<p>look at the worm try to squirm. all of a sudden cornell has an ed rate of around 40%. "about the same as uchi." I don't think so bro. what you conveniently leave out is that cornell has an overall admit rate of around 24%, well below that of uchi. yes, they have way many more applicants than uchi, but that is a product of it being a lot more desirable and well rounded than uchi. btw, once an ed applicant gets deferred they are freed from their obligation and any subsequent admission does not count towards the ed admit rate. therefore, cornell's ed rate is still only 40% not the misleading 60% that you try to smear another school with. now on to swarthmore:</p>
<p>The PR guidebook screwed up copying the data from the Swarthmore Common Data set. They used a figure of 1385 acceptances (they double counted the male acceptances). This caused them to publish an incorrect acceptance rate figure of 38% instead of the correct 25%. This obviously makes the yield calcuation incorrect. They published 26% instead of the correct figure of 39%.</p>
<p>USNEWS managed to accurate copy the numbers from the Swarthmore Common Data Set for fall 2004:</p>
<p>also, when i do go off on a rant, i make sure what i say is correct. i don't puprosely go out and manipulate numbers to make the school of my choice appear better than it really is. making a mistake is one thing, but to intentionally mislead as you have done over and over again for the sake of ego is just reprehensible.</p>
<p>I was comparing ED to EA, all references to Cornell were in regards to ED admit rate. Look it up. The Chart I linked from Swarthmore came from their 2005 data set, not the 2004 in your link (which when clicked on did not work). The data are from the Swarthmore College 2005 Factbook (Swarthmore College Office of Institutional Research). </p>
<p>There have been many many discussions on the board of how to interpret EA or Ed acceptance rates. It is acknowledged that the rate of admission for all who apply ED or EA is greater than the ED or EA statistics show when those deferred who are later admited are calculated as part of the analysis. This is very useful for students to know, because ED admit rates are often even higher than published. If one has a problem with the ED rate of 41.7 for Cornell, then write a letter to the editor of the Yale Daily News <a href="http://www.yaledailynews.com/article.asp?AID=27692%5B/url%5D">http://www.yaledailynews.com/article.asp?AID=27692</a></p>
<p>"Dartmouth College, the University of Pennsylvania and Cornell University were less selective in their early decision admission processes, admitting 33.6 percent, 34 percent and 41.7 percent of their applicants respectively." (January 10, 2005)</p>
<p>i don't know if there are many ways to interpret an ed rate, but most people use what's in the guidebooks and in cornell's case it's 40%, you can do all the mental gymnastics you want to cya, but anyone reading these postings rely upon the standard set of numbers. the last sentence you posted is no big whoop, everyone knows that almost all colleges are less selective in their ed process. the bottom line is still that even on ed, they were more selective than uchi during their rd process. none of this should obscure the fact that when you use made up statistics, it damages your credibility, not that you care since all you seem to want to do is convince readers as to why uchi should be considered as desirable as an ivy, which it is not.</p>
<p>also, looking at your link and your data, it appears that even you are confused by your own information. if what you provided on your link are 2005 data as to my 2004 (i don't know if what i provided is 2004 or 2005, i copied it off another posting) then the graph shows that yield is up over 40% while admits were down into the low 20's. do you actually know what you are talking about or are you just so blinded and upset that uchi's high admit and low yield confirms that uchi is not as desirable as you hope? your postings are a mess.</p>
<p>Indeed I did misread the Swarthmore legend, as did the Princeton Review. I will let anyone who reads these threads decide on credibility of posts, I do cite my sources, which can lead to correction. </p>
<p>The data and analyses are often complex and are used to help inform students. As for UChicago's high admit rate, I wish it could be higher, not lower. Chicago has been considered one of the nation's top schools for a very long time, even when its admit rate was 60% or higher. My only concern was that students not consider Chicago as it is today a true safety, no matter what the student's test scores are. But that case has been stated earlier.</p>
<p>you are also hoping that noone follows the yale link, because that link refers to a story about ed admit rates, but does not substantiate any of your claims about deferred applicants being subsequently admitted and being tacked on to the original ed admit rates. you should be ashamed of yourself for trying so overtly to confuse and mislead. do you have any credibility left?</p>
<p>you are entirely correct that the data and analysis are complex. students don't need you further confusing them with made up numbers. they should also realize that just because you provide a link to a source does not mean that the link corroborates any of your assertions. most people would assume that, but they need to be forewarned where your links are concerned. </p>
<p>I also know that you don't really mean what you say about the 60%. the 40% is just barely on the precipice of acceptability to the ivy credentialed who apply. any higher and uchi would lose an exponential amount of prestige in the eyes of our graduating seniors and all the apps that it gets as a safety for the ivy's would dwindle which would force uchi to accept even more just to fill out their class.</p>
<p>In the 1970's UChicago's admit rate was about 60%, it was considered as prestigious then as it is now. I see no reason why that would change. </p>
<p>As far as the deferred from ED analysis, this has been discussed and analyzed extensively on the various CC forums. I never said the Yale article discussed the deferred analysis, that is one of the frequent misreadings that are typically ignored when pointed out. I will let others decide if any comment or information is helpful, continuing this thread is not.</p>
<p>another frequent misreading committed all the time concerns the swarthmore yield rate. everyone on this board wishes that someone would be able to understand whatever it is they are posting. concerning the yale link, it was provided amidst some mumbo jumbo nonspeak that was to obscure the fact that a ficticious 60% ed rate for cornell was cited. the link was also provided to highlight that if anyone had any issues with the use of ed, they should take it up with yale. i will grant that this was a fairly sophisticated method by which to confuse the general public into believing that yale also concurred with the practice of adding deferred ed candidates, subsequently admitted to the ed admit rate. this is not a practice used by any university, no statistics are ever given concerning subsequent admits, yet a ficticious 60% figure was used to paint uchi in a better light. the only misreading i find here is that idad misread his audience and now is faced with a severe credibility issue and is trying to push his mistatements under the rug. how does one misread a graph that he himself posts to corroborate one of his points. kind of makes one look like an idiot, wouldn't you say? unless the intent was to mislead.</p>
