Class 2018 EA applicant pool was very strong

Colleges and Universities A-Z University of Chicago ✅
1

<p>As we know UChicago has made great progress on the admission front in recent years. I am just curious to see how strong its applicant pool is as now.</p>

<p>I have dug into the class 2018 EA result threads and gathered some statistics reported by students. I have only collected four kinds of hard data - gender, race, SAT/ACT scores, major awards. There are many intangibles like extracurricular, essays, recommendations, etc. which are hard to compare.</p>

<p>Here are the class 2018 Deferral/Reject stats - 21 students reported:</p>

<p>Male Female Asian White Hispanic Black Other<br>
8 13 7 12 0 1 1
38% 62% 33% 57% 0% 5% 5%</p>

<p>For testing scores I have picked up the higher score only once- either SAT (12) or ACT (9)</p>

<p>SAT (25%) SAT(75%) SAT(>75%) Avg ACT (25%) ACT(75%) ACT(>75%) Avg<br>
2100 2305 2350 32 35 35.5</p>

<p>SAT range (2030 - 2380) ACT range (29-36)</p>

<p>There were two students with major awards (Intel/Siemens, Olympics, others).</p>

<p>41 students reported to be admitted into class 2018:</p>

<p>Male Female NA Gender Asian White Hispanic Black Other<br>
20 20 1 14 17 5 3 2
49% 49% 2% 34% 41% 12% 7% 5%</p>

<p>There were 26 SATs and or 15 ACTs</p>

<p>SAT (25%) SAT(75%) SAT(>75%) Avg ACT (25%) ACT(75%) ACT(>75%) Avg<br>
2255 2330 2378 33 35 35.7</p>

<p>SAT range (2070 - 2400) ACT range (33-36)</p>

<p>There were three students with major awards (Intel/Siemens, Olympics, others).</p>

<p>One can see the class 2018 EA applicant pool was very strong (Deferral/Reject + Admit). As expected the admit stats are higher then those of Deferral/Reject's. The number of reported Deferral/Reject students is smaller than the number of admit - maybe they were a little bit disappointed to report and moved on.</p>

<p>The data sample is small and may not be accurate but it is correlated to the class 2017 freshman profile, more or less. </p>

<p>First from the sample data it does not seem many unqualified students applied - due to UChicago's reach-out effort. I believe students were smart enough to know their chances.</p>

<p>Second it also indicates UChicago tries to diversify its student body while admit the best possible. It does not try to protect yield not to admit the best students (perfect/near perfect testing scores, major awards).</p>

<p>Last it does seem the admission process is indeed mysterious - perfect/near perfect testing scores, major awards were not admitted into EA.</p>

<p>It will be interesting to see how strong the RD applicant pool will be.</p>

2

<p>OK, you can’t infer much from CC. There’s too much selection bias.</p>

<p>Here are the statistics from EA, straight from the admissions office:</p>

<p>Admit Rate: 11.6%
Average Admitted SAT: 1504
Average Admitted ACT: 33</p>

<p>With UChicago’s high range of standardized test scores, medians are undoubtedly higher than averages. I expect that the median admitted SAT was around 1520 and the median admitted ACT was 34.</p>

3

<p>Also, you can’t infer the quality of the applicant pool as a whole from any of the statistics provided. We can’t tell whether it was stronger or weaker than in years past. We can only say that, given the higher admitted SATs, the TOP of the pool was probably slightly stronger.</p>

<p>Of course there’s no yield protection. Then again, only rejects and blatant anti-UChicago trolls ever claimed that there was. The 1504 figure obviously is proof against that. Of course, there are still 1400 admits and 1600 rejects, since there are plenty of 1600ers who are testing trolls and plenty of 1400ers who are much more intelligent and ambitious.</p>

4

<p>Where did you get the class 2018 EA admission stats? </p>

<p>You said it was from the admission office. I could not find it anywhere. Is it public yet?</p>

