<p>From @gtadmission twitter:</p>
<p>"Amazing group of #georgiatech applicants. Overall admit rate= 32% SAT avg. 2185; 32 ACT. On avg 9 AP/IB/College courses in hs. #GoJackets"</p>
<p>That means the EA acceptance rate was 40% and the RD acceptance rate was 24%. Does anyone know what the acceptance rate for deferred students was?</p>
<p>@May2013SAT: I don’t think they would release that (just as many schools would not release waitlist statistics. If number of students getting off isn’t great, and you report it, some may lose hope or interest fairly quickly). I expected the SAT avg. to be much higher (but I guess CC is always skewed right). I wonder how much those numbers will slide when enrolled stats. come out. Even if 40 points or so, it isn’t bad at all (though I get the feeling, it will be more than 40 as many of the very top folks come from out of state and may get offers that they consider more desirable unfortunately). </p>
<p>Although I found this on Collegeboard, apparently are transparent about waitlist: <a href=“BigFuture College Search”>BigFuture College Search;
<p>It’s not a terrible rate, but not great either. </p>
<p>Buzzport says that 26000 people applied and there are room for 2700 people.</p>
<p>I heard 12000 applied for EA, 40% got accepted which is 4800 people. (should have applied for EA lol)
Which means 14000 applied for RD, 24% accepted which is 3360 people.</p>
<p>8160 people… that is a lot more people than the room available for 2700 people. The number don’t make much sense to me, but I guess that’s how things normally are?</p>
<p>so… I’m guessing that there is pretty much no chance whatsoever for people wait-listed… correct?</p>
<p>@SJK1106: EA is not like the ED that private schools have. EA is typically done by people applying to many schools who want to “test out safeties”. They basically just want to see if they get in somewhere early on. It won’t increase your chances. 40% got in because many of them had really high statistics. ED programs at private schools on the other hand may slightly lower the threshold because people applying to ED rounds are committed to coming (binding). As for chances of getting off waitlist…don’t look at admit rates, consider yield. If Tech yields a higher percentage than normal because, say, many RD and EA admits don’t get in somewhere else that they may prefer over Tech, then less people than normal will be pulled off of the waitlist. If the yield does not fill the class, then more people will be pulled off the waitlist. Considering that Tech admitted really high, it’s probably that many of the students will be successful at another one of their choices. If those choices are more desirable to those applicants than Tech is, then they won’t be yielding. </p>
<p>So is this like a new low for georgia tech’s acceptance rate?</p>
<p>@onmyway111 I think GT’s admission rate has dropped 20% since two years ago, so yes, it is a new low</p>
<p>Georgia Tech is going through a UChicago-esque sudden increase in selectivity. I wonder if it’ll keep going for a few years; if it does, it may someday get so selective/competitive that it’ll feel compelled to turn private… </p>
<p>I can’t imagine GT someday hitting a 10% acceptance rate while still forcing 51% of its student body to be composed of less qualified (due to the competitiveness of out-of-state/foreign admissions) Georgia residents.</p>
<p>@jerryaeroastro: Don’t get confused. Vanderbilt is what you consider an increase in selectivity (as in SAT/ACT scores have skyrocketed for the students they yield, not just the admits. Don’t know if it’s a good thing. Seems the caliber of students may have surpassed the caliber of the academics…whereas Chicago’s caliber is more intense or appropriate for the same students. Guess the 2 have students with the same stats. but different academic orientations/attitudes), Chicago, not so much. Same for Georgia Tech (as Chicago). The fact is, Chicago got far more applications and then rejected most of them. The SAT and ACT scores haven’t climbed that much. They pretty much just have a lower admit rate due to the increase in applications. Georgia Tech is exactly the same way. Using Emory as an example, it’s kind of like how collegedata.com or college board considers UC Berkeley and UCLA as “most selective” while Emory is considered “very selective”, yet you look at the SAT/ACT scores, they are identical to Berkeley and a little better than UCLA (like 100 points better on the bottom end and only 20-30 points better on the top). However, Berkeley and UCLA get far more apps.than they can take in, and reject a lot, so the admit rate is low. The same can be said comparing Tech to Emory or these schools (Tech and Emory yield identical student bodies. We kind of go back and forth and Tech will best us one year by like 10 points in 2 categories, and then we may best Tech in some years), where Tech is considered selective and Emory “very selective” though the student bodies are identical. I also notice that Georgia Tech admits very high (like way higher than Emory, because we use a much more holistic process that perhaps also took yield into account. However, I think the differences will diminish this year because of the number of ridiculous scholarship applicants, most whom were denied the scholarship, but will likely get in. Also appears ED rounds got stronger than normal applicants. In addition, demonstrated interest counts worth nothing now, when it did in past years. So with flat app. numbers this year, the people that did apply were probably much better), but then yields a class identical (and sometimes slightly lower on the 25% if you look at CDS) to ours. Be very careful when looking at the admit rates. Tech and Chicago already had solid student bodies (relative to schools with similar students) before the increase in app. numbers. And you have Emory which hasn’t changed admit rate in years and is still keeping up with Tech in terms of the students it yields regardless of the increases in app. numbers that Tech has seen. According to the stats. of the students it’s been admitting over the past 3 or so years, Tech’s yielded student body should have surpassed ours by a lot, but that is not the case.</p>
<p>I highly doubt that GT will end up going private. BTW as a Georgia Tax payer I’m happy that Georgia requires that 51% of GT students are Georgia residents. That’s the way it should be.</p>
<p>@MichiganGeorgia That’s the way that’s most convenient to you… Not necessarily the way it should be.</p>
<p>Georgia Tech is one of the highest-caliber engineering schools in the country (not to mention in the world). If it ever reaches a point where it sees itself rejecting thousands of highly-qualified out-of-state students just to offer less-qualified students a cheaper education, it will inevitably go private… Or if not, at least “federal” somehow.</p>
<p>And if you think that most of GT’s funding comes from Georgia taxpayers, you’re fooling yourselves; it all comes from federal research grants. In-state tax revenues just serve to offer in-state students a lower tuition rate.</p>