the press releases tout selectivity. There are already rankings of lowest acceptance rates by number. I’d love to hear why you think chicago went test optional when there are clearly plenty of applicants and the most well known attribute of test optional is an increase in applications.
google “class of 2023 selective” . and see what comes up; college press releases touting it
@Marlowe1 Asking a question I honestly don’t know the answer to. When you say; “average test score levels and every other measure of excellence have risen during this period and are among the highest at the elite schools.”
Do you think going test optional would artificially raise the average test score measure? I would think lower scorer candidates would not offer their results and if accepted wouldn’t dilute the aggregate result. Sorry if I am misstating the methodology.
yes it’s tinfoil hat to point out chicago does ea, ED1, ED2 and now test optional and that has nothing to do with increasing applications and rejections and selectivity, which indirectly affects reputation. Just ask anyone trying to differentiate their product - elite/exclusive is a well known marketing technique that works.
I agree with this, also anyone want to argue why Chicago went test optional besides this…
https://www.koppelmangroup.com/blog/2018/6/14/why-did-the-university-of-chicago-become-test-optional
You keep shifting your ground, @anon145 . Are you now saying that test optional was also a rankings move? You’re making my point: To a hammer everything looks like a nail.
I never said test optional was done for anything other than boosting applications; it’s most verified effect in peer reviewed journals.
I’ve also never deviated from the fact that perception and reputation are indirectly effected by selectivity. So my ground has not shifted. Others have argued that since USNWR dropped yield/selectivity it has no effect on ranking; I have disagreed saying that selectivity/yield indirectly affect reputation/high school counselor surveys which ARE in USNWR. Everyone wants to go to the “hot” restaurant/night club since it’s so exclusive…
@anon145 - agreed that ED1/ED2 would help keep yield high. The question is why is it going even higher? Last year there was no Test Optional and no change in ED policy and yet yield jumped five points. We don’t know the impact of TO on anything at this point, but the switch didn’t seem to play a factor in application numbers since they increased only about 6% overall (pretty modest when compared to the double digits we are seeing for other top elite schools). That would have happened anyway. So TO didn’t seem to have an impact on admit rate or “selectivity.”
Test Optional at UChicago was introduced as part of the Empower Initiative so these admits have to be quite exceptional in their own right. Highly doubt they would be rejects from “test required” schools. UChicago’s big challenge will be to keep them from going to another top institution. So really doubt that TO would be helping yield either.
Anecdotally, the number admitted under TO seems to be quite small as well. The typical admit - and applicant - was expected to submit test scores.
Yes, Bowdoin’s admit rate is currently in single digits. But hasn’t it been Test Optional for a few decades now? I’d argue that something else might be driving that admit rate down.
Sure - do this and the results are about (in this order) Lehigh, Dartmouth, Harvard, Amherst and Haverford. Where is your discussion of those? UChicago has not made any press release… probably part of their nefarious plot!
I suspect it will, but we won’t know for a bit yet since this was the first year that has been in effect. Marlowe’s comments about having the top scores amongst elite schools was prior to the test-optional policy going into effect.
@Nocreativity1 the best verified/most repeated effect of test optional is about a 10% boost in application number. There’s a mild increase in average test scores since the college can bypass the lowest scorers for someone with a similar demographic who doesn’t report scores. (URM, pell grant etc). (bowdoin and bates for example have been test optional for a long time)
CC won’t let me post the link but google “Belascoetal_TestOptional.”
There’s no increase in URMs or low income with test optional
When you look at UChicago Class of 2022, the mid-50 range for ACT is 33-35. That’s BEFORE Test Optional. Would be very surprised if TO moves that range any higher.
Insert eye roll here. Guess what UChicago’s rank was for the couple of years prior to instituting ED1 and ED2? Hint - pretty much what it is now - #4 then, #3 now. Big, huge impact… not.
Guess how many other top 10 colleges have similar admissions policies? Hint - more than one and it hasn’t signficantly changed their results, either. But no discussion of those Evil Empires?
Love the link to the person who’s trying to sell consulting services yet doesn’t even know how rankings are calculated. Very authoritative.
Get over it. This obsession is just silly. You’re all pretty, too.
@JBStillFlying bowdoin just added ED2 so did Colby; It’s not hard - add ED2 add test optional and boost applications. Will be interesting to see if Williams and Amherst add ED2 soon. They probably don’t want to be less “selective” than colby and bowdoin.
as far as a small increase in apps for Chicago that is interesting, but we don’t know if the numbers for EA, ED1/2 were vs RD… Chicago would gladly take increases in EA/ED1/2 for losses in RD. So until breakdown of numbers hard to say. Also, everyone I know has gotten emails to apply to chicago(meaning kids know it doesn’t mean they’re special) and their reputation is not as generous with FA as some peer tippy top schools so they may be approaching a max.
