<p>University of Chicago receives 25,271 apps, up from 21,762 last year. Increase of 3509, up 16.12%</p>
<p>According to New York Times:
Applications</a> Surge to Berkeley and Virginia - NYTimes.com</p>
<p>Another record year for UChicago. Look for admit rate to drop to record low.</p>
<p>Application Changes This Year for Selected Schools:</p>
<p>1) Virginia up +17.64%
2) Berkeley up +16.5%
3) UChicago up +16.12%
4) Stanford up +6.98%
5) Duke up +6.13%
6) Yale up +5.05%
7) Wesleyan up +4.52%
8) Georgetown up +4.2%
9) Northwestern up +3.5%
9) Dartmouth up +3%
10) Pomona up +1.64%
11) Johns Hopkins up +1.04%
12) MIT +1%
13) Williams up +.14%
14) Penn down -1.69%
15) Amherst down -1.71%
16) Columbia down -8.91%</p>
<p>Then the admit rate will be 12.6% ~13.6% if they admit between 3200 to 3446 (last year’s number). I guess Chicago will admit less than 3270 totally, to make the admit rate look nicer at 12.9%, lower than 13%. Anyway, the yield will climb from last year’s 41% to 42~43%. But who knows.</p>
<p>I surmise the acceptance rate and the yield will further go down and up respectively for two reasons in addition to the increased total application number this year.</p>
<ol>
<li><p>rising reputation for U Chicago</p></li>
<li><p>the reinstatement of EA/ED at Princeton and Harvard. I assume a lot kids who were admitted to HP also applied to U Chicago to hedge their bets, and they may withdraw their application before the April RD decisions come out, thus removing them from the admit pool, giving the Chicago adcoms the opportunity to offer admissions to students who are, collectively, more likely to come.</p></li>
<li><p>I understand last year they underestimated their yield, and the incoming freshman class was too big, so the adcoms may adjust the size of the incoming class a bit downwardly.</p></li>
</ol>
<p>Just my conjecture. It’s worth about 2 cents.</p>
<p>IMHO, they should admit less and if the yeild is normal or lower than expected, they can pick from the waitlist.</p>
<p>Actually all three schools in HYP have single-choice or restrictive early action programs, these HYP applicants can ONLY apply to ONE school in the first round except for their home public schools. These applicants did not and could not apply to Chicago for early action.</p>
<p>Harvard down -1.9%</p>
<p>1) Virginia up +17.64%
2) Berkeley up +16.5%
3) UChicago up +16.12%
4) Stanford up +6.98%
5) Duke up +6.13%
6) Yale up +5.05%
7) Wesleyan up +4.52%
8) Georgetown up +4.2%
9) Northwestern up +3.5%
9) Dartmouth up +3%
10) Pomona up +1.64%
11) Johns Hopkins up +1.04%
12) MIT +1%
13) Williams up +.14%
14) Penn down -1.69%
15) Amherst down -1.71%
16) Harvard down -1.9%
17) Columbia down -8.91%</p>
<p>Harvard down -1.9%. Cornell up +3.53%</p>
<p>[Applications</a> to Harvard Drop for First Time in Five Years | News | The Harvard Crimson](<a href=“http://www.thecrimson.com/article/2012/1/26/admissions-applications-decline-2016/]Applications”>Applications to Harvard Drop for First Time in Five Years | News | The Harvard Crimson)</p>
<p>1) Virginia up +17.64%
2) Berkeley up +16.5%
3) UChicago up +16.12%
4) Stanford up +6.98%
5) Duke up +6.13%
6) Yale up +5.05%
7) Wesleyan up +4.52%
8) Georgetown up +4.2%
9) Cornell up +3.53%
10) Northwestern up +3.5%
11) Dartmouth up +3%
12) Pomona up +1.64%
13) Johns Hopkins up +1.04%
14) MIT +1%
15) Williams up +.14%
16) Penn down -1.69%
17) Amherst down -1.71%
18) Harvard down -1.9%
19) Columbia down -8.91%</p>
<p>Here’s a link to the Chicago Maroon article:</p>
<p>[College</a> applications jump 16 percent to record high – The Chicago Maroon](<a href=“Saul Bellow, dead at 89 – Chicago Maroon”>Saul Bellow, dead at 89 – Chicago Maroon)</p>
<p>Outside of the “common app bump” chicago received between the classes of 2013 and 2014 (where apps increased from the 13k to the 19k range), I don’t know if the growth in the past 2 years - from 19k apps to 25k apps - is massively impressive. It’s nice, certainly, but in terms of actual additional number of applications received, it’s not out of line with growth found at Chicago’s peer schools overall a comparable span of time.</p>
<p>For instance, from the Class of 2013 to 2015, Penn received nearly 9k additional applications, for an increase of close to 40% over the two year span. Similarly, from the class of 2013 to 2015, Columbia received nearly 10k more applications, for an increase of close to 40%.</p>
<p>So, Chicago’s change over the past two years, about a 30% increase, is certainly good, but also not terribly above some of its peers.</p>
<p>On a related note, I think Chicago needs to concentrate on getting its total number of applications up to the ~30k range. If Chicago wants to play the big numbers game, and schools like Wash U can get ~30k apps, there’s no reason Chicago can’t as well. </p>
<p>I’m not making any assertions about whether the big numbers game is “good” or “bad,” just that Chicago has chosen to play the game.</p>
<p>Aw…I liked Chicago for not being so obsessed with the game.</p>
<p>As far as the game goes–and a game is exactly what it is–the total number of applications is not the most important factor. You also have to take into account class size and yield rate and admit rate. MIT and Caltech are extremely unpopular and receive very few applications compared with the other schools, but they have small classes so they have a low admit rate. Similarly, Penn, Northwestern and Duke get 31,00 applications–more than Yale and Princeton–but Penn, Duke, Northwestern have a higher admit rate because they have bigger classes (and lower yield).
