<p>I mean they have these crazy increase in early applicants, but its not everyones first choice.. People can apply at the same time to MIT, Caltech, and alot of ED schools. I think UChicago should single out the people who REALLY want to go, more than anything, what do you guys think?</p>
<p>Sent from my SGH-T959V using CC App</p>
<p>i sure wish they did…i would have done ED to Chicago in a heartbeat!</p>
<p>Then they would get less applications, which would mean a higher acceptance rate. They want a lower one – high end applicants, unfortunately, see acceptance rate as an indication of the quality of the school (much like US news).</p>
<p>^this is true. U Chicago has seen a major increase in application numbers since its rise in U.S. News Rankings which uses acceptance rate as a factor.</p>
<p>ED is a terrible thing that no school, even UChicago, should do.</p>
<p>No, definitely not! ED and SCEA are the worst things ever. Restrictive early action, sure, but not ED.</p>
<p>I really like that UChicago has EA so that students who can’t commit due to their financial situation can still apply/find out sooner. It’s a really fair system.
However, I do wish there was SCEA.</p>
<p>@LesleyCordero is there a difference between Rescrictive Early Action and Single Choice Early Action?</p>
<p>ya like boston college has restrictive early action so you can apply anywhere else early action but not early decision anywhere.</p>
<p>It’s doubtful that Chicago’s acceptance rate would change that much if it did ED rather than EA. </p>
<p>Remember, with ED, the school gets 100% yield, which greatly reduces the number of acceptances the school needs to send out.</p>
<p>So, instead of needing to send out ~3400 acceptances for a class of ~1400, with ED (and taking about 40-45% of the class ED), Chicago would only need to accept around ~2500 students to get a class of ~1400. </p>
<p>This year, Chicago will probably receive around 25,000-27,000 apps, will accept around 3400 students, and should have about a 12-14% accept rate overall. </p>
<p>If Chicago went ED, and received only 19,000-20,000 apps (a significant drop), but only accepted ~2500 students, its accept rate would remain in the 12-14% range, and the yield would increase significantly. </p>
<p>Ultimately, there would be no real change in the accept rate, and the rate might even be lower if UChicago instituted an ED policy.</p>
<p>A big reason as to why UChicago should NOT adopt an ED policy, though, is an EA policy insures more diversity in the applicant pool. The pre-business gurus intent on Wharton, the prepsters intent on Dartmouth or Williams, the brilliant scientists intent on MIT, etc. all apply to Chicago, and some of the students who don’t quite make the cut at Wharton or MIT or whatever come to Chicago, and they never would have applied if Chicago was ED.</p>
<p>Put another way, if Chicago went ED, most likely the really wonky cerebral kids would apply ED, and Chicago would lose out on the chance to get at least some of the prepsters, future ibankers, etc. that would never apply to Chicago ED. </p>
<p>Put yet another way, I’m quite happy with Chicago taking some of the “scraps” from Wharton or MIT at this point. Chicago’s been the destination for a lot of nerds and Marx-quoting hippies for a long time. That’s all well and good, but infusing the student body with some more diversity is in Chicago’s interests right now. Keeping an open EA policy helps that.</p>
<p>Maybe years from now, when Chicago has cemented its place as a premier university not just for academics, but for preparing leaders in ANY venture, Chicago can change their policy. For now, as the “new” chicago is still emerging, the current policy seems sound.</p>
<p>^Great post from Cue7! I completely agree with you. I think it’s a great policy of having a simple EA plan. </p>
<p>However, to boost yield rates, is it possible to offer both EA and ED? That way, the people who really, really want to go to Chicago can apply ED, and the people who have Chicago high up on their list can apply EA. If not, then keep EA! :)</p>
<p>I feel like Chicago respects students too much to do ED (or even restrictive early action). Both of those play to the school’s advantage but I believe they want to give students the advantage by allowing them the opportunity to make choices.</p>
<p>In a way it would be nice if they had ED but I’m glad they don’t.</p>
<p>singer582, I don’t know if it has anything to do with Chicago “respecting” its applicants.</p>
<p>Right now, an EA policy aligns neatly with Chicago’s goal of having a more diverse set of incoming students. If at some point Chicago’s interests should change, I have no doubt they’d move quickly to a ED policy.</p>
<p>Especially right now in terms of admissions, Chicago is like any other top school - seeking to play the “big numbers” admission game, seeking to increase yield, aware of its ranking, etc.</p>
<p>@singer582: Yeah, I kinda feel the same way about ED. Imo, it really limits applicants to upper-class or financially well off people thereby limiting the applicant pool, because students who are in a less stable financial situation would not apply due to the risk of being accepted and given little FA. All that cost for just a better chance of getting in seems somewhat ridiculous.</p>
<p>@Raichu: for the reasons above I feel ED would be a poor choice, and I pretty much agree with Cue7 as to why they remain with EA.</p>
<p>wow you guys make a good point :P</p>