UChicago EA/ED combined were 9%. Incredibly low…
Was there a formal release of the official numbers ?
Did they release some statistics?
the 9% EA/ED1 was expressly stated in an event for admitted students.
With this in mind, would it be smarter to apply RD? Who would benefit from the EA/ED at UChicago? Thanks!
The composite figure for EA/ED obscures the fact that EA (the bulk of early applicants last year) was minimally advantageous while ED rates were quite high. RD was virtually impossible (about 2%). The clear message being sent was if you want in, apply some form of ED. ED2 did not seem less advantageous than ED1, but we don’t have the actual numbers. And, of course, this year could (presumably will) be different from last.
Bottom line, if UChicago is your clear first choice and your family’s decision will not be influenced by cost, apply ED1. If UChicago is your clear second choice and your family’s decision will not be influenced by cost, apply (SC)EA or ED elsewhere and if you aren’t happy with your results, then apply ED2 to UChicago. Otherwise, apply EA or RD if you are really interested in UChicago specifically (e.g. not simply as a top 10 school), and do your best to write compelling essays and let your college counselor/regional rep know how interested you are. But recognize it’s a long shot.
Yield 73%
Hi @“Cariño” is your yield number sourced or interpolated?
HI @CU123
The AO said it during the admitted students reunion on July 10th. We were there.
U Chicago is doing a wonderful job on recruitment. Cheers.
Wait a minute. UChicago is delaying 1st year housing assignments because they don’t have enough space, supposedly. 73% yield on 8% admitted for 28,000 applicants is 1,635. Last year’s entering class was about 1,590 so we are talking no more than 50 additional first years with a 73% yield - reasonably within the margin on error. Why do they need to make all this extra room? Hasn’t I-House always had extra space? This doesn’t make much sense.
Damn that yield! They would have offered my D a full ride if it was a bit lower 
The notice my D received is that more upperclassmen are staying put in housing, (my guess is in North), rather than leaving as they traditionally have done. So it is a combination of a slightly bigger class and less free housing than normal.
OK - the e-mail that arrived here just said “due to increased demand” or something generic. However, my hubby spoke to a rising 2nd year today and he confirmed what you heard, @hebegebe - the upperclass students aren’t moving off campus as expected. That’s good news for UChicago, right? Haven’t they been attempting more community for decades now?
That yield is really high considering that the “summer melt” is already factored in.
Frankly, it would not surprise me when the official numbers come out in the fall, the yield will be higher than 73% which is phenomenal enough already.
@theluckystar Honestly not that phenomenal since reportedly 75-80% of the class was admitted early. I don’t see the benefit in having EA/EDI/EDII and taking so many students early. Chicago can compete perfectly fine against other top schools with a simple EA or ED.
I just don’t see the long-term effects of this policy. If anyone has a theory of what are the long-term strategic benefits of this policy, I would be very interested to hear.
From what I can tell (based on who I see being admitted and enrolling there), they’re trying to become the go-to school for highly-academically-qualified candidates who are unhooked and aren’t quite making it to HYPS. By taking the great majority of the class ED, they can pick and choose among students who fit the desired profile. Stats-and-selectivity-wise, I think they’re aiming for UChicago to be seen as a new member of the HYPS club, and they’re trying to pull clearly ahead of the next tier (Penn, Columbia, Duke, etc.).
They already have pulled away from those …
Betting that Chicago always had a higher yield from the EA’s under the old admission plans (we already knew that those kids had a higher admit rate). Obviously, introducing the ED option has the potential to tilt the scales favorably towards those kids, but that’s not a given (especially if you haven’t eliminated the previous option of EA). A lot depends on which type of kid applied under which plan. This year, a whole lotta kids who would have been highly probable EA admits under the old plans opted for ED this time. Most likely UChicago thought it had this type of applicant for several years now and finally decided to test that hypothesis. Unless we see a drop in stats suggesting that they sacrificed quality for “certainty”, we can’t deny that this was a successful move on their part. Why entice kids with merit aid if they were planning to come to your school anyway? We on the other side of the bargaining table might not prefer this, but a fiscally prudent institution is simply doing it’s job to introduce ED under those circumstances. Keep in mind, too, that UChicago didn’t invent “ED” - it’s been in use by other institutions for awhile now.