For the long run, Penn, Duke and Northwestern won’t be able to compete with UChicago because UChicago has a significantly smaller class size and thus will end up with the lower admit rate as its total applications grow. Northwestern and Penn could never overtake Harvard, for instance, because they have larger classes and thus would have to get many more applications than Harvard to be equally or more selective (keeping in mind yield rate.) Stanford Business School overtook Harvard Business School in admit rate (i.e, became harder to get into) by remaining smaller. Thus UChicago will be able to make gains on the top schools in the country (based on admit rate) that are simply impossible for Duke, Penn, or Northwestern.
Also, from the figures below, you will see it is fairly common for schools applications to grow something like 22,000 to 25,000 or 26,000 to 29,000 to 31,000. Which is my guess about what UChicago will do over the next few years.</p>
<p>2016 2015 2014 2013 2012 </p>
<p>Columbia:
31,818 34,929 26,178 25,427 22,585</p>
<p>Penn:
31,127 31,659 26,938 22,808 22,922</p>
<p>Duke:
31,565 29,689 26,784 22,280</p>
<p>UChicago:
25,271 21,774 19,370 13,600</p>
<p>UChicago has plenty of room to grow its application pool (up to 31,000-35,000). That is not the case for Penn, Northwestern, and Duke. Thus, UChicago has more room to lower its admit rate further than the others.</p>
<p>(And this is not just a three year change for UChicago; it’s a 20 year trend)</p>
<p>Duke undergrads 6,526
Penn undergrads 10,394
Northwestern undergrads 8,425
UChicago undergrads 5,200 or so
Stanford undergrads 6,878
Harvard undergrads 6,655</p>
<p>Caltech undergrads 978, applications 5,169
MIT undergrads 4,384, applications 18,000</p>
<p>(UChicago used to have fewer undergrads than MIT)</p>
<p>Truth123 - the difficulty, though, becomes a question of yield. Yes Chicago’s class size is smaller than Penn or Duke but, it’s very difficult to envision Chicago’s yield improving much beyond 45% without going to Early Decision to lock down applicants.</p>
<p>Put another way, for Chicago to persuasively pass by Duke and Penn in terms of selectivity, the school would need to get about 34,000 applications, and then have a yield rate of about 45% to have an overall acceptance rate in the single digits, while Duke and Penn remain stagnant.</p>
<p>It’s difficult to envision that.</p>
<p>Put another way, what I’m saying is that I imagine Chicago has settled into the “band” of schools that it will compete with for some time, and I don’t necessarily see Chicago surpassing this group any time soon. The schools most close to Chicago in terms of selectivity will be Duke, Penn, Wash U, etc. </p>
<p>Unless Chicago gets ~10k more apps than it does now, it’s tough to see the U of C breaking away from this current band of competitors.</p>
<p>I agree yield is important but the University is discovering that the lower the admit rate drops, the higher the yield goes (not the opposite.) If you put the trends of those schools on a graph for the past 15 years you would see why UChicago has not settled into a band with those other schools. UChicago is on a much faster downward course. No school has ever had its admit rate drop as quickly as UChicago over the past 10 to 12 years. (In other words, while many schools have had applications increases over the past decade, UChicago has moved up much more relative to the other schools.)
Duke has also shot up a bit, I agree. But it is closer to maxxing out than UChicago (and is lower ranked).
And you have to take into account the affect this will have on the rankings.
