" …assuming applications rise to +/- 38,000, a 5% admit rate would result in 1,900 acceptance letters."
Do you think somebody will be fired over this?
I recall a store called something like Antoine’s Dream. They did a lousy business, probably partly due to the name not indicating what was being sold. Well it was clothes. So the owners hired a firm to do a media blitz in the hope of bringing in new customers. The media blitz was a roaring success. People came in droves from all over. What the advertising company had failed to convey is that the store sold petite clothes only. The overwhelming majority of those who came had wasted their time. There was no boasting about failing to outfit 85% of those who showed up. NO, the marketing was a colossal failure. When colleges have a similar outcome, I think it’s also a marketing failure…or something else… but nothing boast-worthy.
@lostaccount - if the quality of the matriculating classes were not increasing, that would mean that the marketing efforts have failed. That is not the case. The quality of the incoming class has continued to increase by every objective measure, so the marketing has been a huge success. The goal of the college is to attract the best quality students who will fit and be successful there - mission achieved.
Colleges aren’t selling a product like a dress shop. The process of college admissions is not like selling a commodity product in a retail store, it’s more like panning for gold. There is no major college that targets and attracts only the type of students that would be successful and that the college wants. Human nature - unrealistic expectations, inability to self-evaluate, lack of knowledge of national and global competition - mean that it’s unlikely and unrealistic to expect only the perfect candidates to apply. The best a college can do is make their brand known, offer a great product, attract a broad range of applicants and have the happy job of picking through the pile of pebbles to find gold nuggets. It’s an imperfect process in that some nuggets will be missed in the volume of pebbles, but it’s better than the alternatives.
Back to the original discussion and the heart of the matter - will UChicago see an increase in applications this year and if so, how many will it receive?
At the World Economic Forum this month in Davos, Zimmer was a member of a UChicago panel discussing managing complex organizations in changing times. The entire discussion is worth watching, but an interesting hint about admissions occurs at around the 40 minute mark when the moderator asks Zimmer how the college managed to increase applications to 40,000 with a 6-7% admit rate. Zimmer does not blink at or in any way refute those estimates and proceeds to answer the question.
Obviously, these aren’t official figures, surely there is rounding and the rough math doesn’t pencil out entirely unless the College is planning an increase in incoming class size or a decrease in yield (40,000x.6% = 2400 acceptances which would imply a class size of 1800 if the yield is 75%), but it’s interesting that this 40k application figure popped up.
^ Tea leaves, but non-trivial. Rajan was nodding at the number. Someone had briefed the interviewer. Guessing they aren’t being shy about throwing some numbers around. The 15,000 early applications seems to be an undisputed, though unofficial, number. It’s possible that they are adding up all applications in each pool - as opposed to applicants - and that will obviously double count the number of deferred apps. Totally see how they get to 40,000 that way. But this year has been an extraordinary year at least for early admissions at many selective schools, not just UChicago, so it’s possible that some of a genuine 25%(!) increase is due to “industry-wide” trends. Perhaps the increased effort of these places to leave no stone unturned and go after less typical pools of students has generated a surge of applicants. It could also be that college is the new high school in that employers require that you have some post-secondary training of some kind. In UChicago’s case, “test optional” and seriously great funding for first gen and similar might have provided a means for many who truly want to be there, to be able to at least have a chance to mae that happen.
If it’s truly 40,000 applicants, that’s a major win for Team NZ.
Interesting and oddly specific numbers re: UChicago admissions. If this had been a proper TV talk show, the host, prior to the interview, would have asked the guests what they wanted to talk about and then created a list of topics to discuss on air. Assuming a similar process for this panel, the source for these numbers would have been Zimmer, himself.
Maybe Rubenstein should ask Zimmer why is the Rubenstein Forum going up so slow while Woodlawn Residential Commons is springing up like wildflower (even amidst the polar vortex) ?
Rubenstein, the moderator in that YouTube video has donated tens of millions to UChicago and is on the Board of Trustees… He also follows the rankings, admit rate and such things very carefully and is very interested in the topic based on comments he has made publicly before. It would be very unusual if he got the application numbers wrong, given his interest in it and his position as an important member of the Board. He surely knew all the answers to the questions he asked Zimmer, but asked them anyway to make some of the information public. It is also interesting that he focused almost all his questions to ZImmer on selectivity, admit rates, outreach etc of the undergraduate program.
I would be very surprised in the final number was way off from the 40K mentioned.
It was also interesting that Zhang Xin the Chinese billionaire real estate investor raised her hand when Rubenstein asked whose kids were applying to UChicago. Zhang and her husband Pan have donated millions to Harvard and Yale as part of the couple’s US$100 million initiative to fund disadvantaged Chinese students at top institutions around the world. I would think their kid would be able to walk into any school.
This number is insane as are the numbers being reported from other schools as part of the “industry-wide trend”. I wonder how much of it actually results from reaching out to new pockets of applicants as opposed to applicants anxiously applying to more and more schools as acceptance rates continue to plummet across the board. I also wonder with these kind of numbers if UChicago will relax some of its reliance on show of commitment through binding ED in order to identify the best types of students for the College. Their admission officers seemed to be already doing a great job of identifying who were good fit for the school with yields higher than some peer ED schools and very close to at least one SCEA school when they were an EA/RD school only.
^^^It would be so interesting to see if UC is taking applicants from elsewhere and/or is attracting those who would never have considered it, rather than merely being part of the increasing number of total apps per student.
Regarding ‘industry trends’, not all elite colleges experienced an increase in early applications this year, notable UPenn was flat, and Cornell decreased. Who knows what will happen when layering in RD though?
Watched the video. Seems like all things are going his way. I’m calling my wife to see if I can make a big capital donation right now! I might want to be 102.
Aw crap. S will get waitlisted. This’ll be long ride.
"I wonder how much of it actually results from reaching out to new pockets of applicants as opposed to applicants anxiously applying to more and more schools as acceptance rates continue to plummet across the board. "
Yep. AO's are telling kids shooting for an elite admission to apply to 10 - 15.
“I also wonder with these kind of numbers if UChicago will relax some of its reliance on show of commitment through binding ED in order to identify the best types of students for the College.”
That ED stuff is a bit loosy-goosy if the candidate is awaiting major funds. Predict they will be shifting to SCEA in order to accomodate that type of student. Maybe it'll be an add-on to their already-diversified portfolio of application options LOL.
^^^I wouldn’t bet against your son. I think your family knows what it means to be a UChicago student and you have recently been successful in relating that to the current gate keepers.
I don’t see Chicago losing much switching to SCEA, or even back to EA. It will definitely help some applicants. Not a win/win but maybe win/insignificant loss situation. I am aware, others will disagree.
@ccdad99 I agree that UChicago wouldn’t lose much if you are measuring acceptance rate and applications. I think what they would have to do is be more liberal with the merit scholarships if they did so. With ED, you are getting a ton of full pays that would have to be enticed to stay vs. going to some other that is offering merit. I think approx half the class comes in on ED.
@FStratford just because The Man was keeping 'em down by not approving Bus. Econ. as a “major”, they still view it as that and if they are all calling it that, then so it is. And you probably are onto something by connecting Bus. Econ. to the increase in applications.
?