<p>Which of these has a more competitive applicant pool for Early Decision?</p>
<p>I heard Amherst had a 15% acceptance rate while Williams had 21% (for regular decision).</p>
<p>Does one favor test scores more than the other (I have 670cr,770m, 760w and 770,730 Subject tests)? First generation (I qualify)? GPA/rigor (I have 3.99uw under the most difficult courseload)? Athletes (I´m good enough to pull some weight but am not a true ¨hook¨)?</p>
<p>Based on this information, for which college do you think I´d have better luck for ED? Thanks in advance.</p>
<p>they’re both equally as hard to get into but i’d think it would be easier to get into williams. williams is really self-selecting and so those who apply ED are those most self-selecting bunch. a girl in my high school got into williams early and her stats were not that high. she wasn’t even in the top 10% her sister did go there though. but yeah my two cents.</p>
<p>^True, but Williams and Amherst are already somewhat similar to each other, and picking the best fit is moot if the OP can’t get into that fit. Regardless, both are very difficult to get into.</p>
<p>The crossovers between the two students bodies (i.e. people who apply to both) is extremely large, perhaps the greatest overlap of any two schools in the country. Amherst is (or was) a bit smaller, but has access to the Five College Consortium, and to a bunch of extraordinary 5-College Certificate programs. Both tend toward the athletic (Williams more so). Both have high rates of binge drinking. Both have student bodies with about 50% coming from the top 3% of the population in income, with Amherst having a higher percentage of Pell Grant students. Both have huge endowments. Williams has distributional requirements, Amherst an open curriculum. Faculty come from the same general pool, with certain strengths at one or the other changing over time. </p>
<p>But if you don’t have a clear first choice, you shouldn’t apply ED to either. I graduated from Williams back in the dark ages (and got a fine education); if I had to choose now between the two, I’d go to Amherst (mainly because it is much less isolated.) But to be fair, I’d likely choose neither.</p>
<p>Isn’t it kind of contradictory to say that the ED group at Williams is self-selecting and then to turn around and say that you know “this girl who got into Williams early and her stats were not that high”?</p>
<p>Williams and Amherst are both comparably selective, but in different ways. </p>
<p>Amherst has broader appeal; it gets more applicants than Williams, even though it is the smaller school. Amherst therefore has lower acceptance rates.</p>
<p>Williams has a narrower appeal (possibly because of its relatively isolated location), but the people who do apply to Williams seem to be unusually committed (possibly for the same reason). For example, the ED option is much more popular among Williams applicants. According to the latest Common Data Set, Williams received almost 50% more ED applications than Amherst – despite the fact that Amherst had more applicants overall. But this does not necessarily mean that Williams ED is more competitive, because Williams fills a larger percentage of its class by ED. </p>
<p>I doubt that it is significantly easier to get accepted by one or the other by ED. You would be better off choosing based on fit.</p>
<p>Williams had a strange drop in application numbers this past year which I have not heard explained. Before that, the schools seemed neck in neck. Maybe one takes a smaller percentage of the class ED? Bottom line, the majority getting into both ED have a hook. There’s probably no advantage in applying to either ED without one.</p>
<p>I visited both and loved them. I suppose I´ll have to see which coach wants me more. Thanks for the responses. I just feared that Amherst places more weight on test scores (which I´m severely lacking).</p>
<p>Neither school places too much emphasis on test scores. However, Amherst places a greater deal of emphasis on ethnic and socioeconomic diversity.</p>
<p>ED at both schools is swamped by applications from recruited athletes and legacies.</p>
Dick Nestbitt 'splained last year was the first time they added a Williams-specific essay, something about looking through a window and see yourself. That probably scared off 1000 casual applicants.</p>
<p>I’ll give you a moment to catch your breath, bluebayou.</p>
<p>Now, I didn’t say that test scores don’t matter. It’s a given that you need fairly strong academic and standardized test credentials to be competitive for admission at either school. I was implying, however, that well-hooked candidates can reasonably expect good news from either school, even if they don’t have scores in the 99th percentile.</p>
<p>well duh, kwu, a “well-hooked” candidate don’t need no stinkin’ test scores bcos, by definition, they are well-hooked. But, the great unwashed masses, however… :)</p>
<p>Which school fits you better? If you like Williams’ location then go for it. If you like Amherst’s open curriculum, then go for that. Either way, you will end up get a great education.</p>
<p>The common wisdom is to refrain from applying ED unless the student is both convinced the school is his top choice and that financial aid isn’t an issue.</p>
<p>That being said, Williams and Amherst are very close in selectivity. I looked at the the Common Data Sets for each school for 07-08 (the 08-09 year was either an anomaly for Williams or the start of a new trend). The admit rate was within a percent. Williams had a higher yield, and a slightly higher admit rate, both of which are explained by Williams’ higher ED applications (when you factor out ED, the admit rate - around 16.5% - is within a tenth of a percent).</p>
<p>Williams filled 40% of its class with ED admits, while Amherst filled 28.5% of its class.</p>
<p>The only other significant difference between the schools is that Williams seems to go to its waitlist, while Amherst does not. Otherwise, in terms of statistics, they’re basically twins.</p>
<p>Maybe they have completely different “vibes”; I don’t know. My son couldn’t differentiate too well between them; he applied to both, which I think is very common.</p>