<p>I received my rejection letter stating that I will not be admitted into USNA class of 15 but on the bright side I am a sponsored student by the Academy's foundation and am looking forward to being admitted into the class of 2016. When I opened my letter It stated that over 19000 young men and women applied and only 1200 were accepted! The competition grows stiff year by year, so about six percent of those 19000 got in!</p>
<p>Technically, you may be correct in the “lowest acceptance rate” observation. Going strictly by the numbers. </p>
<p>More, probably between 1500 and 1600 were offered appointments, with about 1200-1250 accepting and being enrolled. </p>
<p>There is no denying that USNA is incredibly selective and competitive, especially in the admissions process. Conversely, it has probably the highest 4 year graduation rate of any college, university, institute, or service academy in the country. While some chaife at the observation, I stand by it. Anyone and everyone appointed who desires to graduate from USNA, can and will do so pending 3 things:</p>
<ol>
<li><p>They WANT to be there and graduate, i.e. motivation.</p></li>
<li><p>They remain healthy and medically fit.</p></li>
<li><p>They choose to behave, mostly meaning they will avoid alcohol and drugs.</p></li>
</ol>
<p>Note: There were even 6 or 8 in this class who graduated but were unable to receive a commission. </p>
<p>Note #2: One frequent implication of these candidate/appointment/enrollment #s is that this class (or last’s) are the most traditionally qualified and academically strongest. That would NOT be the case. Interestingly, as the applicant numbers have risen the past several admissions cycles (3 or 4 now, I believe), the “selectivity”, at least academically, has declined. While only the admissions statisticians know for sure, this is undoubtedly due to the recent diversity push which has driven up candidate numbers while driving down traditional measures of candidacy strength. </p>
<p>The primary point here is not to make erroneous assumptions based upon several traditional stats. And that the recent admissions process is not comparable to those of 4,5, or more years past. The staffing, marketing, materials, and resources are completely different.</p>
<p>Now, for a brief, superficial summation of the recently graduated USNA Class of 2011 inducted on 27 June 2007 and experienced, literally, the longest Plebe year in USNA history due to leap year, induction date, and several other factors noted at the commencement/commissioning exercises:</p>
<ol>
<li><p>12,003 applicants</p></li>
<li><p>3,827 applicants w/ an official nomination</p></li>
<li><p>1,893 applicant/nominees qualified scholastically, medically, physically</p></li>
<li><p>1,419 offers of appointment</p></li>
<li><p>1,212 accepted offers</p></li>
<li><p>1,202 actually inducted</p></li>
<li><p>1006 graduates</p></li>
<li><p>78% were top fifth in their HS class, 94% top 2/5</p></li>
<li><p>30% scored above 700 math and 23% verbal (31 or above on ACT</p></li>
<li><p>31% scored below 600/26 verbal and 16% math</p></li>
<li><p>21% were female</p></li>
<li><p>24% minority </p></li>
<li><p>7 grads were from foreign nations</p></li>
<li><p>1 Plebe classmate died while at USNA. Her Mid cover was the first-ever female cover placed atop Herndon in spring, 2008. She was honored as an honorary member of the Class of 2011.</p></li>
<li><p>1 Midshipman received a Rhodes scholarship; 9 Trident Scholars; 16 began grad study in their 1st class year; </p></li>
<li><p>The “Anchor” was in 4th Company and received $1,005 for being last in the Order of Merit.</p></li>
<li><p>Assignments were as follows:</p></li>
</ol>
<p>A. 225 Navy Pilot
B. 58 Navy Flight Officers
C.179 Surface Warfare
D. 29 Surface Nukes
E. 15 Surface/EDO
F. 5 Surface/IPO
G. 3 SWO/Oceanographers
H. 3 SWO/Info Warfare
I. 3 SWO/Intel Warfare
J. 133 Subs (including 12 females … a first for firsties!)
K. 30 SEALs
L. 14 Explosive Ordnance Disposal
M. 260 USMC
N. 9 Med Corps (Medical School)
O. 1 Dental School
P. 3 Supply Corps
Q. 2 Intelligence
R. 2 Information Warfare
S. 3 Oceanography
T. 6 Civil Engineering Corps
U. 1 U.S. Army
V. 1 U.S. Coast Guard
W. 1 U.S. Air Force</p>
<p>GO NAVY! BEAT ARMY! And fair winds and following seas to USNA Class of 2011! 
