<p>Proud Dad- I would like to offer one last observation, slightly off the intended topic, but in line with your last post. First, your lead sentence talks about UVA's rank. Obviously, you think that is important. Second, although I cannot prove it empirically at this point, I think it is a fair assumption that UVA's yeild (percentage of accepted students who attend) will go down by eliminating ED. Third, yield is a perceived factor, if not an actual factor, in rankings. Hence, by eliminating ED, UVA's rank "may" be hurt. That does not make it a better school or worse school--just a school that may not be ranked as high.</p>
<p>
I see the point of your post, but I disagree with the assumption above. Simply, the ED applicants as a group have a much higher family-income level than non-ED applicants, and UVA confirms this when they say only a handful of ED applicants seek financial aid, while one-quarter of those at the school receive need-based aid.</p>
<p>Im sorry to say this, but obviously dajada just wants her kids at uva asap or something! lol thats why she/he keeps asking for EA, while most people could either care less or dont want it at all! lol</p>
<p>I no longer see a point in arguing this subject, it is obviously to me, a way in which UVA can bring in diversity into the campus. So haters, just stop! and if you dont like it, then write to the UVA directors or something... cuz talking here isnt going to change anything.</p>
<p>
[QUOTE]
There is a selfish reason that Harvard and Princeton dropped ED and it wasn't because they could help poor kids (if you believe that, then you're very naive).
[/QUOTE]
It wasn't?</p>
<p>Regardless of what we think is best for UVa, the Board of Visitors has made it a goal to increase the number of low income students in the school. AccessUVA was created a few years ago, but hasn't had a dramatic effect, despite a variety of approaches to getting the word out.</p>
<p>When an analysis was done and they found that only one low income student applied during ED last year and only a handful of ED applicants even applied for aid, it was decided to doing away with ED was the next step to meeting the goal.</p>
<p>
The implication to which I'm responding is that if UVA drops ED they will attract a less-capable incoming class. In jRoss's case it is just not as attractive to his son who likes to move on more quickly, but (I assume) non-binding EA would fix that, right? Others have essentially said dropping ED will lower UVA's standards and thus its ranking. I agree with you that ED is a way to bolster if not create higher rankings based on USNews-type criteria, and that's simply another reason I applaud UVA's decision as being just as brave as Sarah Lawrence no longer using SAT for admission and suffering in rank because of it. I've said all along that dropping ED won't change the quality of UVA, it just makes for a more level playing field for those qualified applicants without the advantage of higher parental household income that seems to favor ED. I don't give a rat's ass about ranking but like most, I'm subjected to them because the majority of those looking at selective schools live and die by them. The eclectic mix of schools my kids applied to certainly speaks to them not being impressed by rank. UVA's just a good, inexpensive, in-state school for us. It just also happens to be one I'd be proud to see my kids attend.</p>
<p>My suggestion in the opening post was to reinstate some form of early admission. As there is some clear UVA data showing that low income students and families felt that they could not take advantage of ED, I am NOT arguing for reinstatement of ED. However, I am arguing for EA or, as in the case with UNC, Early Notification. </p>
<p>Prouddad: UVA has publicly stated that it wishes to attain a top 15 national ranking. You may not care, but those in charge of the school do (and I admit that I care as well). If you want to play at this level, you need to attract the best students possible. While I too applaud UVA’s altruism, college admissions is pretty close to a zero-sum game. Other schools will almost certainly pounce on UVA’s unwillingness to compete for students in the early admissions round. College admissions is not charity, it is serious business and I expect those in charge to be selfish in protecting and promoting their college. That is true for UVA and all institutions. Re the hoi polloi comment, mine is not an elitist argument. This is about keeping the University in the game for an important segment of students. That segment may be of greater financial means than you, but that does not discredit their interest in the University. </p>
