Compared to the Class of 2020, the acceptance rate for the Class of 2021 has increased (8.7% vs. 7.8%) though yield also increased (72% vs. 66%). The Class of 2021 has 1,735 students compared to 1,591 for Class of 2020.
Note that this was the first year UChicago rolled out early decision.
Seems like early decision was a bust. Thoughts?
Wow that’s a huge jump in class size! ED seems to have been effective in boosting the yield, but I wonder if there’s more at play to cause the decline in applications overall.
Looks like yield places UC behind only Harvard and Stanford among “elite” universities. (Leaving the academies out as special cases.)
Nice to admit people who want to attend. If that was the goal of ED, it was at least somewhat successful. And increased total enrollment suggests the yield increase may have been larger than anticipated.
Wait, how is that a “bust?” I’m not going to bother to do the math (although I’m sure that some obsessive person is about to do it for me), but it seems like the only reason that the admissions rate increased is because they decided to increase the class. If they had kept the class in the 1500s, the acceptance rate would have been unchanged.
Exactly, @ThankYouforHelp - unless they were purposefully trying to increase class size, this would appear to be a major screwup. At the risk of my appearing “obsessive” ;), consider this: Had they admitted 2,200 students, their admit rate would have remained 7.9% (2200/27694). 200 fewer admits might well have translated to a class size of around 1600, similar to the prior year. That’s a yield of right under 73% which is pretty much where they ended up.
Instead, looks like they admitted about 2400 students (27694 * .087) which is only 100 fewer than were admitted in 2016. With TWO separate binding plans, they admitted only 100 fewer students and you have to ask yourself WHY they did that? Two explanations off the bat: 1) the stats look REALLY BAD from the ED’s they admitted and not enough quality RD to make up for that; or 2) they were purposefully trying to increase the class size by a good amount.
Well you have the average SAT as 1499, so it can’t be 1), or we just don’t know why they admitted so many with two ED rounds. Albeit mistakes/surprises can happen when you radically change your admissions policies from the previous year. This years numbers should be more telling.
This is a significant yield jump which puts them in the top 3. The only thing i don’t like is the drop in overall applications.
Like it has been previously stated, that tends to happen when Chicago makes the news for its crime/murder rates. Personally it doesn’t cause me any concern when you look closely at the problem and where exactly it’s occurring.
@CU123 that 1490 number was from Nondorf, correct? The problem there is we don’t know whether he was referring to old (equivalent) or new SAT #'s. If new, then the concorded “old” is 1460 (the 25th percentile from Class of 2020 so bad news). If “old” then no change from Class of 2020 (good news). I know we’ve all been around the block on that before and can’t recall whether it was resolved. The way he was sounding at our local accepted event it reminded me of someone trying to lie with statistics. Maybe it’s his perpetually happy voice that caused me some suspicion.
In any case, the Class of 2021 Profile should hopefully be up on the admissions website soon and mystery solved - right? 
You don’t have a one-year dip of 3,700 applicants (12%) just because your city’s crime rate is discussed in an unflattering manner. And while there may have been a spike in the reporting during 2016, the higher crime rate had been going on for a few years. Other factors should also be considered. The two main ones that affect the university directly would be the more complex admissions plan, and the Ellison “no safe spaces” letter. Both were revealed around the same time and could easily have caused a student to strike UChicago from the list (esp. given the amount of time you need to invest in those essays).
Nondorf was very clear in meetings that this class has the highest SAT/ACT ever in the history of the college…
The Elison letter, I am sure, turned many off but also garnered kudos and was seen as a positive by many. My guess is, it was a wash.Students were likely reluctant to put in the extra essay work for Uchicago RD as they viewed the admissions chances to be very low in light of the two ED’s.
@Chrchill I’d be delighted if that were the case about SAT scores, and we’ll know for sure once they are put on the website. Would have had no bearing on our kid’s (or our) decision. Interesting, however, that Nondorf also said “around 8%” for the admit rate when it’s actually closer to 9%. No one expects the Admissions director to round UP .3% but are we cool with him rounding DOWN by .7% while thinking he’s completely credible? Nondorf’s a sales guy, tbh, and his outlook is going to be rosy and optimistic, but perhaps a bit vague on the exact numbers. And that’s ok . . . as long as the real numbers are made available in a timely fashion.
@JBStillFlying …not showing Nondorf much love here…anyway, as you said, all will be revealed in due time.
The biggest story here - by far - is the low number of total applications. Chicago had more application options - EA, ED, ED2, RD - than any of its immediate peers. Yet, Chicago only received 27,694 applications. In comparison, Brown, Duke, Columbia etc. received in the range of 33,000-36,000 apps, despite having fewer app options.
Why, with a big marketing campaign, a high USNWR ranking, and so many application options, did Chicago receive 20% fewer apps than its peers?
Well that is a difficult question to answer with any certainty. Anecdotally,
Here are the reasons on CC
Any others?
1, 2, 3, and 5 all existed before the 2016-17 admission cycle.
@JBStillFlying You hit on the main reason my kid didn’t apply last year: the Ellison letter. Although its argument was unexceptional – who doesn’t love free exchange of thought & robust critical debate yada yada.-- the tone, at least to one 17-year-old, was negative (sneering and obnoxious) where it could have been positive. There were a lot of universities to consider & you can’t apply everywhere.
@CU123 - as @JBStillFlying said, almost all your reasons applied two years ago, but Chicago received MORE applications two years ago - almost 32,000, I think.
So Chicago created MORE application options this past cycle, but received FEWER applications. How is that possible?
True, but the publicity has a more dramatic for #1 then in previous years. Personally I think it is related to #1 and not the Ellison letter. I also believe that Chicago has been in the news for its murder rate enough this year to affect applications again. JMHO. In totality the other reasons only compound #1, so if I don’t think its safe but I might still apply but its also a lot of writing…