</p>
<p>P.S. Any truth to the rumor that your TWE was due to spelling deficiency? :eek: 
Go get in 2012!</p>
<p>One particular word of encouragement in all of this:</p>
<p>Consider that despite the daunting numbers on the “upside” IF one is 3Qed … scholastically, medically, physically able, and IF one receives a nomination from any direction … the chances of appointment are extremely good. </p>
<p>Specifically 1,419 of the 1,893 who are nominated and 3 Qed … actually receive offers of appointment. </p>
<p>What does that mean? Well, if one does not pass muster scholastically failing to generate a sufficient “whole” or total person score … or IF one has a non-waiverable medical situation … or IF one cannot do enough push-ups (etc.) … then they will not get close. Conversely IF they do pass muster on those complex issues? Chances are pretty doggone good!</p>
<p>So … IF one thinks he/she can get over these hurdles, go for it!</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>19,000 did not submit a completed application, the number I heard from someone inside Admissions was much much lower. </p>
<p>Counting those who simply filled out their name and address on the CIS as a “applicant” does not give the true picture.</p>
<p>Remember something about the numbers - you are never competing against someone who never finishes the application, you are never competing against a person who is not 3Q (triple qualified), and you are never competing against a person who doesn’t have a nomination, as they are not eligible for appointment.</p>
<p>WhistlePig’s number are better suited to determining an appointment percentage - 1,893 candidates were eligible for appointment (3Q+nom), and 1,419 received one.</p>
<p>Pretty good odds. (74.9%)</p>
<p>BTW - Congrats on your Foundation scholarship, you are on your way to an appointment for 2016.</p>
<p>Well summarized, Lou. A few other thoughts about this.</p>
<ol>
<li><p>The fundamental flaw in all of this … trying to compare apples to oranges, i.e. USNA and the other SAs to selective secular colleges and universities. While a general picture can be confirmed that both categories may be HIGHLY SELECTIVE, the processes are totally disparate beyond some similarities in assessing 1 of the 3 components in the SAs WP score … scholastics. That’s really the only overlap in these modestly concentric circles. F</p></li>
<li><p>The reality of this disparity can be very challenging to grasp, especially when businesses devoted to making money at the expense of parental and student egoes and ignorance fuel these inappropriate comparisons. I’m not attempting to look down my nose nor place judgement or value on either, both. Simply offering that there is no real comparison, at least in attempting to assess comparable “selectivity.” I’ll stick with my own rule of thumb and it is this …</p></li>
</ol>
<p>**“There are WAAAAY more Mids and Cadets who might have been admitted and graduated at HYP, Stanford, MIT, etc. than there are students of those highly selective institutions who’d manage appointments AND graduation and commissions from any/all of the Service Academies. Guaranteed.” **</p>
<ol>
<li><p>To Lou’s correct observation … Remember, while you and I will never have an inkling, at the HYPs of the world, just like at USNA and other SAs, the VAST MAJORITY of applicants to those institutions are not, never were viable. Lots of Whitman sampling and “why not give it a go” among delusionally hopeful applicants there too. Make that LOTS.</p></li>
<li><p>FYI, for those absent a calculator or merely math challenged, the 4 year graduation “rate” at USNA for the Class of 2011 is 84%. Interestingly, especially in light of the enormous, perhaps well “merited” criticism of the Supe serving most of the tenure of this class as being too lax in terms of honor code violations and in some cases, refusing to expel those earning this dubious distinction, this is a lower grad rate than has been traditionally cited. It is most often 85 - 87%. </p></li>
<li><p>Despite the national call for “transparency” especially in functions funded by citizen taxes and donations, we will not likely ever know the grad rates among the various groups that USNA takes so much pride in touting on the front end of the appointment process … priors, women, minorities, alumni children, NAPS/Fdn, athletes, etc. Some would be outta site, in both directions, I suspect. But doing so would offer too much indefensible exposure.</p></li>
<li><p>Under the "bad news/good news category, perhaps … Even with claim of favoritism among varsity athletes … and while the figures are known, I speculate here … USNA and its brethren SAs undoubtedly have the highest grad rate among D I programs.</p></li>
</ol>
<p>How were some students able to graduate but not receive a commission?</p>
<p>Others may know of additional circumstances leading to graduating absent a commission, but 2 I’m aware of are Mids from foreign nations (they presumably will be commissioned in their own nation’s military) and medically disabled Mids who can no longer qualify for commissioning.</p>
<p>2007:
1,893 applicant/nominees qualified scholastically, medically, physically
1,419 offers of appointment </p>
<p>Are these numbers available for 2011?</p>
<p>Not yet. They soon should be.</p>