“From about 10 years ago, there was only EA and EA admit rate is always higher than RD. Then they started ED and ED rate is higher than EA and RD. Now they have ED1 and ED2, I think they want to play a low key on the admit rate of ED1 so they mixed the admit rate of both ED1 and ED2, you have no evidence of what admit rate on ED1, so, how you can say ED1 and ED2 are treated equally? If they are, why they created those categories?”
- So, let's start by getting the sequence of events correct:
For years, UChicago offered EA and RD. RD was “technically” a lower admit rate than EA because they deferred a whole lot of the latter and put them in the regular pool. Don’t recall reading much from CC parents about how many tended to be deferred or how many of those were subsequently accepted. It’s quite possible, for example, that a new RD app. had a better admit rate than a deferred EA. But we don’t know. UChicago never published that information. Then, for the 2016-17 application cycle UChicago - without fanfare or indeed even an announcement - changed the application options to ED1, EA, ED2, and RD. So ED1 and ED2 were introduced TOGETHER.
Now, there is little doubt that UChicago’s ED admission has a better admit rate than EA/RD. ED is a binding plan, and for most universities binding admission will attract smaller pools than non-binding admission. Keep in mind, however, that UChicago’s early admit pool never shrank by introducing ED1. It remained at about 13K for two years, and then last year it jumped to 15K, assuming the WaPo reporting is correct. Given that the overall early admit rate was 7%, and keeping the mix of admits at 2/3 ED1 and 1/3 EA (like it was for the first year of the new plans), that means that the ED1 applicant pool would need to be 10K strong in order for the two admit rates to be equal! That seems a tad high, even for UChicago. Therefore, it’s likelier that the ED1 pool was smaller than 10K, and the admit rate above 7%. My own guess is that we are looking at 10% ED1 and about 5% for EA. But it’s just a guess.
You are correct that I have no current evidence on ED1 vs. ED2 admit rates. However, they are both BINDING PLANS. ED1 is offered for the early pool, and ED2 for the regular. And there’s a terrific reason why they created ED2: many top kids who apply in the regular round to UChicago applied SCEA elsewhere first. If they were deferred, ED2 allows them a follow-up chance at another top school that they would love to attend. That’s how my S19 (currently a first year) was admitted. And, for the first couple of years at least, ED2 also scooped up some EA-deferreds who switched to binding in the regular round. That’s how my D (currently a 3rd year) was admitted. There was some evidence last year to suggest that particular “back door” wasn’t available as much - perhaps the ED2 pool was super strong.
They don’t have much concern at all about “mixing” the admit rate of ED1 and ED2 up. They are attracting different applicants and pools might vary significantly from year to year in both numbers and quality. ED1 is for those early applicants who have a clear #1 preference for UChicago over and above other schools. ED2 is for those who aren’t planning to apply to UChicago early but have a clear preference for UChicago over other schools by the time they do apply. UChicago admits approximately half its total class early (ED1/EA), and the other half regular (ED2/RD). As mentioned upthread, how that breaks down now between ED and non-ED is anyone’s guess. Depending on size of pool and number of admits in each, the ED2 admit rate can be higher, lower or equal to ED1.
Finally, they don’t play “low key” on ED1. They make it pretty clear how they view ED vs. non-binding.
“In the bio job market, only top quadrant students will get the fruit, plenty of bio graduates went on to be Sales in a mall or a waiter in a restaurant.”
-Well, not sure how it was 10 years ago (2009? - Great Recession?) but the career placement stats tend to be a bit better than that now. OP never disclosed long-term plans (pre-med? research? something else?) so we probably can’t speculate on specific outcomes. Suffice it to say that UChicago undergrads shouldn’t have too much to worry about in terms of internships and professional outcomes. OP, if accepted, might even qualify for an Odyssey Scholarship and that will come with its own level of professional mentoring.