Any info on admissions rates to Tufts and U Richmond? Anyone?
@19parent Stanford probably was being truthful. There isn’t much of a statistical advantage for most for the EA schools and it may be covered by those with hooks. But some of these schools with ED end up with half their final class in the ED pool and acceptance rates that are at least 3x the RD pool. And when those schools claim it’s only athletes they are not being truthful. I once had lunch with a person who happened to have been in admissions at a major (Ivy) school previously and I was curious and brought this topic up casually and he laughed out loud at the idea that there was no advantage. It’s one of those ubiquitous white lies among colleges with high ED admit rates. But again, you can’t look at a highly selective LAC with a 40-something percent ED admit rate and think those are your odds. But your odds do far somewhere meaningfully north of their RD rate, no matter what they claim in the info sessions.
Thanks that makes sense. It does seem like yield is becoming significantly more important as students are increasing the number of schools they are applying to. You just need to check the admission thread to see some students rattle off the 7-8 acceptances at top universities while others getting none. The best indicator that schools have that they will get accepted is EA/ED
Updating overall rates with Northwestern, NYU, Boston College and Bowdoin College:
Harvard (RD+SCEA) 1,962 out of 42,749 (4.6%)
Princeton (RD+SCEA) 1,941 out of 35,370 (5.5%)
Columbia (RD+ED) 2,214 out of 40,203 (5.5%)
Yale (RD+SCEA) 2,229 out of 35,306 (6.3%)
MIT (RD+EA) 1,464 out of 21,706 (6.7%)
Pomona (RD+ED) 713 out of 10,245 (6.9%)
Brown (RD+ED) 2,566 out of 35,438 (7.2%)
Duke (RD+ED) 3,097 out of 37,390 (8.3%)
Penn (RD+ED) 3,731 out of 44,491 (8.4%)
Northwestern (RD+ED) 3,392 out of 40,425 (8.4%)
Dartmouth (RD+ED) 1,925 out of 22,033 (8.7%)
Swarthmore (RD+ED) 980 out of 10,749 (9.1%)
Johns Hopkins (RD+ED) 2,894 out of 29,128 (9.9%)
Cornell (RD+ED) 5,288 out of >51,000 (10.3%)
Bowdoin (RD+ED1+ED2) ~935 out of 9,081 (10.3%)
Williams (RD+ED) 1,163 out of 9,559 (12.2%)
USC 8,258 out of 64,256 (12.9%)
Colby 1,602 out of 12,313 (13.0%)
Harvey Mudd (RD+ED) (14.5%)
WashU (RD+ED) (15%)
Tulane ~6,598 out of 38,813 (17%)
Wesleyan (RD+EDI+EDII) 2,186 out of 12,788 (17.1%)
Middlebury (RD+ED+Febs) 1,696 out 9,230 (18.4%)
Emory (RD+ED, excl. Oxford-only apps) ~5,135 out of 27,759 (18.5%)
Davidson ~1,066 out of 5,700 (18.7%)
Haverford 877 out of 4682 (18.7%)
Wellesley ~1,267 out of 6,670 (19%)
NYU (RD+ED1+ED2) 15,722 out of >75,000 (< 21.0, incl. 19% for NY campus)
BU ~14,184 out of 64,473 (22%)
Georgia Tech (RD+EA) ~7,832 out of 35,600 (22%)
UVA 9,850 out of 37,222 (26.5%)
BC (RD+EA) 8,400 out of >31,000 (< 27.1%)
VIllanova (RD+EA+ED) 6,545 out of 22,727 (28.8%)
Florida 14,866 out of 40,849 (36.4%)
Georgia (RD+EA) < 12,700 out of 26,500 (< 47.9%)
Santa Clara (RD+ED) ~ 7,954 out of 16,233 (49%)
@19parent My D15 applied ED1 to Pomona (she’s now a junior). She was high stats but unhooked. Originally we planned on her applying SCEA to Stanford where she was a legacy. But once she decided she preferred Pomona, our reasoning was that a lot of her competition in the “high stats but unhooked” category wouldn’t be in the ED1 round because they’d be doing some form of restricted EA to HYPS. So we hoped she had a better chance of standing out in the ED1 pool than in the RD round, when all the kids who were deferred by HYPS would apply. Don’t know if that reasoning was sound, but she got in, and I figuring getting into Pomona as an unhooked female is a big victory.
Olin: http://www.olin.edu/news-events/2018/admission-offers-go-out-class-2022/
125 out of 882 (14.2%)
How interesting! When I started compiling data on admissions, there were three schools known to obfuscate data or reporting blatantly false information. WUSTL/WashU was known to overstate their applications numbers by not segregating the mere requests for information from real applications. University of Chicago was extremely creative in sharing early numbers that could never be verified nor correlated with official numbers. And then, among the LACs, there was Middlebury obfuscating the real numbers through the erroneous reporting of their Spring admissions. All of this “vetted” by the duplicity or complicity of the USNews and their guru, Bob Morse who never bothered to implement a quality control system that should ferret out perennial distorters.
Accordingly, citing the transparency of Middlebury as an example is a bit peculiar, as their practices have never changed in the past 15 years.
Oh well, certain things never change - although WUSTL has abandoned a few of their old habits and has become more transparent.
As ED2 has become more prominent and a necessary strategy for many, the near complete lack of transparency in data on the ED2 process from schools that use it is a real disservice to applicants.
@xiggi What exactly is Middlebury obfuscating?
