<p>They know a certain amount will turn down the offer... the bigger the number, the more they will admit over the number they can handle. Which means good things for us :) but poorer ratings for the college, if it has low matriculation rates. Heck, it's MIT though, what do they need a ranking to say that their inherent reputation doesn't already say ten times better.</p>
<p>Including the students who turned down their offer, MIT admit 1495 students. MIT can't be that far off in their estimation of students who reject their offer (~50% off). Since they have a very low matriculation rate, why would they plan for more than 495 students to reject their offer?</p>
<p>I suspect that far more than 495 will reject their offer. I think colleges usually accept a least 130% of available spots don't they? But then again. there is always the waitlist. I am spewing numbers out of no where, but isn't that what this thread about? postulating the unknown?</p>
<p>John Galt</p>
<p>I must not have been very clear. Last year, MIT admit 1495 students (instead of the 1000 they set as their limit). Since 1495 is the amount of admitted students, not accepted students, we can only wonder how many students MIT accepted (this information might be available online). In any event, this is clearly above their limit of 1000 students. </p>
<p>Anyway, why would you think more than 495 students would reject their offer? Their matriculation rate is very low. Since students applying to MIT are typically <em>I stress the word typically</em> interested in MIT's renowned science-geared education, why would many reject their offer of admission to one of the best math/science universities world over?</p>
<p>One might expect most colleges to accept close to 130% of their target class size in order to achieve a full class. But MIT? Most people who apply to MIT (especially EA, but also RD) typically hold MIT as their first choice. Thus, they wouldn't need to accept close to 130% of target class size.</p>
<p>Take not that MIT didn't touch the waitlist last year.</p>
<p>Yeah, upper-tier schools rarely have to touch their waitlists, I suspect. Which means I really hope I don't get waitlisted -- in some area, being flat-out rejected might be better. Then there are fewer there-might-have-beens as though we all don't have enough of those of those as it is. Anyway...</p>
<p>zking, you are right. I see that the number 1495 didn't come out of a random-number generator. I just thought it was pretty low, because I know Yale accepted some 2000 a couple years ago and ended up only having a matriculation of 1.3k or so. However, MIT also has fewer slots to fill, I suppose. This is somewhat disconcerting.</p>
<p>Then it seems like MIT is very good about filling its spots. I think Mootmom mentioned it a couple times throughout this forum: apparently, after the initial acceptance, they, being MIT, really initiate a rigorous campaign to get you to enroll. At the same time, I think they would be competing for a lot of students against places like Stanford, Princeton, Harvard and to a lesser degree (due to the number of enrollments) Caltech.</p>
<p>Oh well, if the numbers you guys are saying is 4000 early applicants, that means about a <10% acceptance rate for EA assuming about 384 will be accepted again this year. Then if you assume that the growth factor is the same for RD, then about 10.25K regular applicants for a total of 14.25. If the admitted number remains about 1495k, then we are looking at a 10+% admit rate.</p>
<p>Which means the admit rate for CC will be about 50%</p>
<p>--> I just had to end with a positive note. Of course, these statistics are useless. :)</p>
<p>zking87: Acceptance and admittance are the same thing. Enrollment is the actual quantity of students that come to the school. MIT had it's highest yield ever last year (67%), so of the 1495 accepted, about 1,000 enrolled, which is exactly what they were aiming for.</p>
<p>The MIT adcom is doing a great job. :D</p>
<p>So there is a distinction between acceptance and admittance... By the name, one would think that someone who is "admit" enters, but I guess I'm wrong. All my intricite calculations must now be redone! Anway, where did you find the yeild data and the actual number of enrolled students (class size data)? It's surprising to find a yield of 67%, I expected higher. Do you have EA enrollment percentages, along with the RD enrollment rate?</p>
<p>Also, your calculations seems to make more sense. It seemed odd for MIT to plan for 1000 and enroll 1495. I guess it's an important distinction. Thanks for the clarification. Please let me know where you get your stats.</p>
<p>My EC gave them to me following the interview (apparantly all ECs get a summary). As for the yield, MIT's been boasting it's highest yield ever on the MITBlogs, etc, but that was included with my EC's e-mail.</p>
<p>My interview seemed less personal and more numerical, but to each his own. Advice: quit worrying about statistics and calculations.</p>
<p>Same with my interview! I basically provided the EC with my resume (per his request) and we went through it, him making notes. That was about it! Would it be possible for you to email me an excerpt of the message, providing the statistics [adnan(dot)esmail(at)gmail(dot)com]? My EC didn't provide me with any stats. I've also been reading the blogs; I think I remember reading about the yield. Also, thanks for all your advice. I thought I knew a lot about MIT!</p>
<p>"Also, with regards the 4000 applicants, didn't MIT say the server could handle more then 4000 last-minute applications at the same time? I'm probably mistaken, but I don't think they mentioned that 4000 applications had already submitted when the site went down."</p>
<p>That doesn't mean that they did have 4k last-minute apps (actually, I thought they said they could handle 10k, but that's just speculation). There's a difference between having the capacity for 4k applications and actually having 4k applications. So I think this 43% spike in the number of applicants is preposterous.</p>
<p>I don't know Frank, what they said was along the lines of "with 4000 of you trying to submit your applications at once."</p>
<p>And for the record, they slightly overenrolled this year.</p>
<p>Oh, I didn't see that. Bah.</p>
<p>Server can hold 10000</p>
<p>Hehe. When I said "4000 of you applying at the last minute" it was a figure of speech, not real data. Sorry for the confusion.</p>
<p>I don't know the exact numbers yet, but it won't be anywhere near 4000 EA apps. Don't worry.</p>
<p>Mollie is right - we take no more than 1/3 of the class during EA selection. Our intended class size of ~1000 stays constant every year regardless of how many people apply. We use a variety of factors to predict yield, the most influential of which is yield data from the past few years (and any associated trends). Last year's yield was 67% - in other words, about 1000 of the 1495 students we accepted chose to enroll at MIT.</p>
<p>Olo is correct in that accept = admit. It's "enroll" that separates an "MIT admit" from an "MIT student."</p>
<p>Hope this info helps.</p>
<p>Gah, silly intarweb. So hard to convey those nuances that leads to figures of speech.</p>
<p>In the meanwhile... reading has started.</p>
<p><em>scared</em></p>
<p>Bargh, that's a relief. I was thinking my chances had just crashed into the floor.</p>
<p>Also, don't forget that a yield of 65% is a very high one. The figure has been rising steadily over the past several years -- if you read the archives of The</a> Tech, you'll see that yield used to be in the mid-50% range until rather recently.</p>
<p>Don't even get me started on the delicate relationship between incoming class size and the freshmen on campus policy -- perhaps if freshmen didn't have to live in dorms and could instead live where they chose, we would have room for more of you here next fall...</p>
<p>Oh please oh please do NOT change that policy! Dorm living, for a year anyway, is an important part of a college experience. I would have actively discouraged my S from considering a school where he could not at least begin by living on campus. If you want a commuter school, they exist, but MIT shouldn't be one of them. Ship upperclassmen off campus if you must, but let the freshmen stay on campus. Please oh please.</p>
<p>Why does class size have to be larger, anyway?</p>