<p>I feel compelled to say something here. I am not going to get into the rights and wrongs of these statistics or your positions on this issue but, frankly, you are beating a dead horse. </p>
<p>Anyone who reads this thread and others understands that you generally do not agree with what ** idad ** is saying and that you feel his statistics are flawed. It is further your opinion that there is an intentional attempt to mislead on ** idad's ** part and that UChicago, while a good school, is not as strong as some would believe. I believe that is a fair statement of your position. </p>
<p>I have no problem with your assessment of the school or the statistics. Everyone is entitled to an opinion. But I think you've gone beyond the bounds in repeatedly suggesting that there was an intentional attempt to "mislead" on ** idad's ** part. There is a point where discussion merely becomes a veil for "attack'. Moreover, saying something two or three times is legitimate information; repeating the same argument another dozen times only has the effect of prodding a reaction in an endless, empty cycle.</p>
<p>And, no, I won't be responding publicly if you do a counter post on this thread. I fear I would only get sucked into a pointless back and forth. The appeal of a public forum is too strong. If you'd like me to respond and explain my position further, I'll be happy to. Just drop me a p.m. and I will respond with the same.</p>
<p>cammi: you think i've gone beyond the bounds, but that it is ok to post statistics on this board that are clearly misleading in an attempt to support a position? I also believe that everyone is entitled to their opinion, but find it repulsive when one takes a position of knowing authority, yet clearly misrepresents stats and facts to support his claims. when taken to task, the only response is that they misread their own evidence in support of their position? or that they never said that a link provided would support a position when it was clear that the supposition of the argument was provided by the link. please..that is so grade school.</p>
<p>what idad may have to offer prospective students concerning the actual functioning of uchi may be valuable (though i am not so certain anymore since he makes so much stuff up), when reading some of his postings, he is clearly a shill for the school and when backed into a corner, either uses support that does not relate to his position or out and out misleads. i also don't agree that if someone repeats something two or three times, it is information. if the facts are wrong, i'm not referring to a subjective opinion mind you, but actual numbers, then it is not information, but propaganda.</p>
<p>lastly, i don't know about idad, but i certainly object to you calling him a "dead horse"</p>
<p>the beauty of uchi is that there is always a chance. first, the essays play a larger role here than at other institutions, so even if your grades or sats are not worthy of a more selective school, you stand a chance at uchi should you write a great essay. second, the school accepts 40% or more of their applications which is the highest of the so called elite schools except for umich, so sure, the poster has a chance here that may not be available at another school. also being from alaska, the illinois winters should be tank top weather for him or her.</p>
<p>The limit on your interpretation is that the ~40% acceptance is predicated on your having a very good record. The main reason the acceptance rate is as high as it is is the comparatively small number of applicants, relative to the number of places, plus, of course, the fact that only about a third of those who are accepted end up attending. But your overall HS record and credentials themselves aren't going to be very different from what you would need at schools that have even lower acceptance rates. In other words, don't confuse the acceptance rate with the level of credentials you have to present to be accepted. I would guess (no numbers) that essays make a critical difference in fewer than 10% of admits: 90% are determined largely by the same criteria as at other highly ranked schools.</p>
<p>that goes without saying. you may not need 750's across the board or a 4.0 gpa, but 500's and 3.45gpa will usually get the uchi door slammed in your face. the small number of apps to uchi is indicative of the school being somewhat self selective to high school seniors. the quarter system, the neighborhood, the rigor of the work. a lot of students don't want to deal with that. yet students apply to uchi as their second or third choice school because it has a great reputation in the event the first choice doesn't pan out. the high acceptance rate is a direct result of the low yield that uchi has (meaning in most cases, the first or second choice does pan out). if uchi had a higher historical yield rate, they would be able to accept fewer applicants than they do. since the yield, year in and year out is around 30-34%, the school is forced to accept more applicants. to uchi's credit, it doesn't play the low acceptance rate game. if they go to a ed system, they would manipulate their yield, thus reducing their overall acceptance rate and thus push it's prestige, which is substantial, even higher. was it w. c. fields who said that any club that i can get into, i don't want to be a part of. that is why low acceptance rates and desirability go hand in hand.</p>
<p>i think the essays are really the most beneficial to candidates that are on the bubble. i concur entirely.</p>
<p>
[quote]
was it w. c. fields who said that any club that i can get into, i don't want to be a part of?
[/quote]
Nope, Groucho Marx.</p>
<p>What this all boils down to is that if you have strong credentials, and put academics very high on your personal agenda in looking for a college to attend, you should consider yourself lucky that there's such a fine university as Chicago that you have a 40% shot at being admitted to. But it's not a 40% shot if you have a marginal record (read: modest GPA and SAT), though you might be a "lottery pick" if you can write some fine essays or tell a good story about yourself and why Chicago's the place for you.</p>
<p>groucho who? frankly, i wasn't really sure who w.c. fields was, i assume both were well ahead of my time. </p>
<p>Uchi is that anomaly that is a truly great university that one has a decent chance of getting into. but that one better have good stats, not any schlub can get in.</p>
<p>btw has anyone been able to substantiate the brown legacy admit rates? confirming what cami said, i could only find brown's legacy admit rate in the low 40 percent area. can anyone else locate the 56% legacy admit rate at brown?</p>