Anomaly with ED acceptance rates

College Search & Selection
1

<p>At most schools there is an advantage to applying Early Decision (ED.) That is, the acceptance rate for those students who apply ED is usually higher than the acceptance rate for those students who apply Regular Decision (RD) at a given school.</p>

<p>Just the opposite is the case at RPI and Carnegie Mellon. Based on the 2010-11 Common Data Sets for these schools, the acceptance rate for ED students is lower than the acceptance rate for RD students.</p>

<p>At RPI, 26% of ED applicants were accepted, while 41% of RD applicants were accepted (the overall acceptance rate was 39%.) The same was true at Carnegie Mellon, where 21% of ED applicants got in while 34% of RD applicants were accepted (with an overall acceptance rate of 33%.)</p>

<p>Does anyone have an explanation why it is harder to get in ED at RPI and Carnegie Mellon?</p>

2

<p>They “might” think that the pool of RD applicants will be stronger as it “might” include more students who did not get the early nod at more selective schools. Also. don’t borderline applicants get a second chance in the RD pool? Lastly, it is possible that FA plays a role in limiting the ED admissions.</p>

<p>Specialty and highly STEM-focused schools do not seem to offer much of an EA/ED advantage. Check MIT for an example.</p>

3

<p>Look at ED and EA at UMiami; same phenomenon</p>

4

<p>It is exactly that Xiggi for Carnegie Mellon. CM only offers to meet full financial need to accepted ED applicants, so without the huge $ some of the bigger uni’s have, they have to limit enrollment during ED.</p>