Here’s another way that they can fiddle with scores. The Chicago website used to say that they didn’t consider SAT essay (or that it was “supplemental” info). No essay is required with the new SAT. If a kid got 800 math / 800 critical reading, they could say that kid got a 1600 on old SAT. Could calculate the whole set of “old” SAT scores, with and without “writing” score, converting to new SAT, and see which was higher.
Yes, that was one of the types of conversions I tried that gave me the variation in results (though my example had a writing score higher than either CR or M). Using the 2400 scale concordance yielded a “new” score of 1560 which was 50 points higher than what U of C would have listed the CR+M score as last year.
Per Maroon, UChicago is not releasing final admissions statistics until the Fall. Any thoughts?
@Chrchill, UChicago won’t know its yield until the Fall, though I suspect bits and pieces of the '21 cycle will continue to be highlighted by the school until then. I am not overly concerned by this “delay” if it is really is a delay.
It is a delay. Its always published in the spring. They should explain why they are delaying to avert the inevitable negative inferences.
Well, Stanford is no longer publishing it’s Early results and one can hardly attribute negative reaasons for that (other than negative publicity for basically letting in no one! LOL). They have opted to make one announcement at a certain time of year (spring). UChicago might also be changing its announcement date because they want final numbers. In the past what the Maroon publishes and what the final numbers are can be a bit different (eg 66% yield reported last may, 64% reported on the UChicago website).
One set of numbers released at one time to all sources - news, website, etc.
OK. Could be right,. .
Chicago’s timing is still off. Stanford still releases its numbers in the spring, so high schoolers over the summer can access these stats. Not releasing until the middle of the fall (in mid-October) is unduly late - and gives applicants a LOT less time to learn about Chicago’s stats, and what to do.
(Stanford, btw, still releases how many students were admitted early, and I believe will have breakdowns available soon - much earlier than Chicago.)
@Cue7 the frustration is understandable but UChicago has definitely released an admit rate of around 8%. They saw a huge number of early applications (something that’s been trending up over the years anyway and didn’t seem to adjust due to ED - except perhaps to increase!). What is going to affect you or your kid’s decision to apply based on these factors? NONE of them changes the underlying fundamentals of the institution.
Wouldn’t you like to see the early admit stats - ESPECIALLY the Early Decision stats? If I’m applying - especially applying binding - to something, I’d like to know the different admit rates for ED/RD, etc.
Every other top school that does ED shows this data, so applicants can gauge their chances and at least incorporate the data into their analysis.
Knowing these stats could absolutely impact which way to go - EA, ED, ED2, RD. Not really knowing ANY of these stats is a glaring lack of information indeed.
(And Chicago never officially released the 8% stat - that’s just been talked about on this board.)
Yes, EA needs to be separated from ED for the numbers to be meaningful. Bundling the two together really obscures what’s going on. I don’t know how they’ll handle EA movement to RD vs to ED2 but that would be useful info as well.
For those who haven’t already seen it, this post (on the College Admissions forum thread on 2021 stats) may be interesting/potentially useful:
616
PurpleTitan
04-03-2017 at 8:24 pm edited April 3
@Chrchill: OK, if the U of C’s numbers are to be believed (and that’s open to question, as their past behavior has shown):
8% of 28K total = 2240 total admits.
EA & ED1 = 9% of 13K total = 1170 admits in ED1+EA
ED2 & RD = 1070 admits from 15K total.
x * .02 + (15000 - x) * y = 1070
We don’t know how many applied to the U of C ED2 but we do know that roughly the same number applied to ED2 at BU as to ED1. We also know that between 3000 and 4000 apply ED to Brown, Duke, and Northwestern, but the U of C doesn’t have engineering (or a lot of schools that Northwestern has). Between 1500 and 2000 ED to Emory, Dartmouth, and JHU (even though JHU does have engineering). Even being generous, say 2K-4K apply to each of ED1 and ED2 at the U of C.
If 4K ED’ed to each of I and II (and EA had the same 2% admit rate as RD):
ED1: 24.75%
ED2: 21.25%
If 3K ED’ed to each of I and II (and EA had the same 2% admit rate as RD):
ED1: 32.33%
ED2: 27.67%
If 2K ED’ed to each of I and II (and EA had the same 2% admit rate as RD):
ED1: 47.5%
ED2: 40.5%
Note that the school with the most SCEA apps (Harvard) only had a little over 6K, so UChicago almost certainly didn’t have 8K ED’ing to it.
In any case, the U of C is giving a massive bump to those who ED.
It seems like your chances to the U of C range from around 30% to possibly even above 40% if you ED, but they are almost nil if you do not.
And yes, taking in a decided majority of your class in ED most certainly would increase yield.
@Cue7 Noyt quite: We know for sure: 9% ED1 and EA. We know 2% RD and we know that deferred admits were 0.5% This was all repeatedly disclosed at accepted student cocktails.
Dudes, everyone would love to see the ED numbers and admission rates. But UChicago has never released data on the early pool in the past so there’s no reason to expect them to change.
However, IF a big reason for them to delay release is so that they can come clean with ED, EA, ED II and RD numbers in a press release, then Cool! (Don’t expect it, however . . . ).
Exactly! If you’re going to create all these options for applying, why not present the data behind each option?
Maybe that’s what Chicago is doing - they’re just meticulously preparing ALL the data and they’ll do a big data dump in mid-October (EA rate, ED rate, ED2 rate, those deferred to the RD rate, RD rate, etc.), to give students the complete full picture.
Haha does anyone believe that?
@Cue7 the applicant plan segmentation is for YOU to tell THEM how much you love them. It’s not for THEM to tell YOU what your chances for getting in are. Wish it were different! 
In this household, Admissions is affectionatey known as The Lying Liars Who Lie.
Edit: BTW, that’s AO’s everywhere not just UChicago. Want to make that clear.
The statistically-minded among us definitely want this stuff. As to whether there’s a good reason for it not being released earlier than November I am agnostic. But my question is more a behavioral one: It is being suggested that kids who don’t know these exact figures will act in some other way than if they did know them. Is that so? I highly doubt it. They will certainly know that their chances are considerably better (though still long) in applying ED1 than they would be in applying in any other form. They will certainly know that their chances are miniscule in applying RD. Will it matter to anyone applying in that way that his chances are 2 per cent as opposed to 3.15 per cent or whatever? I never thought I as a proud U. of C. alumnus would say this, but there is such a thing as overthinking a subject.
Absolutely - I think the statistics can impact decisions high schoolers make, and the way they apply. Let’s say (hypothetically) the EA rate is 15%, the ED rate is 30%, and the RD rate is 1%. (These numbers might not be far off from Chicago’s reality, actually.)
If I’m a high school senior, that means I’ll apply either EA or ED, and ignore RD. For the admissions office, this could lead to horrible work flow - tons of apps to read starting from mid-October (when recruiting/traveling is still ongoing), and a very strange spring.
That could impact things, no?
@marlowe1 As do next years applicants!
Admit rate doesn’t tell everything. It completely ignores the quality of each pool and ED applicants were probably as a group much more qualified than the other group and RD apps were probably the weakest by far (all speculation but likely imo). Obviously it’s an advantage but a well qualified kid who can write need not shirk from the RD round
No need to shirk from the RD round but the numbers don’t lie (well, that is, if they’re accurate). You have to assess if your a shoe in for whatever reason, if not, you had better up your odds somehow.