<p>Sv3a: When 1000 students are admitted, I seriously doubt that these are all a bunch of rich dopes who otherwise would not get in. Do you really mean to insult 1/3 of the entering class? I suspect that the quality of UVA’s ED admits are much stronger than you give them credit. </p>
<p>JohnRoss: Yield plays no part in the USNWR ranks. However, I suspect that it is a critical variable for the college admissions departments at every college. Historically, and depending on the year, UVA’s IS state yield is 60-70%, OOS about 30%. Yield does play a huge part in the financial and merit aid games as the predictability of the enrolled class affects the allocation of these dollars. UVA has no merit aid other than Jefferson Scholars, but other schools will use these monies aggressively in the recruitment of students. </p>
<p>Mojojojo: I have a different perspective than some on this board, including you, about the value of early admissions plans. I consider your attacking comments meant to shut down debate or insult as counterproductive. Differ and participate all that you like, but… well…let’s not go there at this time. Thanks.</p>
<p>UVa, along with Harvard and Princeton, are probably going to do some form of a likely program, at least for athletes. I imagine they'll keep the regular "likely letter" (letters went out in Feb at first) for "normal" applicants with good applications (not necessarily athletes). </p>
<p>As far as EA goes, I don't think it's going to address the concerns that the Board of Visitors has with low income students and applying early. It would address the concerns of people who can't easily afford college and would like to compare offers in case they get a way better one, but I'm not exactly sure this was the main criteria that this decision was aimed at. Low income families should get aid through AccessUVA so it stands to reason that this would not really be the problem the ED dropping was aimed at. It is a benefit nonetheless, don't get me wrong. </p>
<p>I don't know if it would be better for them, I don't really have that information and I'm not too convinced that anyone categorically does. Personally, I think it could conceivably go either way, although based on my experience, I would lean somewhere towards the side that says it won't make a really big difference in the actual incoming class. I think it could make a difference in the applicant pool, but yield wise, I'm not all that sure. The top students at my school, many of whom didn't apply ED (some did though...depends on if they were ready to be locked in to a predictable decision) are basically waiting on their UVa decision (almost certainly yes, since we're in-state) and Ivy decisions (almost 100% certain to be nos, although sometimes you hit a strange patch of luck). Therefore, it's going to be UVa in the end anyway. I know a few people who went for the private schools on UVa's level of competitiveness, and gained admissions, however these schools are so much expensive than UVa that isn't reasonable for most families to justify them over UVa, whether they have the means to afford it or not. Common sense tells you that if you can get the same education (and a better one in some cases!) for less, then applying to a very expensive similar school JUST because they have ED is not all that prudent. I really can't imagine people are going to make that decision just because they can't apply to UVa early, and for all but the very tippy top students, significant merit aid (enough to make those schools a better deal than UVa) is hard to come by. </p>
<p>Based on the reasons for the decision, I think that dropping ED to instate EA would be sort of pointless. EA won't solve any of the problems they aimed the decision at. I'm not trying to say that EA won't make UVa more competitive, I'm just speaking to the odds that they'll decide to use EA (as early as the next year anyway).</p>
<p>I think even Dean J is noticing dajada's ignorant remarks about minorities and her/his perception of instilling another early program!</p>
<p>to dajada, ps. public schools cannot obtain usnews 15 status lol, not even berkeley can at the moment.</p>
