GLADCHEMMS Admissions Data - admission is tough, but not a longshot

Prep School Admissions
1

I was curious about the actual number of students who apply to one or more GLADCHEMMS schools each year, versus the number of spots available.

For those interested, there are approximately 2,100 annual GLADCHEMMS spots and these 10 schools received around 18,700 applications in 2017. Extrapolating statistically from limited CC Prep Forum data (2016 & 2017 Prep Decision Threads with 120 responses), I estimated each prospective student applied to 3.5 GLADCHEMMS schools, implying roughly 5,300 students applied to these schools in 2017. Using anecdotal data I have assumed 85% of these accepted students actually decided to attend one of these schools.

The result was an adjusted admissions ratio of 46%: 2,100 spots for 4,500 prospective GLADCHEMMS students.

I have a Google Doc link to the spreadsheet. For each school the table shows # of applications; acceptance rate; # accepted; yield; spots available. Most of the data is recent and sourced from school websites, newspaper articles & press releases. I avoided Wikipedia, test prep and aggregation websites, and Google Search summary results.

2

MODERATOR’S NOTE

Keep in mind that such links are not allowed here, nor is asking users for the link.

3

3.5 Hah, then there’s me applying for nine :slight_smile:

1 Like
4

The legacy and other connected applicant pool is large, certainly upwards of 30% in the aggregate and likely significantly higher. On cc a few months ago we discovered that a non-GLADCHEMMS but reasonably “comparable” boarding school was upwards of 55% legacy and connected. Back those students out of the admit pool and the numbers will tilt decidedly towards the longshot side of the field.

5

You lost me at gladchemms…

6

^ I think Thacher is in the range of 65% legacy + connected - at least that was what was told to me by a parent of an applicant and confirmed by a Thacher alumna.

7

Siblings/legacies/faculty kids at Cate, Thacher and I would imagine other small schools, can be a significant part of the applicant pool. Often higher than 65% depending on the category (9th grade boarding boys for example). Because of that, they are less of a “sure thing” admissions-wise than at larger schools, because nobody wants to fill a class with siblings, no matter how qualified they are. At my daughter’s day school in NYC, almost every year there are more sibling/legacy applicants than there are K spaces. It’s tough to manage.

8

@SatchelSF - My understanding, on good authority, is that direct parent legacies are similar to other elite schools at around 10-14%. The percent of current siblings could be higher than that at other schools–since everyone seems to want to go. Very much a family school. I know that if you combine all possible connections the percent is well under 50%.

9

@ThacherParent … I do hope for DD’s sake that you’re right and that @SatchelSF is wrong. But what I’ve heard is closer to what @SatchelSF reported.

10

With proper respect paid to ThacherParent, I’ll call it GLADCHEMMS-TC. The absolute numbers will be different but the ratios probably very similar.

If we assume 15% of the applicant pool is Legacy and take them out (side note, a 2016 Lawrenceville student newspaper article stated the Legacy acceptance rate was 56%), then there are 1785 non-Legacy spots for 4,225 applicants, producing an admission/applicant ratio of 42%.

11

I suspect the acceptance rates for FA candidates are much lower.

12

I’ve seen the actual data for one of the schools you are including and the legacy acceptance rate is not near 56%. I really don’t think you can extrapolate from one data point at one school and assume it applies across the board at all schools. Multiply that fallacy by many data points and, IMO, the results start to become pretty meaningless.

13

Hello @doschicos - the 56% acceptance rate for Lawrenceville legacies didn’t affect the numbers. I assumed the incoming classes of the subject schools were composed of 15% legacies as per @ThacherParent .

14

A 50% acceptance rate for siblings & legacies doesn’t seem THAT far off to me @doschicos . Given the fact that it’s likely a qualified group with a high probability of matriculation and future donations (the more ties that a family has to a school, the more likely they are to donate consistently).

15

After further adjusting the numbers, there are about 2 qualified applicants for every generally available GLADCHEMMS spot.

1,778 general spots / 3600 qualified applicants = 49% (general spots available vs. general qualified applicants)

  1. PA states 75% of applicants meet “eligibility” requirements - in other words, 75% are qualified applicants, even if not admitted. Accordinglt I have adjusted the pool of qualified applicants down by 20% (1-80%) for all of GLADCHEMMS.