Anyway, as I say, it is all a big game. And in many ways a very silly one. UChicago has always been better academically than Duke, Penn, Northwestern, etc. But it’s nice to see it getting the popular appeal.
It will be interesting to see how it all plays out over the coming years. But reputation and prestige are a very nebulous thing that grows because of admit rate and rankings; it’s not an immediate over night change. But it does make a difference.</p>
<p>By the way, on a side topic…if you think the rankings don’t matter. When U.S. News first did its rankings in 1983 and in 1985 Stanford was ranked #1. Lately it’s been hovering, what 5th or 6th or something. Whatever. Anyway, as soon as Stanford lost the #1 spot, it immediately began losing more students to HYP than it had in previous years, as their admissions director noted at the time. So in some ways the U.S. News rankings have hurt Stanford while it has really just helped UChicago (even as badly as it under-ranked it over the years.)</p>
<p>I would have to check the numbers and years but UChicago’s yield has grown from 30% to 42% or so in the past 10 years or so. And again, yield only rises the more apps increase.
If UChicago’s yield rate were 70% I would say it had maxxed out, but it has plenty of room to grow. And other universities have seen yield grow along with popularity. It is not unheard of and indeed UChicago is doing it as we speak.</p>
<p>As I guess, UChicago’s admit rate will be lower than 12.9%, yield will be over 42% this year for the class of 2016. Good for them.</p>
<p>Truth 123 - I agree with your analysis (i.e. Chicago’s had the most drastic change over a period of recent years), but, as some schools are beginning to see now, a flattening out will occur at some point. Most schools this year didn’t see huge gains in the number of applications, and it seems as if some schools are flattening out a bit.</p>
<p>Accordingly, the bigger question becomes - when does UChicago flatten out? Will it continue ~15% increases every year for the next 5 years while all the other schools remain flat? So, put another way, will UChicago someday receive 46000 applications while Harvard remains stuck at ~35000 apps?</p>
<p>In terms of predicting when the flattening will occur, I tend to be a bit more conservative in my estimates. Schools can market well (as, say, Wash U does), but it’s tough to get in the same ball park of apps as Harvard or Columbia. If you look, Yale and Princeton have comparable numbers of apps to Chicago, and this doesn’t mean they are “niche” schools by any means, but just that they lack the large-scale appeal that comes with being in nyc (Columbia) or, well, being Harvard. </p>
<p>So, I’m not sure how much higher the apps at Chicago will go. I think they can get to around 30-35k, but, unless they go to ED, where would yield flatline out? I’m guessing around 45-50% is the peak. Without an ED policy, it’s hard to see yield getting much better than that.</p>
<p>Truth123, what’s your prediction? You seem quite optimistic about this. Do you think Chicago will zoom right past Duke and Penn and Dartmouth (no slouches themselves) and align right along side the other very tippy-top schools? I don’t see a reason as to why this would happen. Yes UChicago has a high ranking now, but it’s not like Duke and UPenn (which had or have high rankings too) really started worrying the very tippy top schools (Harvard, Stanford, etc.) once they rubbed shoulders with these schools at the very top of the totem pole.</p>
<p>UChicago still has a lot of catching up to do, so it’s extremely premature to expect it to pass Penn or Duke. How many students do you see picking UChicago over Penn? Even though UChicago has much higher SAT scores than Penn, Penn is seen as a more selective school (likely because it’s Ivy League).</p>
<p>That being said, that’s almost precisely the reason why I think there’s some truth in truth123’s argument. If Chicago is getting 25k apps with 42% yield while still being seen as below Penn and considerably below MIT and Stanford, what happens when UChicago actually comes to be seen as a true peer of Penn, MIT, and Stanford? (And I think this will inevitably happen within the next 5 years once Chicago solidifies its position in the top 5 in the USNWR and stops being seen as an outlier, much as Penn did a few years ago.) Its apps will grow and its yield will increase.</p>
<p>I imagine that Chicago has a max yield of 50% over the next 5 years (and I think that 50% is very much attainable in that period), and max apps around 35,000. If this occurs, and Chicago still aims for a class size around 1350, Chicago will have an admit rate below 8%. Now, by that time, HYS’s acceptance rates will likely be around 5%, but I don’t expect Duke and Penn to be able to go below 10% without a marketing campaign equivalent to Chicago’s. Penn’s apps have a tendency to grow for a few years, then remain stagnant or decline for a few years, and it has re-entered its stagnant period after 3 years of solid app growth. And Duke has basically milked its ED-whoring for all its worth.</p>
<p>^well, my friend went to Chicago over Stanford and Columbia, and says there’s quite a few people who made similar choices at UChicago. It definitely attracts a certain type of student more than others.</p>