<p>Since you're making the implication, dajada, what facts do you have that ED applicants are of higher quality, stat-wise, that RD applicants? And as to whether or not the ED applicants are "rich dopes", we have to assume the former but not the latter using facts from the administration to back it up. I have also seen administrators quoted saying that many have not been admitted RD who would have made the ED cut. So, maybe not dopes, but there is an inherent advantage to ED or why would it be so important to those who use it to their advantage? And I believe there's indisputable evidence that it is an accommodation that overwhelmingly advantages the wealthier applicants. So what are you defending? UVA's ranking? Can't see how it'll be hurt. Or maybe it's the upper-class perk that is binding ED? Let me just say that the way I read what you're saying, it is an elitist point of view. And I'm not asking for an application advantage for those who can't afford to pay full-boat, just a level playing field for admissions. I agree non-binding and non-exclusive EA might provide that where ED certainly does not now. Other than your apparent opinion that axing ED will result in a less accomplished applicant pool, I think we agree that some alternative could work for everyone.</p>
<p>mojojojo, None of my statements have referenced minority status. The issue at UVA with the elimination of ED is access to the University for lower income groups. Granted, a large portion of these are of color, but certainly not all. There are poor white people as well. The fact is that UVA does a pretty good job with recruitment of African Americans (9% of the student body) and a great job in graduating these students (ranked #1 for the fourth straight year among public universities with an 87% graduation rate for African American students). Asian students represent 14% of the students and Hispanic students make up 5%. Both of these are higher than the in-state % in Virginia. The issue is not race, the issue is low income students and their participation/access to admissions at a level equal to that of wealthier applicants. </p>
<p>Re ranking goals, UVA would like to be considered among the top 15 and is taking steps with projects like the South Lawn project to address some of our weaknesses. As for your reference to UC-Berkeley, your post implies that you believe UCB to be a superior school. You should know that we don't.</p>
<p>Prouddad: To my knowledge, there is not separate data published for ED admits. My instinct, like yours, is that there are some marginal admits in that group, but I also believe that the very large majority are students who would have been admitted under RD. (Quick aside: My relative was deferred ED and got in RD so it is not all one way.) My point is why put them all (we're talking about 1000 students or 1/3 of the entering class) into play when they are ready to signal their commitment to UVA. Create a process that stimulates more low income applications, but don't lose another group of students in the process.</p>
<p>who is "we"? i think even virginians would agree that UC berk is the bomb. It has been the #1 public school for years...i dont see how it is not superior lol. Obviously, usnews thinks so! And at least uc berk knows how to attract minorities! (they took away all alumni relationships, all ea/ed, and have made it clear that "cultural enrichment" is what they are striving for)</p>
<p>Personally I do not think that ED had that much affect on the low-income applicants. I do not remeber if UVA publsihed this, but the majority of the schools that I looked at showed how 100% of a students needs would be met if they were coming from a family that made under X amount a year. Thus, a low income student could still apply early and be almost certain that their needs would be met.
The people hurt by ED is the middle class. They are the ones who do not have any real idea of the kind of financial aid that they are going to recieve, and so it is them who defer from applying early. That said, it still is not that big of a deal for IS students because the cost of UVA is already greatly reduced. It still might be cheaper full cost than some private school with a decent amount of financial aid.
and btw, I do not think that the ED class is signifigantly weaker. Just check the who got in pages on this website and you will see many strong applicants who were deferred and then got in regular.</p>
<p>Does anyone here have any real experience with fellow classmates in high school who applied ED? Like I've said, the vast majority of those who are 'ready to commit' to UVA are doing so because they have less assurance of their spot at UVA than people who are auto-admits. These are typically people with lower stats.</p>
<p>sv3a: I think that is a bit of a generalization. I know two types of people who applied early to various colleges this year, the ones who were worrying about getting in with their less impressive stats, and the ones who had impressive stats, but wanted to be done with the whole college search because they had made up their mind.
It seemed that the majority of the first group were rejected, while the majority of the second group were accepted.