2100 spots for (4500 applicants less 20%) = 2100 spots for 3600 qualified applicants.

  1. Specific adjustments: 50% Legacy admission rate times 12% of applicant pool; 80% Development admit rate for 2% of pool; 50% Sibling admit rate for 5% of pool; 30% Elite Athletic recruit admit rate for 10% of pool; 50% Hook admit rate for 2% of pool; 25% URM admit rate for 5% of pool

6% plus 1.6% plus 2.5 % plus 3% plus 1% plus 1.25% = 15.35% of admitted pool will be Legacy, Development, Sibling, Elite Athletic, Hook, URM (LDSEHU)

2100 admits less 15.35% slots to LDSEHU = 1778 general spots / 3600 qualified applicants

= 1,778 / 3600 = 49% (general slots available vs. general qualified applicants)

The odds aren’t bad, and if your SSAT scores are 85% or above (the mean for half the schools is 85%, weighted average SSAT for all schools is 89%) your chances are really quite good if you check off most or all of the boxes (good grades, SSAT above 85%, strong ECs, demonstrated leadership or initiative, good interviews, good recommendations, good essays).

A hook is nice, but the majority of applicants, and most admitted kids, don’t have a hook.

Getting into a select group of elite universities is harder than getting into GLADCHEMMS-TC.

Good luck on M10 everyone.

16

Factor this into your model. In the last decade or so, most of the growth in the number of applications to academic elite boarding schools is coming from Chinese students. Many of these students present near perfect SSAT scores/grades.

Today roughly 20% of the applicant pool at academically elite schools are Chinese students. As one admissions officer told me during our visit, “We could fill our class two times over with students from China. We rarely take any as they are not a fit culturally with our school.”

So drop 15-20% off your total application base. These are students that are not going to be admitted.

17

Factor this into your model. In the last decade or so, most of the growth in the number of applications to academic elite boarding schools is coming from Chinese students. Many of these students present near perfect SSAT scores/grades.

Today roughly 20% of the applicant pool at academically elite schools are Chinese students. As one admissions officer told me during our visit, “We could fill our class two times over with students from China. We rarely take any as they are not a fit culturally with our school.”

So drop 15-20% off your total application base. These are students that are not going to be admitted.

18

@GreenIndian We were very surprised at one very highly rated school to see three candidates and their parents with someone who was clearly a coach. All were Chinese. The coach approached the AO, in a manner that wasn’t something you would see normally in the course of business in the US. She kind of half laughed, half bowed to them and then was obviously trying to impress both the AO and the parents. It was surreal. My kiddo asked me about it. I said, you have nothing to worry about that was a different category of applicant. Then they spent time talking with the candidates in Chinese after their interview. All were dressed extremely well and looking around like they were in a fancy restaurant.
I have also heard that for SATs, the answers are often published in China due to the time difference.
Honestly, I would not worry the US academic system creates good critical thinkers.

19

@GreenIndian That is such a good point to raise. AOs have told us, to paraphrase, they basically don’t care if international applicants have a 99% SSAT - it’s so commonplace, the score becomes a tertiary factor, and the focus becomes on interviews, ECs, and English proficiency).

(As an aside - walk through neighborhoods in Long Island and Queens - the tutoring/cram schools post SSAT and SAT scores with names attached on the windows of their retail stores - the scores are sky high, and as much a function of how much studying and repetition occurred as they are about educational aptitude).

So I am unclear how to adjust my stats. 15% of the pool of slots is International - but this includes well qualified applicants from South America, Africa, Europe and Asia. It is unclear how many of the adjusted 3600 applicants are International. I am sure that some of the “99% SSAT but no ECs” applicants are part of the 4,500 - 20% = 3600 that I have already adjusted for (the 20-25% that Andover refers to as not being qualified applicants).

If you have any further insight how I can adjust the qualified applicant slots and qualified applicants figures, please let me know.

20

“they basically don’t care if international applicants have a 99% SSAT - it’s so commonplace, the score becomes a tertiary factor, and the focus becomes on interviews, ECs, and English proficiency”

Cases of rampant test cheating also occur in some countries. I think Adcoms are aware of that.