5

<p>The data isn’t public. It was only told to alumni interviewers.</p>

6

<p>phuriku,</p>

<p>By chance, do you have information on how many people were deferred?</p>

7

<p>Usually official stats are high level aggregates without much detailed information. </p>

<p>E.g., a report reveals the 25% and 75%, maybe the mean testing scores. But it does not report the distribution of them. How about the averages of the top quartile and bottom quartile. </p>

<p>Even though the sample data is small from CC I believe most of the data are real - students report after a decision comes out to celebrate or to vent out. etc.</p>

<p>From this year’s EA results I can see the average of the top quartile of admitted testing scores is quite high. The average of the bottom quartile of Deferral/Reject is not low either. It may indicate the strength of the application pool - if the sample data makes sense.</p>

<p>I have also found something interesting (could not get them from the official stats) are the major awards reported. There were 3 for admitted and 2 for Deferral/Reject (surprise). If a student can win some prestigious awards it means she is bright academically.</p>

<p>Factoring into the fact a student cannot apply to SCEAs while applying to UChicago EA some top students may consider UChicago very seriously.</p>

<p>BTW from your personal experience what is your impression after you have interviewed some applicants this year? That will be a first hand report.</p>

8

<p>Phuriku, do you know how many people applied in total for this year? The university hasn’t released this yet, and the RD deadline passed a week ago.</p>

9

<p>

</p>

<p>Correction. You just made it public. Public, but in typical Chicago fashion, unofficial and unverifiable because of the absence of a released Common Data Set and the inclusion of the EA numbers in the CDS. </p>

<p>That kind of data should hardly be a state secret. It is easy to figure out that Chicago has and will accept between 1300 and 1350 in its EA round. A number that continues to correspond to its anticipated enrollment. A statistic that a lot more telling than the admit ratio deflated by marketing campaigns. </p>

<p>When will Chicago understand the value of transparency? Has Ted not be gone for long enough?</p>

10

<p>For all those inquiring, I don’t have RD statistics. As far as I know, the admissions office hasn’t released them yet.</p>

<p>xiggi: We both know your dissatisfaction is exaggerated. Releasing data via a Common Data Set is hardly official or verifiable - other schools that have released such “verifiable” statistics were shown to have faked their SAT scores.</p>

<p>Transparency w.r.t. detailed statistics is overrated. There’s not a whole lot of information that can be gleaned from a Common Data Set that you can’t already grasp from UChicago’s existent data sets. Once again, you’re just looking for an argument.</p>

11

<p>^Oh, really? Actually, what a US News survey consists of is most of all sections of the common data set except G and H (financial) plus a lot detail that isn’t in the CDS. So why can’t Chicago spill the beans as to what it is submitting to US News instead?</p>

<p>Wesleyan (US News Main Survey) - <a href=“http://www.wesleyan.edu/ir/images/USNews1213.pdf[/url]”>http://www.wesleyan.edu/ir/images/USNews1213.pdf&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p>Kenyon (US News Main Survey) - <a href=“http://documents.kenyon.edu/instresearch/websurveys2012-13/usnews2012-13.pdf[/url]”>http://documents.kenyon.edu/instresearch/websurveys2012-13/usnews2012-13.pdf&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p>So where’s Chicago’s link?</p>

12

<p>^ alicejohnson, do you spend countless hours going through CC just so that you can comment on UChicago posts that you don’t agree with? I hope that you’re not even remotely representative of the of the Duke student body.</p>

<p>Seriously, what’s with the obsession?</p>

13

<br>

<br>

<p>It is not overrated. And neither very complicated. All that is needed is for the admissions’ office to release the numbers on one of their sites. Ever wonder why dear Grace can pen fifty lines on the Chicago site about the class of 2018, but not find it worthwhile to share how many students were accepted. Seriously! </p>