Just because there are people who apply early for better chances does not mean that they are the ones who get in.</p>
<p>anecdotal evidence: my son applied ED last year and was accepted...around a 2230 SAT, around a 4.8 gpa (I forget his exact scores now :)), instate, 4th in class, great ec's. He also was offered Echols in the spring. One of his friends was also top 10, high SAT's, etc. He also applied ED and is also in Echols now. Obviously he didn't apply early for an enrollment boost. He had made up his mind and was 100% positive he wanted to attend UVA. He toured several other universities, both higher in the rankings and lower. and he didn't have financial constraints, so this was a choice based solely on his desire to attend UVA.</p>
<p>Does he have regrets? Absolutely not. To be honest, his dad and I were concerned that he had built up UVA in his mind so much that there was no way it could live up to his expectations. He's only a first year, but to date, UVA has far exceeded his expectations in just about every way.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Does anyone here have any real experience with fellow classmates in high school who applied ED? Like I've said, the vast majority of those who are 'ready to commit' to UVA are doing so because they have less assurance of their spot at UVA than people who are auto-admits. These are typically people with lower stats.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>In-state? It's pretty predictable already who will get in - I haven't really seen a surprising or inconsistent UVa decision (I'm not saying it's a science, I'm just saying it's usually pretty clear where your chances stand IS). Some more "marginal" candidates do apply ED, but this is also true of RD obviously. I was not surprised by my class's ED results. Among the students that got in, two of my best friends have never gotten below an A in high school and have around a 1400 or higher. They both chose UVa and since the option to apply ED was there, they did it. Sure, people like this won't have the choice next year. Okay. But the thing is, I'm certain these two people would have chosen UVa anyway. They were pretty much certain to get in (they had great ECs and are good writers - I saw the essays and they were fabulous). They might have shot an application off to Tech also, but they pretty much could have counted on UVa. </p>
<p>The other kids who got in were basically matches for UVa also. Who didn't apply ED? Most of the top of the class that was hoping for an Ivy/MIT admit. All got deferred (I'm talking about non-athletes). If you hadn't completely reconciled the idea of not even trying for elsewhere, at the top, people don't apply ED because they know barring something bizarre they're going to have to commit to UVa. These kids will mainly end up at UVa for various reasons anyway, I've known kids to take the UVa over Ivies even (obviously they were admitted RD in that case). </p>
<p>I have noticed that some UVa ED applicants at my school are doing what I've seen called the "Hail Mary" application - it's a super-reach. But they don't get in. I feel like the marginal applicants are typically deferred unless they connect with the school in some way (fulfilling a niche). They may get admitted in the spring. ED does give an edge IMO, if only because the UVa admissions office is relatively small and they obviously have way less applications to read in the early round. I am NOT saying that RD applicants don't get a fair read. Like I said, I find the results from UVa extremely consistent. However there are always going to be people on the edge who need to connect with an adcom as a tip factor and I think that the less frenzied atmosphere of the early round could help here, since the officer is only human.</p>
<p>marlin33: You identify a group of students-"the ones who had impressive stats, but wanted to be done with the whole college search because they had made up their mind." These are the ones that I am mostly talking about. In the top private schools, there are more of these kids than you might think. So, in an entering class where you have 1000 ED admits, it’s hard to say how many of these fall into this category. But regardless of the number (10%?, 25%?, 50%?) you are telling these kids to go look around some more. These students may be very inclined to attend UVA, but all of a sudden a version of fraternity rush breaks out. Competitor schools (eg, Emory, Vanderbilt, Georgetown, Michigan, UNC, Wake Forest, maybe even Tulane) get thrown into the mix and the student goes to look at some of these schools. UVA is a fabulous place, but these schools ain't bad either and they will all, to varying degrees, try to seduce these kids and may even get out their checkbooks and use $ to attract these students to make the cost of attendance competitive. And if we're talking about students from private schools where financial constraints are fewer, all of a sudden it's a horserace. As a result, UVA will lose students that it should have had (not to mention their families as potential, ongoing financial supporters of the University). EA won’t completely solve this problem, but I believe it would reduce the leakage.</p>
<p>Princedog: With the elimination of early admissions, the predictability is reduced for all applicants. I remember attending one of those legacy seminars that UVA has run in the summer where they provide potential students with some insights into the admissions process. In one of the sessions, they give out several examples of students’ admissions info and we in the audience have to make the judgment on who gets in and who doesn’t with the knowledge that only about 35% get in. You’d be amazed at the quality of some of the applicants (mostly OOS) who did not get in. If you’re the student who has a competitive application but no way of knowing early if you’ll get in, this possibility of rejection could easily lead you to head elsewhere and use your ED/EA “chip” on another school. </p>