Is that the source of your views, @anon145 ? It’s the merest would-be wised-up speculation by someone selling a product as an educational adviser. No one with any sense really believes that test-optional is appropriate for more than a tiny segment of Chicago applicants - those who have an especially compelling story that isn’t well-told by the stats. And, @Nocreativity1 , no one believes it is moving the needle as to scores and stats. Perhaps the policy will prove to be futile (it is part of a more general initiative to reach kids who have non-traditional backgrounds), but it is laughable to believe it was designed for these gaming reasons so dear to the hearts of some on this board.
“@Nocreativity1 the best verified/most repeated effect of test optional is about a 10% boost in application number.”
“There’s a mild increase in average test scores since the college can bypass the lowest scorers for someone with a similar demographic who doesn’t report scores.”
Class of 2021 Average SAT: 1500. Class of 2022: +25. Class of 2023 (reported): +15. Where’s the impact of Test Optional?
“(bowdoin and bates for example have been test optional for a long time)”
Marlowe1 wasn’t casting shade at all, and didn’t think of it as a form of manipulation.
UC’s stellar reputation for me isn’t a function of statistics or rankings. It’s a lifetime of first hand experience with alumni and students. Hearing their stories, respecting their intellect and seeing their impact. I don’t need a magazine to tell me it’s a very top school…I have personally experienced the product it produces and couldn’t be a bigger fan.
I will now put on my tin foil hat and go listen to my microwaves next instruction:)
Guessing chicago will be low on test optional admits. the question is how many test optional applications do they get? (which as a cynic I’ll argue is the point, boosting apps not necessarily admits)
“Just think about it like this — the University of Chicago will be able to offer admission to that recruited athlete or legacy applicant in spite of their low test scores. Because these students will no longer be required to submit their scores. And yet the school will still benefit from all of the students who submit fantastic scores. Those scores will still be used to calculate its all-important “US News & World Report” ranking. It is a win-win for the University of Chicago. The school has just figured this out before many of their competitors — and that’s precisely the right word for it since colleges are businesses”
unless they break down how many test optional kids they get applying vs admit it’s hard to know how they are using it. Also, the faculty should demand recruited athletes aren’t test optional.
If chicago starts winning D3 football championships I’ll be skeptical
:
“@JBStillFlying bowdoin just added ED2 so did Colby; It’s not hard - add ED2 add test optional and boost applications. Will be interesting to see if Williams and Amherst add ED2 soon. They probably don’t want to be less “selective” than colby and bowdoin.”
"as far as a small increase in apps for Chicago that is interesting, but we don’t know if the numbers for EA, ED1/2 were vs RD… "
“Chicago would gladly take increases in EA/ED1/2 for losses in RD.”
“So until breakdown of numbers hard to say.”
“Also, everyone I know has gotten emails to apply to chicago(meaning kids no it doesn’t mean they’re special) and their reputation is not as generous with FA as some peer schools so they may be approaching a max.”
But aren’t you wandering a bit off topic now?
Once again UChicago has become the subject of this thread. The real question is why? Most don’t bother with the math, or that acceptance rate is no longer considered, they just think somehow that UChicago games the system without any real concrete math to back it up. Somehow ZERO percent of something becomes something. Oh well same thing will happen next year.
