<p>From NYTimes</p>
<p>University of rochester had a record 17,230 applicants this spring. 5,351 were accepted; 9,370 denied; 1,952 waitlisted.</p>
<p>ED acceptance rate: 46.90%
RD acceptance rate: 30.2%</p>
<p>Wow - I hope they did a good job of predicting yield!</p>
<p>Congrats to those who were accepted! (…And condolances to those who weren’t.) Thanks for sharing the info.</p>
<p>I noticed that in 2012 they accepted 5,583 students.
In 2013, 5,351 so 232 less students. </p>
<p>It don’t remember how big the actual enrolled freshman class of 2012 was to give the waitlisted students and idea of how many get off the waitlist. Do you either of you?</p>
<p>The numbers to me suggest they could game the rankings by not accepting as many students who data suggests will go elsewhere. Hope they don’t.</p>
<p>Historically, UR has taken <10 students off the waitlist. </p>
<p>Here’s Fact Sheet for 2012-13. 5370 accepted, 1237 enrolled. UR has taken their older Fact Sheets down. (They’re probably archived somewhere on the Web, but I don’t feel like searching for them.)</p>
<p><a href=“http://enrollment.rochester.edu/admissions/res/pdf/factsheet.pdf[/url]”>http://enrollment.rochester.edu/admissions/res/pdf/factsheet.pdf</a></p>
<p>Back when D2 enrolled and the 2 years previous to that, UR “over-accepted” and the resulting incoming class was too big. There wasn’t enough housing. Plenty of forced triples for Class of 2011, 2012. IIRC, the class of 2010 actually had kids sleeping in hall lounges for the first semester.</p>
<p>Hopefully, they’ve learned to predict their yield better and the new dorm has helped open more freshman rooms in the Quad dorms.</p>
<p>Thanks WOWmom, that is about 23%.</p>
<p>Lergnom, don’t all schools that are more desirable deny or waitlist students they think won’t actually come. </p>
<p>I read in one of the NYTs links that one student was denied at Washington Univ in St. Luis but was admitted to Yale.</p>
<p>I mean they could do more. From what I’ve seen and heard, more schools are trying to predict better. They can say it’s necessary because the common app has increased applications and because they want to save money in the admissions process and so on but it also reduces the acceptance rate while, presumably, increasing yield. Both are marketed as desirable metrics. (BTW, the best thing UR could do to increase applications would be to have a law school - and to create an undergrad biz school. I hope they don’t do either but that is what works.)</p>
<p>But I don’t mean to open a can of worms.</p>
<p>I’m not a fan of undergrad metrics in general. I’ve spent too much time analyzing them and their meaning to respect them. One example: if you look at application numbers for certain public schools, you see a self-limiting factor in which the status or raw level of acceptance is known in-state and so kids tend to slot themselves. And if you look at the in versus out state stats, they can be strikingly different for some schools. And further if you look into specific schools, you find they draw vast numbers from a few locations. NYU, for example, limits what it puts out but you can identify the main sources of applications and acceptances. Guess what? When you’re the large school in the largest city, you get a lot of applications from that area. Does that really equal “selectivity?” The more I went into the numbers, the more I questioned what the typical metrics even mean.</p>
<p>I’m much more in favor of grad school rankings. Why? Though they are mostly reputational, they reflect name recognition in the relevant community, which affects research and employment opportunities. That is why grad school rankings matter: your first job in academia stays with you for a long time. It doesn’t mean quality doesn’t rise over time, just that you have to include “over time” when you’re talking about academics. These rankings, the better ones, also include such things as the number of papers per faculty, number of citations per paper, etc. as ways of identifying the influence of the department in the field. But undergrad rankings? Total bull.</p>
<p>Trying to be honest, which isn’t always easy because it raises odd issues, I look at the percentage of Jews in a school. Why? Well, first, I’m Jewish so I don’t feel weird about it. Second, Jews are associated with high achievement and with an emphasis on academics. Third, the numbers for Jews at a number of prestigious schools tracks pretty well. (Note I’m not saying Jews are inherently intelligent or more intelligent. Also note that if you read David Brooks’ column about the decline in Jewish representation, the numbers he used were really, really off.)</p>
<p>Would people feel comfortable with a “Jewish ranking” system? We sort of have that. We also sort of have an “Asian ranking” system: top schools tend to have a high number of Asian students. (And here, I’ll point out that the vastness of Asia obviously means Asians aren’t inherently more intelligent, though it’s funny how the success of one group is attributed to “hard work” and the other to “genes” or some form of conspiracy.)</p>
<p>We also have an African-American ranking system, but that one tends to be inverse. We don’t like to talk about that one, if only because it’s so hard to separate race from poverty and racism and so much more. </p>
<p>I try to identify these things in myself because I try to be honest about how much they affect my thinking. UR, btw, is below WashU in Jewishness, which one could say reflects how American Jews view the schools (and which in turn, I believe, reflects the existence of a law school and an undergrad biz school). </p>
<p>One could argue what UR shoud do is invest in a Hillel. It’s worked for other schools. (And they are looking at something to do with the Interfaith Chapel, but not at a “Hillel” building.) </p>
<p>Again, my purpose is not to inflame or to argue but to discuss dispasionately.</p>
<p>Lergnom, your “Jewish ranking” system is a fascinating idea, and I applaud your courage in raising such an easily demagoguable (is that word?) topic. </p>
<p>In general support of your point, I can tell you that when my oldest daughter chose to attend the University of Southern California, the school was proud to point out that it was one of only two schools in the country (Brandeis was the other) with an admissions officer tasked specifically with generating applications and enrollment from the Jewish community. The story told to us was that for many years USC had strict limits on the number of Jews it accepted. Under the enlightened administration of former President Sample, the University changed that policy dramatically, as discussed in this article:</p>