<p>Mojojojo: “We” refers to those of us in the UVA community who have an interest in the University and who support the University. That includes students, families, alumni, and all Virginia residents (I am currently or have been all of these). UVA is a special place and I suspect means an awful lot more to us than UCB does to the people of California. As for your comment about UCB’s ranking superiority, your history is a bit faulty. While we respect UCB greatly, it is only in the last three years that UCB has consistently ranked slightly ahead of UVA in the USNWR rankings. In the eight of the ten years prior to that, UVA was either tied with or ranked ahead of UCB in those rankings.</p>
<p>
[quote]
You?d be amazed at the quality of some of the applicants (mostly OOS) who did not get in.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I was talking strictly about in-state, as I said. OOS is a completely different ball game and obviously more selective. It has always been this way. OOS tuition is also more expensive and OOS'ers would be more unlikely to apply ED than IS'ers because of this IMO. Furthermore, legacies are put in the IS pool and have their apps judged by those standards. </p>
<p>I don't really think predictability will decrease. It was somewhat unpredictable because of the highly selective nature OOS, but as I said, IS decisions are very consistent. OOS applicants need to be more hooked obviously since selectivity is increased. </p>
<p>With all due respect, I think you're arguing two points if you say predictability is decreased with the loss of ED. That would imply the applicant pool becomes more competitive than in times past (unlikely at any rate as soon the number of students applying to college overall will decrease based on population trends). Before you seem to be implying that the applicant pool will become less competitive with the loss of ED. </p>
<p>Either way, the predictability I'm talking about is not really linked to ED or not IMO. When I say "consistent decisions," while I hesistate to reduce it to something formulaic, I mean that when you look at my school's past applicants and decisions, no one above a certain GPA in IB classes has been rejected. Looking only at that factor, the students in the top ten in my class could be fairly assured as to whether we would actually get in. Also, 25 kids were admitted last year, and you can expect that it won't suddenly go from 25 to say, 3 (though of course it can fluctuate between say, 20 and 25, but their class was bigger). The reason I hesistate to appear to be making it TOO formulaic is because obviously the assumption that you can pretty much be assured of your chances assumes that you will dot the i's and cross the t's - spend time on your essays, submit everything in a timely manner, give your teachers enough planning time to create a recommendation. Certainly I have heard the "urban legends" of the kids with the 3.9s and 1400s who didn't get in - usually if it's even rooted in truth AT ALL, it turns out they didn't spend any time on the app, didn't submit everything, had been suspended junior year, etc. Obviously this won't hold true in extentuating situations. But my point was the top students don't apply ED unless they know for sure that they won't even entertain a notion of another school. In some cases, people who have borderline ability for NCAA may want a few months to see how another season plays out, etc, there are a lot of factors like that, even though they know come RD round decisions time, they will most likely accept their seat at UVa.</p>
<p>I say we wait until next year and see. I'm ambivalent about having an Early Admission system. I understand why someone would want to know if he's/she's gotten in early to his/her #1 choice. It's comforting to know that you can chill the rest of your senior year. At the same time, I applaud UVA's attempt at leveling the playing field; it does fit with Jefferson's mission for the school. Plus, UVA turns down tons of kids with similar stats to the ones it admits, so I'm not too worried about losing great applicants. </p>
<p>But you know, if UVA drops significantly in the rankings because of this, all hell will break loose. Who knows, US News might throw us all for a loop and change the rankings criteria. As I've mentioned in other posts, plenty of people have been complaining that the magazine judges schools more by their "inputs" (SAT scores, class rank, reputation) rather than "outputs" (what students actually learn and how they benefit from their college education). It's like judging a car company based on the materials coming into its factories more than the actual cars it produces...but I've wandered from the topic and thus, I digress.</p>
<p>Just did a little checking. Unless US News & World report changed its factors, since the post below, they DO use yield as a factor (albeit at a small percentage) in its rankings.</p>
<p>"In the introductory matter to U.S. News's America's Best Colleges 2000,
the editors remind rankings-conscious admissions departments that efforts to
improve yield "simply to move up a rank or two would be silly; yield
accounts for a mere 1.5 percent of the overall ranking." It ought to count
for more: yield is a telling statistic and Laissez-Faire pays more attention
to it than does U.S. News."</p>