<p>This the place to post the officially released admissions' statistics. With an official representative on the forum, the statistics should be forthcoming as soon as the University deems such information worthy of full disclosure. </p>
<p>What is known so far is that more than 11,000 students (11,143) filed an Non Restrictive Early Application. The full details should be added here shortly. </p>
<p>Early</a> action applications set another record, continue yearly rise ? The Chicago Maroon</p>
<p>Wow, from 3777 to 11143…</p>
<p>Nice marketing effort. All those t-shirts paid off.</p>
<p>
What t-shirt? I was accepted, and I don’t have a t-shirt.</p>
<p><a href=“https://blogs.uchicago.edu/collegeadmissions/2013/12/class_of_2018_early_action_dec.html[/url]”>https://blogs.uchicago.edu/collegeadmissions/2013/12/class_of_2018_early_action_dec.html</a></p>
<p>Cool. All that is missing is the … number of successful applicants. And perhaps a link to that elusive Common Data Set. Who will be the last to release. Columbia or Chicago. ;)</p>
<p>So weird looking at the EA decision thread. Tons of accepted lol. It’s like 70% or something of applicants from CC got into UChicago… wut.</p>
<p>Even with self-selectivity, the not-wanting-to-post-if-deferred/rejected psychology and blablabla, I didn’t expect so many ACCEPT…</p>
<p>Non-binding EA is a good strategy to get more applicants different from SCEA or ED of prestigious colleges. It was one of factors my daughter did EA to U Chicago. I love U Chicago, anyway.</p>
<p>@Skyrior</p>
<p>If you read the 2018 EA thread, most people wrote that they got deferred (including me, lol). I assume that they’re just not posting stats on the Results page since that’d be pretty depressing to fill out.</p>
<p>@renoverchat</p>
<p>I see, I did not check the mega-thread at the time of posting of #6. Good luck though! Hope that you will get accepted! (Don’t forget to indicate to UChicago that you’re still interested!)</p>
<p>The silence from the adcoms is … deafening. Old habits rarely die.</p>
<p>Question: if an applicant was deferred EA, does it indicate that on his or her RD application?</p>
<p>It appears that Chicago admitted well over 1,300 students in the EA round.</p>
<p>~1,300/11,143 is about ~12% acceptance rate much lower than Harvard (~21%) and other colleges in EA/ED round.</p>
<p>Yes they certainly did a huge marketing blitz! My son got something from them every week and sometimes twice a week, including the t-shirt. He didn’t apply since they don’t have his major, but was impressed with all the stuff they sent.</p>
<p>"…And perhaps a link to that elusive Common Data Set. Who will be the last to release. Columbia or Chicago."</p>
<p>DITTO</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Different animals altogether! The non-binding EA attracts plenty of “what I got to lose” applications. Here’s a more interesting element:</p>
<p>Try the percentage of the expected class that was admitted in the early round:</p>
<p>Harvard? 922 for 1700 seats. In the past two years, 895 for 1700 and 772 for 1,670.</p>
<p>Chicago? 1350 for an expected class of 1350? Or about 100 percent? The last two years were about 1380 for 1350 and 1532 for 1,350 seats.</p>
<p>The resident adcom should feel free to correct the numbers, if they happen to be erroneous. Not waiting with bated breath for that to happen anytime soon!</p>
<p>Xiggi - that’s very true. I only applied to UChicago because it wasn’t single-choice EA. If it was restricted, like Harvard, I probably would never have even considered it.</p>
<p>That being said, I guess that the UChicago adcoms realized that the matriculation rate would be relatively low, and admitted extra as is standard. I would be shocked if more than half of the EA acceptees ultimately matriculate at UChicago.</p>
<p>What’s with the weird tone, xiggi? Obviously, when Harvard accepts 900 applicants, all of whom forwent any other early applications, it knows about 800 are going to show up in the fall. Or about half of Harvard’s final class. When Chicago admits 1,350 applicants, a whole bunch of which had early applications in to comparable colleges, including binding ED applications, it’s not going to get anything close to 1,350 enrolled students. It’s probably going to get slightly more than half of them . . . which would translate into about half of Chicago’s final class. Harvard’s 920 may represent 48% of its final class (and about 45% of its total acceptances), and Chicago’s 1,350 may represent 55% of its final class (and probably 50% of its total acceptances), but essentially they are doing the same thing.</p>
<p>Harvard’s draw is amazing – that it can get 85% of the students it accepts to enroll, when all of them have other great choices, and none of them is bound. That’s unique. Yale, Stanford, Princeton come close, but no one is really at that level. </p>
<p>(By the way, arrhenius – last year, at least, more than 50% of Chicago’s EA acceptees ultimately enrolled, and I bet they expect the same this year.)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Humm, what is that you find weird in the … tone, JHS? I only commented on the differences between REA and open EA admissions, and that the rates of admissions at a REA school such as Harvard are not comparable to Chicago. And this for the reason you also described (different yields.) I do not think there was something weird or … offensive in that analysis. I also pointed to the number of admits vs open spots to show how the yields will have different expectations. </p>
<p>Nothing new, really! As far as the tone directed at the new person behind the UChicago handle , I make no apologies for repeatedly mocking the usual silence from Chicago (and Columbia) and the usual disregard for a “bit” of transparency in releasing Common Data Sets or … a simple rate of admission for the EA class. </p>
<p>Old habits do not die easily. Even after Ted’s departure!</p>
<p>Would anybody who got accepted already and plans to attend like to exchange contact info?</p>