In an all-time low, 15.8 percent of applicants were offered a place in the College Class of 2015, down 3 percentage points from last year, and nearly half of the acceptance rate four years ago.
The declining acceptance rate at the U of C falls into a trend of increased selectivity across the nation, as schools have received a flood of applications, which strongly correlates with wider access to the Common Application, increased financial aid, and stronger efforts by admissions offices to attract students.
This year, the College received 21,774 applications, a 12 percent increase from last year. Over the last two years, the College has seen a 54 percent increase in applicants, the largest spike in the country.
“There are students in parts of the country like the South and California who might not have known about the University of Chicago, who are hearing about the University of Chicago for the first time,” University spokesperson Jeremy Manier said. He added that the expansion of study abroad opportunities, as well as the opportunity to experience Chicago through the Chicago Studies program, has also attracted more applicants.
Among its Midwestern peers, the U of C's acceptance rate for the Class of 2015 is slightly above that of Washington University in St. Louis (15.4 percent), but lower than that of Northwestern (18 percent). This year, the five most selective American universities were Harvard (6.2 percent), Columbia University (6.9 percent), Stanford (7.1 percent), Yale (7.4 percent), and Princeton (8.4 percent).
While the College’s acceptance rate is more than double that of some of the nation’s most selective institutions, no school has experienced a more rapid decline in admissions rates than the U of C. While Harvard’s Class of 2015 will have an acceptance rate 1 percentage point lower than their incoming seniors, the U of C's Class of 2015 will have an acceptance rate 12 percentage points lower than the Class of 2012.
Manier said he did not think it was fruitful to compare U of C acceptance rates to those of other schools and declined to project what future acceptance rates may look like.
“The standard for any institution has to be what you’re doing to best serve students,” Manier said. “Comparing numbers implies that there is a universal standard, which there isn’t,” he added.
As the College has become more selective, the percentage of students who matriculate at the University has increased. Last year, while the College’s acceptance rate declined by approximately 8 percent, the yield of students who chose to attend increased by 3 percent. Manier said that the yield was expected to increase from last year’s 39 percent, although he said it was difficult to predict by how much the number would grow. Manier also said that while the yield would increase, class size would not.
Gavin Schiffres, a senior at Packer Collegiate Institute in New York City who was accepted through Early Action, said that the U of C’s low acceptance rate helped him convince his parents to let him apply.
“Admission rates reflect a certain selectivity about a school,” Schiffres said. “I wanted to go to a school where they separated the wheat from the chaff, and at Chicago I knew I wouldn’t be the smartest person in the room.”
Schiffres said that he was persuaded to apply to the U of C after an information session at his school. Once he was accepted, Schiffres received a handwritten note from his admissions counselor quoting lines from his application that he enjoyed. Schiffres said that all of his friends who had been accepted to Chicago also received personal notes with their acceptances.
While the declining acceptance rate indicates a more selective admissions climate, Manier said he did not believe that the University’s success could be measured by how many students it admitted.
“The best measure of our success is how enthusiastic students are about the University of Chicago,” Manier said. “And that’s something that we’re seeing.”
“the U of C’s Class of 2015 will have an acceptance rate 22 percentage points lower than the Class of 2012.”
should read “12 percentage points lower”
27.8 – 15.6 = 12.2, not 22.2 :)
I’m looking forward to the day when UChicago is so selective it accepts no one; there will be fewer geeks on campus then and eduhookups.com will have a smaller clientele.
Totally bogus statistics. Before, Chicago was fairly self-selecting when it had it’s high acceptance rate. Does getting more applicants actually bring in a better class? I’d imagine that if you have to choose 2000 qualified people from 10,000 or 20,000, you’d probably end up with a similarly made-up class.
The percent admitted shown in the graphic (15.6%) does not match the one in the article (15.8%).
+1 for JOHNDOE’s comment.
I’m tired of people claiming the UofC used to be self-selective; this was a historical excuse by those of us too embarrassed to admit we could not compete for top students. Frankly, anyone familiar with our history would know that we could not fill the entire class with qualified students in the 90s and early 00s, and that faculty were burdened with a bottom third of the class who was nowhere near able to contribute to classroom discussion at a high level. Our yields (% of students accepting their acceptance offer) have risen significantly despite the decreased admit rate, and those romanticizing the good old life of the mind days are pining for an era where students were less academically qualified, less intellectually curious, less extroverted, less happy about having to go to UofC and less happy about life in general.
Well said, ALUM. The crap about self-selecting is bunk.
Exactly. UChicago historically produced great thinkers. They (generally speaking) did not receive the best students.
What does being “less extroverted” have to do with anything?? Introverts are as smart (actually smarter, if you believe psychological research) and are as interested and engaged with the community as extroverts. True, they might not party as hard, but this isn’t Ohio State.
And I’m not sure what being “happy with life in general” has to do with anything either. Personally I’d be concerned about anybody who thinks they’ve got it all figured out at age 19 (or 20, or 21…)
I think my problem with this post is that it compares UofC statistics on admission, and specifically the fact that the UofC has had the greatest decrease in percentage, as if it meant anything.
Any basic math would tell you that going from 50% to 25% and 25% to 12.5% is actually the same thing, it is halving. So the absolute percentage difference doesn’t matter when you’re dealing with different percentages.
This is to say: Harvard and Columbia’s 6.2 and 6.9 were very hard to come by because it required, in the case of Columbia, 9000 new applicants. That is to say that they received 9000 new students in one cycle, compared to UofC’s 3000 new students. When we compare apples to oranges, we can pretend that the oranges are prettier, but you can’t eat the skin.
+1 Joe.
I teach at Harvard, and I find a good 30% of the students now are (to borrow ALUM’s words) “nowhere near able to contribute to classroom discussion at a high level.” There are indeed many good soldiers, but great thinkers are rare.
Chicago has systematically attracted great thinkers. I wonder if the switch to the Common Application has not resulted in more spots being given to the good soldiers of the Harvard variety?
Keith says the admisssions trend doesn’t matter and yet if it continued only a few more years, Chicago would pass every other school in the country. Chicago is climbing faster than any other school, which is important for many reasons. Chicago is in a unique position in American higher education. It has always been a top school but was severely underrated in the popular imagination. But that is changing very quickly and will have all sorts of positive side effects. For instance, Chicago just recruited faculty from Stanford and Berkeley, which is another sign of the strength of the University. Chicago tied Harvard and Stanford for Rhodes Scholars last year, and those students were admitted before Chicago’s more selective admissions kicked in.
Usually schools climb and gain prestige very slowly and also build quality at the same time. Because Chicago already had the quality, it can rise more quickly. Word of mouth used to take years to spread but because of the internet and FaceBook and proliferation of rankings, a school can gain prestige almost immediately.
A few years ago Apple began a quick upward track on its way to surpass Microsoft, which I predicted. My Windows friends pooh-poohed this but not only did Apple blow pass Microsoft it continues to skyrocket.
Go Chicago!
@ Schriffes —- WHAT A TOOL!!!!
+1
If we select 1 percent of 1 percent of 1 percent of applicants maybe we will have a class of philosopher kings so intellectually endowed they will be able to conceptualize a way to keep the 99 percent from busting down the gates and ransacking the Henry Paulson Institute.
I applied for the University of Chicago with an ACT of 26 and a 3.75 GPA. My friend also applied with a ACT of 33 and a 3.85 GPA. I got accepted while my friend was rejected. There is always hope out there. Don’t give up just because you think you wont get in. We are both of the same ethnicity and we were involved in almost the same high school activities. Good luck and hope you can get in!