<p>Just trying to prove as objectively as possible if the yield protection theory is true.</p>
<p>If it helps, I got denied from Brown and Princeton today.</p>
<p>One of my friends on the waitlist did (Dartmouth though), and one didn’t (got into Stern and Tepper though…) if it helps.
Sorry about Brown and Princeton :(</p>
<p>I was wait listed and got into Penn. Rejected from all the rest (H,Y,P,C) though.</p>
<p>Same here myuusmeow, waitlisted and accepted to Penn</p>
<p>Waitlisted at Chicago and Dartmouth, rejected at all of the other Ivies except Brown (didn’t apply). :P</p>
<p>@lloyd:</p>
<p>I do know that this doesn’t prove much. I’m merely inviting all of the “I don’t know why I wasn’t accepted” and “Chicago must be yield protecting” loverlies to stand up and tell us all where they will be going next year.</p>
<p>I really don’t like Nondorf… just saying. Anyway, I’ll most likely be attending Northwestern. I was waitlisted at UofC, but really don’t feel like waiting around for a school that is equivalent in academics to NU.</p>
<p>Chicago rejected/waitlist, Ivy in - Yield Protection.
Chicago in, Ivy reject/waitlist - Chicago not good enough.
Chicago in, Ivy in - Wash.
Chicago reject, Ivy reject - Wash.</p>
<p>Seems like a fair experiment 
Never mind the fact that my being fairly conscious of how adcom at undergraduate institutions work, a large share of applications are being read by 22-26 recently graduated folks with little data on ‘real work’ (and lots of lots of noise) making most 25-75th band applications across the nine schools independent probabilities (and thus that third choice, the wash, the most statistically small while few will admit their personal defeat at the hands of the last choice)?</p>
<p>Guys, make yourself feel better, rant to your friends, and then read a book or something. I do/did the same thing when I wait to hear back from jobs (but eventually the volume of everything [it’s really a probability game, at this stage in our careers] you apply to overwhelms any personal hurt). Very little of your success is determined by where you go for school.</p>
<p>cchsmccann1016: Why don’t you like Nondorf?</p>
<p>I like Nondorf, nice and very friendly. Met him last year during parents reception. He is doing a superb job, very happy he is working for UChicago. Funny, in Yale’s newspaper in an article related to the top schools admissions rate for this year, UChicago is totally omitted. Interesting since the UChicago 8.8 admission rate is below 4 other ivies rates. I wonder why?</p>
<p>@Realeducation: It’s a well-known fact that the Ivies like to talk about themselves. :D</p>
<p>Poplicola, indeed. However , the article did mention MIT and Stanford admissions rates. It seems to forget UChicago number 4 rank in the top universities , and it’s admission rate of 8.8 for this year, below 4 other ivies.</p>
<p>Nondorf is very friendly. However, I’m worried that through his intense marketing and rankings-centered approach he is affecting the feel and spirit that was UChicago. Whether, UofC still admits that same type of students, I don’t know. Whether, UofC is just trying to compete with the ivies for name brand status, I don’t know. But, I’m tired of seeing schools sending out shirts, glasses, brochures, etc… with the intent of increasing the applicants and decreasing the acceptance rate. To me Chicago used to be the school that didn’t give a damn about any of that. They saw their applicants as potential students, not numbers in an ever increasing inhuman numbers game. Chicago was the school that academia respected and the average joe didn’t know…and there was nothing wrong with that. I really can’t say I don’t like Nondorf. I don’t know him personally. But I can tell you that I don’t like what he’s doing with the school.</p>
<p>cchsmccann1016: I see where you’re coming from, but I really disagree. You said:</p>
<p>“Chicago was the school that academia respected and the average joe didn’t know…and there was nothing wrong with that.”</p>
<p>The problem is that this wasn’t really that true. There’s still kind of a lingering reputation for Chicago, even within academia, that it’s some kind of Ivy backup school. We see in this thread that even now with Chicago’s <9% acceptance rate, it doesn’t even get a mention on peer schools’ websites discussing the recent admissions cycle. The amount of disrespect that Chicago gets even by its peer schools is absolutely incredulous, and even with its recent increase in prestige, no one wants to consider it in the same breath as HYPSM. When anyone sees that Chicago has higher SATs than MIT or Stanford, their first thought is to accuse Chicago of faking its stats. Chicago was and is in a position where no matter how great of a university it is, no one wants to believe or admit it (somewhat similar to how Apple’s stock has been perpetually undervalued; even now, Apple’s stock price implies negative future growth).</p>
<p>President Zimmer (who has been affiliated with the University since the 80s) got fed up with this lack of respect and decided to do something substantial about it; namely, hiring Nondorf to run Admissions. If you’re in a position where only a few will buy into how good your school is even if you make it the best in the world, you’ve got to resort to some pretty extreme PR to get out of the malicious circle. So I think Chicago is definitely justified in its PR measures, even if it’s annoying to a select few applicants.</p>
<p>Also, I’ve seen way too many people in the past on CC who were “in love” with Chicago, only to abandon it for other Ivies with bigger names and at-best equal academics, to be convinced that the people who criticize Chicago’s new admissions procedures would have actually chosen to attend Chicago under its older admissions policies. If anything, I’d say precisely the opposite.</p>
<p>@phuriku. Impressive post. Spot on.</p>
<p>My daughter was waitlisted at Chicago. She was accepted to Stanford, Columbia, Pomona, USC, Barnard, and Vassar.</p>
<p>@phuriku : You make many good points. But I would like to differentiate academia from admissions. You mention other schools websites disregard for UChicago’s recent stats, but I’m more concerned with other professors’ opinions. Also, realize I wrote the previous comment at 3am. You make many good points. Regardless, it will be really interesting to see where Chicago ends up in 5 years with the addition of Nondorf. I believe there is a thread on UChicago’s forum right now discussing the implications of all of this.</p>
<p>cchsmccann, with due respect, what you dislike so much? Nondof, the academics, or the fact that you were waitlisted? University Of Chicago is superb school, rank in the top 5 of the nation, and 8 in the world .I do no think professors opinions are that bad, as they are raking the university as one of the best in the world. Professors opinions are considered in the rankings methodology.And 5 years from now, the University will be where it belongs, as one of the best in the world.</p>
<p>I’m not bothered by the wait list, if you’re implying that I’m just bitter.(I would have believed this even if I got in). But honestly what is with people assuming a school is only as good as its rankings?! My point was Chicago has always been an academic strong hold (regardless of whether it was an ivy backup or not) It bred strong academics and abstract thinkers. Now they are playing the numbers game hardcore and I’m wondering whether that will affect much.</p>