<p>I'm guessing we'll get more information when Stanford makes its official press release, but this is ridiculous! If the part about regular applicants isn't a typo, that means that we have to add in the more than 5000 SCEA apps for a total of almost 36000 applications to Stanford this year! </p>
<p>Add to this the fact that they're being ultra-conservative in their attempt to enroll a smaller class (1600 students I believe). Accounting for yield I would guess 2200 of those students will receive acceptance letters in the spring, the acceptance rate overall could be as low as 6.1%!! </p>
<p>How do you even discriminate between all those applications!??</p>
<p>And after you take out the legacies (i.e. professor's kids), recruited athletes (surprisingly many), and some of the random SCEA acceptances, your chances shoot down to.. ~3%?</p>
<p>Makes me really feel good about not getting in SCEA, because it's not like 94% of kids who apply don't deserve it, it's just that some have luck on their side.</p>
<p>I'm pretty confident that number includes EA apps. They didn't get 35,000 + applications because that would be greater than a 20% increase as the article states. But, with a target class of only 1600 this year and applying a 70% yield, the acceptance rate will be in the 7.5% range!</p>
<p>It'd be pretty foolish for anyone to assume they'd be accepted here unless they're Godlike. I'm just assuming I'm going to get rejected from HYPS. If I do get accepted then I'll have a pleasant surprise in April. If not, well I wasn't worrying about it for four months.</p>
<p>The 30,348 should be the total = regular+early. Last year's number is 25,298 combined. And 20% increase will give that number. Anyway, Stanford could get very close to Harvard in admission rate this year -- at about 7.2% over all, Harvard could get 6.9%.</p>
<p>I was fortunate enough to have been accepted SCEA( yay URM status), but i'm gonna write exactly what I wrote on the Harvard board. Dont be so discouraged by the sheer number of apps. I still doubt that the level of "qualified" applicants has increased that much. Im sure a good share of them are " hmmmm WHY NOT" shots in the dark.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I still doubt that the level of "qualified" applicants has increased that much.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Depends. The number of "qualified" applicants available nationwide each year is best determined by high scores (e.g. 750-800) on the SAT. Since 2003 the number of such scores has increased by 33% for Math, but has remained constant for Critical Reading.</p>
<p>So, there is more competition for an application with Math as the selling point, but no increase for those applicants proffering a high CR score.</p>
<p>The increase in numbers of top scorers for Math, while CR remains constant, must corrode the value of the former in favor of the latter. There is perhaps evidence of this; if you look at Stanford's 2012 scattergram at CollegeData, there is almost no difference in the average Math SAT between acceptances and rejections, whereas CR has a 40 point spread.</p>
<p>It is if you are trying to compare two classes in two different years. The number graduating in the top 5% of their class doesn't change much, and I sure can't compare EC's and essays in different years.</p>
<p>6.1% (or something) will end up at Stanford. But they'll probably accept 7-8% since their yield won't be 100%, obviously. So, one or two more per 100 people... yay?</p>