waitlisted?</p>
<p>@collegebound1717 - the waitlist stats only account for the people who accept their place on the wait list, therefore the information won’t be available until May 1st and it will most likely be underestimated. Last year I believe 1033 applicants accepted their place on the waitlist.</p>
<p>Where are you getting that number, braniac? I recently saw the following, which suggested 3,000, though that could have been offers instead those choosing to accept a place.</p>
<p>[Colleges</a> grow their waitlists, leaving more students in limbo - Chicago Tribune](<a href=“http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2012-04-23/news/ct-met-wait-list-20120423_1_admissions-officers-college-admissions-counseling-college-websites]Colleges”>http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2012-04-23/news/ct-met-wait-list-20120423_1_admissions-officers-college-admissions-counseling-college-websites)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I still stand by my original idea that the university may have strategically waitlisted more students this year than before because they’re hoping not to turn potential applicants for next year away, however.</p>
<p>I read that on another thread here but I must have seen the stats for 2009 an assumed lol</p>
<p>I believe they are deliberately not revealing the number of waitlisted applicants for whatever reason, but judging from this forum it seems to be quite a big number. Probably larger % wise than last year’s.</p>