I did a deep dive on them a couple years years ago after my son was accepted and was considering them (he didn’t end up going). But when I explored their website I found a wealth of info – very detailed reports on their entire operating costs, what they paid professors (not named), how they compared to their peers, exactly how many were in each major, how many were offered vs admitted, inclusive fall and winter term starts, etc. After that I tried finding similar levels of reports on other private colleges and of those I looked at none matched it. I have no connection to the school – no kids there, no history – so it doesn’t really matter to me. Just saying that was my previous experience, reinforced here with the detailed breakdown of their admits on the previous pages. Very few schools report exactly how many they admitted in ED1 vs ED2 vs RD only, how many were deferred, how many of the deferrals were later admitted, etc.
@bronze2 Agreed. That’s why Middlebury reporting it was so interesting. Rate between ED1 to ED2 to RD dropped from almost 50% to approx. 30% to approx. 15%.
@19parent while ED breakdown into legacy and athletes are tough, it should be possible to figure out. At a DIII school there are no scholarship athletes for example. A top D1 school like Stanford has 300 athletic scholarships for the 900 varsity athletes in their 36 teams, presumably going ED to recruited athletes at a rate of about 75 per year. https://www.stanforddaily.com/2015/02/22/the-price-of-athletics-at-stanford/
Some recruited athletes don’t get scholarships (or share scholarships) so perhaps 100 of the ED spots are taken by athletes? That’ll impact numbers materially but doesn’t negate the ED advantage.
@bronze2 From what I’ve seen this year across LACs, ED2 has been a catch-all/staging area for a variety of purposes. Some recruited athletes are deferred from ED1 to ED2 if they need to do more work raising their GPA or test scores. Some schools defer to ED2 a percentage of candidates who aren’t accepted to ED1 and then defer them to RD, essentially making it a WL situation. And some schools defer candidates who applied ED2 to RD. So for schools it’s very difficult to say what the precise admit rate is for ED2 because you have so many applications coming and going during the cycle.
In general, for schools who do report ED1 and ED2 rates, one trend I’ve seen is that admit rates are ED1>ED2>RD. That’s maybe the only safe guesstimate to make.
more recent announcement from Emory (another obfuscator, no common data set, confusing releases).
http://news.emory.edu/stories/2018/03/er_admission_2018/campus.html
Note the total applicants is given as applicants to Emory University, but admissions are given as admits to Emory College and Oxford College, without exact details as to each category.
Two days ago, the number of applications was given in another Emory-related publication as 27,759. Not entirely clear if that was just Emory College or Emory University. http://emorywheel.com/acceptance-rate-drops-18-5/
But whether it is 5103 Emory College admits / 27759 or 5103 / 27982, we get respectively <18.4% or 18.2% to one decimal place. If the Emory College admit rate is 18.5% to one decimal place, something is missing from the announcement and it’s not clear what that is.
@xiggi Good to see you posting again.
Citivas
This: http://www.middlebury.edu/admissions/apply/february
They count the above applications in their April numbers but do not include the admitted students in the reported numbers.
Anyone got any statistics for the UCs? Tufts? U Richmond?
- To be clear, here are the reports to analyze:
http://www.middlebury.edu/system/files/media/Admissions%20Template%20Summary%202016.pdf
Applications 8819
September Admits 1423
February Admits 252
http://www.middlebury.edu/system/files/media/ACTIVE%20%20CDS_2016-2017_0.pdf
C1 Total applied 8819
C1Total admitted 1423
Admit Rate 16%
How about (1423+252)/8819? And Admit Rate 19%
@xiggi That explains a lot. but not sure it helps answer the problem below (may be it does!)
I am having a hard time grasping the Middlebury release, especially between their overall acceptance rate of 18.4% and the RD rate of 17.2%. It seems to imply (i) an ED1&2 rate of only 23.6%, and (ii) a number of ED1&2 applicants totaling around 1689, which is way higher than the 834 ED applicants in the 2017 Middlebury common data set.
Here is my understanding of the Middlebury release http://www.middlebury.edu/newsroom/archive/2018-news/node/569490, which reads:
“MIDDLEBURY, Vt. – Middlebury College has offered admission to 1,297 students who applied as regular decision candidates for the Class of 2022. They join the 399 accepted through Middlebury’s early admissions program in December and February, and bring the total number of admitted students to 1,696. In all, the students were selected from a pool of 9,230 applicants, the largest in the College’s history. Middlebury admitted 17.2 percent of its regular decision applicants. The overall acceptance rate, including those who applied early decision, was 18.4 percent.”
ED+RD acceptance rate is 1696 / 9230 = 18.4%.
RD rate of 17.2%: as 1297 are admitted, RD pool would be 7,541
So ED1&2 pool must be 1689 (9230 total apps minus 7541 RD apps).
So overall ED1&2 admit rate of only 399/1689=23.6%.
common data set from Middlebury had 915 in 2016 and 834 in 2017 in the ED applicants values, with about 400
admitted ED in each year. ED admits were ~400 this year, but can the ED pool have gone up by so much? from 900 to 1700?
How should we incorporate the Feb admits into these numbers?
@bronze2:1,297 RD candidates were accepted. It’s likely that approximately 1,000 were WAITLISTED. You’re omitting those folks from your calculations.
Regarding the CDS–
Middlebury is accurately reporting stats using the parameters/instructions established on the CDS:
First-time, first-year, (freshmen) students: Provide the number of degree-seeking, first-time, first-
year students who [bold]applied, were admitted, and enrolled (full- or part-time) in Fall 2016[/bold]. Include early
decision, early action, and students who began studies during summer in this cohort.
@arcadia how or where should one use the 1000 waitlist number to make the numbers make more sense?
I am not disputing the 2016/17 common data set numbers. it’s just that the numbers for this year’s release is hard to reconcile with prior year numbers in a consistent way. Of course, things might have changed drastically and Middlebury did get ~1689 ED applicants. But that is the only way I can make sense of this year’s numbers, from my read of the release.