ND admits 3,484 from strongest pool ever

<p>An excerpt from the NDSMC Observer:</p>

<p>*If statistics on accepted applicants for next year's freshman class are any indicator, the incoming class of 2010 - like each freshman class in recent years - will be the strongest academically in Notre Dame's history. </p>

<p>This year's selections were made from a pool of applicants who boasted academic statistics equal to those of Notre Dame's incoming freshman class nine years ago, Director of Admissions Dan Saracino said April 4.</p>

<p>"In the end, we think this is the academically strongest and ethnically most diverse class we've ever had," he said.</p>

<p>With 12,800 applicants, this year's pool - the largest ever - was up 13 percent from last year, Saracino said. The Office of Undergraduate Admissions sent acceptance letters to 3,484 students, and Saracino said the University hopes to enroll 1,985 students for the fall 2006 freshman class. Notification letters were mailed March 30.*</p>

<p>A bit farther down in the article comes this surprising statistic:</p>

<p>Though high class ranks and test scores are an undeniable factor in admissions decisions, they never guarantee admittance, Saracino said. He noted that the admissions committees chose to accept only 438 of the 849 applicants who were ranked number one in their high school classes.</p>

<p>Read the whole thing at: <a href="http://tinyurl.com/mhkv2%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://tinyurl.com/mhkv2&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>Damn. Notre Dame's matriculation rate is ridiculously high.</p>

<p>The SAT score is an average of 6 points higher than my class' ('10 vs. '09) so while it is getting more selective and higher scoring classes... it really isn't that substantial... The 13% increase is probably in-part due to the football success and the prospect for coming years, haha (just a speculation). But yea.. it's really great to hear that next year's class is looking so strong.</p>

<p>not to criticize, but every year, there's a paper with that heading. Four times I've read about how next year's matriculating class is the strongest...guess its good to know that every year we keep getting more talent.</p>

<p>
[quote]
not to criticize, but every year, there's a paper with that heading. Four times I've read about how next year's matriculating class is the strongest...guess its good to know that every year we keep getting more talent.

[/quote]

This is true for almost every national university. Although a 13% rise in applicants and a drop of from 32% to 27% acceptance rate are both very good signs. As far as I know, Cornell was the only other university which saw such a drastic increase in the number of applicants this year.</p>

<p>Yeah, Cornell's acceptance rate went down from 29% to 21% and applications rose drastically.</p>

<p>Johns Hopkins had one of the biggest increases in applications. They went from just over 11,000 last year to well over 14,000 this year. A 27% increase! They also overenrolled last year and thus this year's accpetance rate was 24%, as compared with last year's which was between 30%-35%.</p>

<p>So, a 13% increase in apps for Notre Dame is not that bad!</p>

<p>
[quote]
Yeah, Cornell's acceptance rate went down from 29% to 21% and applications rose drastically.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I think the original figure released was incorrect. The acceptance rate went down, but only to 25%.</p>

<p>Boston College's applications rose from 22,451 to about 26,500, just under a 20% increase.</p>

<p>True but I wonder what will happen with the yield at BC. Applicants have never been the problem, but they have always been at about 20-25% yield if I remember correctly.</p>

<p>Actually the 22,451 applications number I posted for BC was for 2 years ago. Though I have read that BC apps were up 12% this year to the 26,500 number. According to USNews the BC yield rate was 32% in the 2004 cycle.</p>

<p>Notre Dame, the Ivy league schools, MIT and Stanford all have a matriculation rate of over 50% with ND at around 57%. ND and MIT are the only schools from that group that do not have a restricted early application program so those yield rates are really quite impressive.</p>

<p>ed shouldn't matter...if someone who would have applied ED had to apply RD they obviously would go if they got in...</p>

<p>I disagree Jags I think having ED would effect matriculation rates, but that's just my opinion.</p>

<p>ED significantly affects matriculation rates. Let's use Princeton University as an example. They have a pretty restrictive ED program. Here are their numbers for the 2004 graduates from US News:</p>

<p>Total applicants: 13,695
Total acceptances: 1,733
Total freshman enrollment: 1,172
Proportion of freshman enrolled from early action and early decision: 49%</p>

<p>That translates to a 67% matriculation rate overall but a 51% matriculation rate for those accepted RD. To get to this number you need to back out the ED numbers. 49% of 1172 is 574 of 100% yield ED applicants. 598 (1733-574) is the number of students accepted RD. To calculate the yield on these students back out the 100% yield ED students. That means 598 students of 1159 matriculated RD or 51%.</p>

<p>The other thing not mentioned is the increase use of wiatlists to control matriculation/yield rates. The students on the waitlist are also almost 100% yield In the 2004 year, Princeton has 719 students on the wiatlist and they took 79 off the waitlist.</p>

<p>That is why I think it is impressive that MIT and ND both can get such a high yield rate with unrestricted EA. Note, Harvard, Yale and Stanford all have limited EA through the use of "Single Choice" Early Action.</p>

<p>BTW, this is not to pick on Princeton, it is just a good illustrative example.</p>

<p>I do think that ED helps matriculation a lot!</p>

<p>Also, I do have to give BC credit, that matriculation rate was better than I thought they have. I wonder if it is improving of if I was just off?</p>

<p>irish,</p>

<p>The number I quoted was from the 2004 cycle. That is the information that is available on the current version of USNews. Overall, I think every school tries to improve thier yield and matriculation rates over time.</p>

<p>Note that almost all the catholic schools have open EA because as ND says, they think that I student should not be bound by thier early application. A notable exception is Holy Cross which I think went to ED this year.</p>

<p>i didn't really follow your post about princeton.</p>

<p>if you look at this logicly - Person A applies to school X with ED because it is his first choice. He gets in, he goes. </p>

<p>Person B applies to school X 5 years later RD - the school has gotten rid of ED. He also applies to 5 other schools RD. School X is still his first choice. He gets into all 6, he goes to school X, his first choice.</p>

<p>How is that any different then Person B applying to school X with ED and still going?</p>

<p>Either way, a person getting accepted to their first choice is going to go.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Either way, a person getting accepted to their first choice is going to go.

[/quote]

Princeton may not be everyone's top choice though. One could easily choose Harvard, Yale, Stanford, or MIT and other top schools over it.</p>

<p>It is really quite simple, schools use ED policies to ensure high yield and matriculation. Look at the acceptance rate at schools with ED policies and compare the ED acceptances with the RD acceptances.</p>

<p>For a school without ED, Notre Dame's yield rate is stunningly high. I gues this is further proof of Notre Dame's appeal to its unique base of students. </p>

<p>Jeez, I just can't wait to get there next year!!!</p>

<p>I can't wait for a lot of you posters, we have a lot of good people coming in next year. I just hope you stay on the boards and help me out!</p>