univstats

Admission Comparison Between Best Information and Technology Management Schools

Admission StatsSATACTApplication Checklist

Acceptance Rate and Application Statistics

The following table compares the admission related statistics including number of applicants, admitted, and enrolled between best Information and Technology Management schools. The average acceptance rate of best Information and Technology Management schools is 39.83% and the average admission yield (enrollment rate) is 22.43%.
Harvard University has the tighest (lowest) acceptance rate of 3.65% and Harvard University has the highest yield (enrollment rate) of 83.60% among best Information and Technology Management schools. The numbers in parenthesis() in below table represent the number and rate by gender (men/women). The statistics is based on the latest data from IPEDS, U.S. Department of Education for academic year 2024-2025.
Admission Stats Comparison Between Best Information And Technology Management Schools
RankName ApplicantsAdmittedEnrolledAcceptance RateEnrollment Rate
1 Carnegie Mellon University
33,941 (20,143/12,734) 3,959 (1,973/1,870) 1,808 (974/780) 12% (10%/15%) 46% (49%/6%)
2 Syracuse University
44,480 (17,646/26,817) 20,427 (8,311/12,110) 3,835 (1,644/2,191) 46% (47%/45%) 19% (20%/8%)
3 University at Albany
32,442 (14,364/18,070) 22,416 (9,572/12,841) 2,830 (1,245/1,584) 69% (67%/71%) 13% (13%/9%)
4 Rutgers University-Newark
36,793 (17,277/19,508) 26,254 (12,084/14,163) 1,857 (929/928) 71% (70%/73%) 7% (8%/5%)
5 Georgia Institute of Technology-Main Campus
59,789 (40,022/19,765) 8,413 (4,634/3,779) 3,836 (2,160/1,676) 14% (12%/19%) 46% (47%/8%)
6 Indiana University-Bloomington
67,658 (32,684/34,954) 52,918 (24,941/27,965) 9,611 (4,718/4,893) 78% (76%/80%) 18% (19%/14%)
6 University of Nebraska at Omaha
9,246 (3,869/5,340) 8,042 (3,312/4,703) 2,116 (862/1,237) 87% (86%/88%) 26% (26%/23%)
8 Harvard University
54,008 (25,613/28,372) 1,970 (920/1,050) 1,647 (767/880) 4% (4%/4%) 84% (83%/3%)
8 The University of Texas at Austin
72,885 (35,912/36,750) 19,417 (8,101/11,264) 9,210 (3,847/5,343) 27% (23%/31%) 47% (47%/15%)
Average45,694 (23,059/23,059)18,202 (8,205/9,972)4,083 (1,905/2,168)39.83% (35.6%/43.2%)22.43% (23.2%/21.7%)

SAT Scores Comparison

The average SAT score of best Information and Technology Management schools is 1435. By subject, the average score of the SAT EBRW(Evidence-based Reading and Writing) is 707 and the average SAT Math score is 728.
Harvard University has the highest SAT scores of 1,550 and Indiana University-Bloomington has the lowest SAT scores of 1,290 among best Information and Technology Management schools. The following table compares SAT Scores between best Information and Technology Management schools for the academic year 2024-2025.
SAT Score Comparison Between Best Information And Technology Management Schools
RankNameSubmit%*
(Submit#**)
SAT TotalEvidence-Based Reading and WritingMath
1Carnegie Mellon University
53%
(951)
1540750790
2Syracuse University
22%
(861)
1360680680
3University at Albany
Test Scores are considered (not required), but no data is available/reported.
4Rutgers University-Newark
Test Score is NOT considered for Rutgers University-Newark admission.
5Georgia Institute of Technology-Main Campus
77%
(2,966)
1480720760
6Indiana University-Bloomington
42%
(4,054)
1290640650
6University of Nebraska at Omaha
Test Scores are required, but no data is available/reported.
8Harvard University
54%
(892)
1550760790
8The University of Texas at Austin
56%
(5,189)
1390690700
Average50.67% 1435707728

*Number of first-time degree/certificate-seeking students submitting SAT scores.

**Percent of first-time degree/certificate-seeking students submitting SAT scores.

ACT Scores Comparison

The average ACT score of best Information and Technology Management schools is 31. By subject, the average ACT English score is 32 and the ACT math score is 30.
The following table compares ACT Scores between best Information and Technology Management schools for academic year 2024-2025.
ACT Score Comparison Between Best Information And Technology Management Schools
RankNameSubmit%*
(Submit#**)
CompositeEnglishMath
1Carnegie Mellon University
22%
(405)
353535
2Syracuse University
9%
(357)
313328
3University at Albany
Test Scores are considered (not required), but no data is available/reported.
4Rutgers University-Newark
Test Score is NOT considered for Rutgers University-Newark admission.
5Georgia Institute of Technology-Main Campus
35%
(1,354)
333432
6Indiana University-Bloomington
14%
(1,357)
303129
6University of Nebraska at Omaha
69%
(1,465)
222121
8Harvard University
19%
(321)
353535
8The University of Texas at Austin
18%
(1,686)
313229
Average26.57% 313230

*Number of first-time degree/certificate-seeking students submitting SAT scores.

**Percent of first-time degree/certificate-seeking students submitting SAT scores.

Application Requirements

The following table list and compare the requirements when applying best Information and Technology Management schools based on academic year 2024-2025 data.
Application Requirements Comparison Between Best Information And Technology Management Schools
Rank NameHS GPAHS RankHS Record Prep. ProgramRec.Compe.SAT/ACTTOEFL
1 Carnegie Mellon University
✔✓ ✔✓ ✔✓ ✓✔
2 Syracuse University
✔✓ ✔✔ ✔✔ ✓✔
3 University at Albany
✔✓ ✔✓ ✔✓ ✓✔
4 Rutgers University-Newark
✔✓ ✔✔ ✗✗ ✗✔
5 Georgia Institute of Technology-Main Campus
✔✗ ✔✔ ✓✗ ✔✔
6 Indiana University-Bloomington
✔✔ ✔✔ ✓✗ ✓✔
6 University of Nebraska at Omaha
✔✔ ✔✔ ✓✗ ✔✔
8 Harvard University
✓✓ ✔✓ ✔✓ ✔✓
8 The University of Texas at Austin
✓✓ ✔✔ ✓✓ ✓✔

✔: Required △: Considered but not Required ✔: Recommended ✗: Neither Required nor Recommended

  • HS GPA: High School or Secondary School GPA
  • HS Rank: High School or Secondary School Rank
  • HS Record: High School or Secondary School Record
  • Prep. Program: Completion of College Preparatory Program
  • Rec.: Recommendations
  • Comp.: Formal demonstration of competencies (e.g., portfolios, certificates of mastery, assessment instruments)
The ranking data is provided by CollegeEvaluator.