Can we move this discussion to a dedicated topic in the U of Chicago forum? It seems played out and a bit off-topic.
Harvard REA + RD: 1,950 out of 43,330 (4.5%)
Columbia ED + RD: ~2,171 out of 42,569 (~5.1%)
Princeton SCEA + RD: 1,895 out of 32,804 (5.8%)
Yale SCEA + RD: 2,178 out of 36,843 (5.9%)
UChicago ED + EA + RD (5.9%)
Brown ED+RD: 2,553 out of 38,674 (6.6%)
MIT EA + RD: 1410 out of 21,312 (6.6%)
Duke ED + RD: 3,064 out of 41,613 (7.4%)
Penn ED + RD: 3,345 out of 44,960 (7.4%)
Dartmouth ED + RD: 1,876 out of 23,650 (7.9%)
Rice ED + RD: 2,364 out of 27,084 (8.7%)
Swarthmore ED1 + ED2 + RD: 995 out of 11,400+ (8.7%)
Bowdoin ED1 + ED2 + RD: ~831 out of 9,332 (~8.9%)
Johns Hopkins ED+RD: 2,950 out of 32,231 (9.2%),
Colby ED1 + ED2 + RD: 1,295 out of 13,584 (9.5%)
Cornell ED + RD: 5,183 out of >49,000 (~10.6%)
Amherst ED + RD: 1,144 out of 10,567 (10.8%)
USC: 7400 out of 67,000 (11%)
Barnard ED + RD: ~1,053 out of 9,319 (~11.3%)
Williams College ED+RD 1205 out of 9,715 (12.4%)
Tulane EA+ ED1+ED2+RD: ~5,400 out of 41,365 (~13%)
Pitzer ED1 + ED2: 532 out of ~4,409 (~13.2%)
Harvey Mudd ED1 + ED2 + RD: (13.4%)
WashU ED1 + ED2 + RD: ~3,556 out of ~25,400 (~14%)
Emory (Decatur) ED1 + ED2 + RD: 4512 out of 30,017 (15%)
Middlebury ED1+ED2 +RD: 1,547 out of 9,750 (15.9%)
NYU ED1+ED2+RD: 12,307 out of ~85,000 (~16% overall, 14.4% NY Campus)
Hamilton ED1+ED2+RD: ~1,334 out of 8,338 (16%)
Haverford ED1+ED2+RD: 801 out of 4,968 (16.1%)
Washington and Lee - 1,115 out of 6,178 (18.0%)
BU EA+ ED1+ED2+RD: ~11,260 out of 62,210 (~18.1%)
Georgia Tech EA+RD: 6940 out of 36936 (18.8%)
Emory (Oxford) - 3432 out of ~18,000 (19%)
Wellesley ED1+ED2+RD: ~1,298 out of 6,488 (20%)
Grinnell: ~1,696 out of 7,961 (~21.3%)
UVA RD+EA: 9,725 admits from 40,869 (23.8%)
Boston College EA+RD: ~9,500 out of 35,556 (26.7%)
Scripps ED1+ ED2 + RD: (29.8%)
Macalester ED1+ ED2 + RD: ~2,048 out of 6,598 (~31%)
Florida - main campus RD: 14,136 out of 41,407 (34.1%)
GWU ED1+ED2+RD: ~11,000 out of 27,071 (40.6%)
Georgia EA+RD: 13,050 out of 29,314 (44.5%)
Alphabetic order:
Amherst ED+RD: 1,144 out of 10,567 (10.8%)
Barnard ED + RD: ~1,053 out of 9,319 (~11.3%)
Boston College EA+RD: ~9,500 out of 35,556 (26.7%)
Bowdoin ED1 + ED2 + RD: ~831 out of 9,332 (~8.9%)
Brown ED+RD: 2,553 out of 38,674 (6.6%)
BU EA+ ED1+ED2+RD: ~11,260 out of 62,210 (~18.1%)
Colby ED1 + ED2 + RD: 1,295 out of 13,584 (9.5%)
Columbia ED + RD: ~2,171 out of 42,569 (~5.1%)
Cornell ED + RD: 5,183 out of >49,000 (~10.6%)
Dartmouth ED + RD: 1,876 out of 23,650 (7.9%)
Duke ED + RD: 3,064 out of 41,613 (7.4%)
Emory ED1 + ED2 + RD: 4512 out of 30,017 (15%)
Emory Oxford College- 3432 out of ~18,000 (19%)
Florida - main campus RD: 14,136 out of 41,407 (34.1%)
Georgia EA+RD: 13,050 out of 29,314 (44.5%)
Georgia Tech EA+RD: 6940 out of 36936 (18.8%)
Grinnell: ~1,696 out of 7,961 (~21.3%)
GWU ED1+ED2+RD: ~11,000 out of 27,071 (40.6%)
Hamilton ED1+ED2+RD: ~1,334 out of 8,338 (16%)
Harvard REA + RD: 1,950 out of 43,330 (4.5%)
Haverford ED1+ED2+RD: 801 out of 4,968 (16.1%)
Harvey Mudd ED1 + ED2 + RD: (13.4%)
Johns Hopkins ED+RD: 2,950 out of 32,231 (9.2%)
Macalester ED1+ ED2 + RD: ~2,048 out of 6,598 (~31%)
Middlebury ED1+ED2 +RD: 1,547 out of 9,750 (15.9%)
MIT EA + RD: 1410 out of 21,312 (6.6%)
NYU ED1+ED2+RD: 12,307 out of ~85,000 (~16% overall, 14.4% NY Campus)
Penn ED + RD: 3,345 out of 44,960 (7.4%)
Pitzer ED1 + ED2: 532 out of ~4,409 (~13.2%)
Princeton SCEA + RD: 1,895 out of 32,804 (5.8%)
Rice ED + RD: 2,364 out of 27,084 (8.7%)
Scripps ED1+ ED2 + RD: (29.8%)
Swarthmore ED1 + ED2 + RD: 995 out of 11,400+ (8.7%)
Tulane EA+ ED1+ED2+RD: ~5,400 out of 41,365 (~13%)
UChicago ED + EA + RD (5.9%)
USC: 7400 out of 67,000 (11%)
UVA RD+EA: 9,725 admits from 40,869 (23.8%)
Washington and Lee - 1,115 out of 6,178 (18.0%)
WashU ED1 + ED2 + RD: ~3,556 out of ~25,400 (~14%)
Wellesley ED1+ED2+RD: ~1,298 out of 6,488 (20%)
Williams College ED+RD 1205 out of 9,715 (12.4%)
Yale SCEA + RD: 2,178 out of 36,843 (5.9%)