<p><a href=“http://www.jewishjournal.com/education/article/jewish_trojans_oxymoron_no_more_20030822[/url]”>http://www.jewishjournal.com/education/article/jewish_trojans_oxymoron_no_more_20030822</a></p>
<p>There is little doubt that USC’s fast rise in national rankings has at least something to do with it’s greater acceptance and inclusion of Jews. And while I am not Jewish, I find it hard to argue with their reasoning.</p>
<p>FWIW</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Too late. UR now has an undergrad biz major that started this past fall. The new major is interdisciplinary and utilizes resources at the Simon School of Business.</p>
<p>[Business</a> Major : Multidisciplinary Studies Center : University of Rochester](<a href=“http://www.rochester.edu/college/msc/businessmajor.html]Business”>Barry Florescue Undergraduate Business Program : University of Rochester)</p>
<p>Not sure what the question is here now. How to make UR more selective? Or stronger?</p>
<p>I agree with the Jewish argument up to a point. Nobody likes to talk about this either, but there is a threshold at which the % may become a negative, at least in terms of non-Jews making a decision where percentages may seem too high. I think this happens, for instance, at Brandeis and Muhlenberg, and if you go to the Brandeis site on CC you will see the question put right out there as “Is Brandeis too Jewish for me” or something like that. The schools that do best are probably the ones with a high percentage of Jews without being overtly identified as Jewish schools.</p>
<p>For me, I look at the number of Caucasians (to see if it’s too high), but more so retention rates, 4 and 6 years grad rates, and middle 50% on SAT/ACT. If the admit is high relative to the reputation of the school I try to understand that (geography, less marketing, drifting too far out of the mainstream, or whatever).</p>
<p>Wow it seems like we have a lot of creative ideas around here.
I am happy to learn that this year the acceptance rate for U of R is lower and I get accepted…(which doesn’t mean that I don’t feel sorry for those who don’t)
Although acceptance to U of R is cool, I don’t feel good about the overall outcome of my college application.
I applied to 20 schools, 4 SUNYs, 16 privates. Almost all of the privates I apply to can be considered as competitive. Most of these privates are liberal arts. I attempted to apply to schools where there’s less Asian(I am an Asian female and I believed that I might have more chance to get into such schools), like Trinity and Colgate…
So my questions are:
- Are schools where the Asian percentage is lower than 5% trying to get more Asians? When I visited Trinity I heard the multicultural affair office talk about their efforts in getting more minority students, but I feel like the Asians they accept this year is still in limited amount. I mean is it because there aren’t many Asians apply to this college or the college only choose to accept a tiny amount of the applications? (God they should make acceptance rate for each racial group as well!)
2.I understand that I got rejected by top schools like WashU and Middlebury, but I still don’t get why I got waitinglisted by 8 schools, including schools like Union…If like some of you said above that schools would put people on waitinglist if the stats suggest that the student would go elsewhere, what’s the criteria in this case or how would the stats suggest such things? Would it be like students from the high school in the past turn down the college’s offer or the past student they accept didn’t perform well in college? - If you get waitinglisted for reasons like you fit the school but it seems like you’ll go somewhere else, would you have a bigger chance to be accepted from waitinglist if you choose to remain? Is it some schools’ strategies to get some good students?
- We all have seen that it’s not rare for many schools’ acceptance rates to go down even more than 5 percents, what’s the reasons for that? I know a big one is there are more and more applicants. But why the phenonmenon really stands out this year?</p>
<p>I know I just asked many questions, but I do hope some of you sort of know the answer. Any response is welcomed!</p>
<p>I’m surprised you didn’t get in Trinity or Union, as these are almost identical classic upper-middle class to upper class good white-dominated schools supposedly looking to bolster their reputations with greater “diversity.” Not sure where I saw this, maybe in a NYU thread, but one kid wrote something I thought was brilliant (even if obvious on reflection). A lot of the adding diversity movement is for the enhancement of the privileged white, so that THEY can have a more diverse experience, rather than for the students providing those folks the diversity that makes their school appear more prestigious.</p>
<p>Actually back in the dark ages of 2005, younger d who graduated U of R in 2010 was in Rochester to sing in the all-state chorus as a junior. A high school friend who was a year older was there and so he was a senior. As part of the all-state conference and performances there are exhibits that include a college fair. Again these are schools with music schools, conservatories and so on. Her friend was flat-out told by Vanderbilt with their relatively new music school that they were actively looking to recruit northeastern Jews…assuming that the school admissions criteria was met because they wanted to diversify and broaden their student and geographic base. By the way, he is Jewish, so are we. He also attended Rochester.</p>
<p>I’ve heard from a source in admissions that so far over 700 students have accepted their offer, which is way higher than the number they wanted for this time during the month (since most students typically wait to commit during the last few days of May). It’s still early, but they might have a yield problem on their hands.</p>
<p>URHopeful, any more on the above? Can anyone else confirm or offer anything about this? What is the desired class? 1250? 1350?</p>
<p>I think they over enrolled last year as well with something like 1250 freshmen. Looks like their yield is going up. How do schools predict yield? I would imagine being off in either direction could be a nightmare. And to think I was wondering what my son would do with a math major…he could go work in their admissions office working algorithms!</p>