<p>Fwiw, do you know of any real excuses for not releasing the CDS forms? After all, Chicago has to release the information to the federal government, and the school has surely found how convenient it is to supply the information to the … people who developed the CDS. </p>

<p>I understand why this can be irritating to read over and over. And to realize that Chicago could be a lot more transparent. The truth hurts. Always does.</p>

14

<p>Phuriku,</p>

<p>Could you tell me where to find this data (that peer colleges have released, either in the common data set or otherwise):</p>

<ul>
<li><p>The number of students deferred and rejected in the early pool? (For figures on Harvard, Stanford, etc. see here: [Early</a> programs not created equal | Yale Daily News](<a href=“http://yaledailynews.com/blog/2014/01/24/early-programs-not-created-equal/]Early”>Early programs not created equal - Yale Daily News))</p></li>
<li><p>Enrollment by ethnicity for the entire undergraduate college (not just the incoming class)? This is available in any common data set.</p></li>
<li><p>Total number of students waitlisted last year, and number of students taken off the waitlist? (Available on any common data set.)</p></li>
<li><p>How much does UChicago spend on both need-based and non-need based aid (e.g. merit scholarships)? (Available on any common data set.)</p></li>
<li><p>How many students applied for and received aid, and how many students whose need was fully met? (Available on any common data set.)</p></li>
<li><p>What’s the distribution of degrees conferred (e.g. how many major in economics, physics, etc.)? (Available on CDS.)</p></li>
</ul>

<p>I can’t for the life of me find any of the above information. You indicate that UChicago has all the info available, although perhaps not in one centralized place. Can you link me to the relevant links?</p>

<p>Or, as I suspect, does the University simply not disclose much of this material information? I’ve looked pretty hard for a lot of the above, and can’t find it. Why not release it and - even better - release it in a way (with the CDS) that is easily digestible? </p>

<p>I agree with Xiggi on this. UChicago hiding the ball is frustrating here, and doesn’t provide info that is of interest to applicants - info that virtually all the other top schools disclose willingly.</p>

15

<p>Cue7 – a lot of that information (the stuff that is on common data sets) is available through the National Center on Education Statistics’ College Navigator website, [College</a> Navigator - National Center for Education Statistics](<a href=“http://www.nces.ed.gov/collegenavigator/]College”>College Navigator - National Center for Education Statistics), although you can’t go back and look at previous years easily. It also does not have the waitlist information, or break out EA.</p>

<p>The Registrar’s page has links to the Registrar’s quarterly reports of enrollment, which tell you how what majors have been declared by everyone in the college, including second and third majors, as of the fourth week of each quarter.</p>

<p>Since Chicago commits to meet full need for all domestic students accepted, I’m not sure I see the utility of giving numbers on how many students’ need was fully met, unless all of the other numbers are broken out by nationality status.</p>

16

<p>JHS,</p>

<p>The College Navigator is great, but it doesn’t provide all the info other schools readily provide (e.g. amount of merit aid given and to how many students, waitlist information, EA breakdown, etc.). Also, as you note, many schools post their Common Data Sets for many years - which makes it much easier to track changes over time.</p>

<p>Why doesn’t UChicago just do the same thing? Heck, why has UChicago STILL not announced its application numbers for 2013-14? We still have no idea how many people applied. Most other colleges released this info weeks ago. </p>

17

<p>Which other schools did? I just know Tufts and Kenyon’s numbers. </p>

18

<p>I am aware of some has reported recently (NW, Brown, WashU, Penn, Princeton). It is a little bit weird many still have not reported yet since it is already February. One reason I can think of is due to the Common App glitches. </p>

19

<p>Not only was the Class of 2018 EA applicant pool very strong, but according to info I heard during our visit last week, the matriculation rate of the EA pool is way ahead of expectations, meaning that the acceptance rate for the RD pool is likely to be much lower than in years past.</p>

20

<p>DGDzDad: How was your visit? </p>