Thank you, you are very kind. I will definitely start early (already got a good amount of essays done), I appreciate the advice!
1 Like
I applied to way more colleges than advised. It was fine because I started on my essays early. Just stay organized and it will be manageable. Keep us posted on where you end up.
1 Like
Yeah, I definitely will make a post with the results. Its good to hear that its possible to apply to a large number of colleges. Thanks!
1 Like
Well at my sonâs boarding school the college counselor sent out the transcripts all at the same time. But they do actively petition for students who get accepted in the early round to not further apply in RD. They also have regular telecons with the admissions offices of the top colleges, and have plenty of room to slip in comments. The boarding school college counselors have VERY good connections. One phone call is all that it would take to tip the scales.
Keep in mind the main objective for the boarding school counselors is to maximize the prospects for the entire class. Not an individual student. So they do they best to âspread the wealthâ.
3 Likes
I am curious because my kids and I have been public school kids where the GCâs are focused more on graduating their charges than getting them into selective privates. I can see the dynamic where a boarding school GC(s) will try to optimize the aggregate results for the class by âspreading the wealthâ as you say. But doesnât that also apply in the RD round where they will push certain students to certain schools since they see the whole board?
You can only go to one college when it is said and done. If you (in this case OP) have a clear favorite, why would you not apply EA, REA or even ED? Based on the Harvard litigation data, there appears to be a strong advantage, controlling for other factors, in applying SCEA at least there. Why give that up in order to get more GC support in the RD rounds of schools that are lower in your list? I have always been a big advocate of applying to your first choice school REA (ED under certain circumstances, clear favorite and FA not an issue) and EA/rolling to flagships (honors programs especially). Having a school secured by January 1 saves a lot of unnecessary stress January through March. Apps are not cheap and thoughtful apps take time that could be spent on more productive or enjoyable things. The results you obtain EA/REA/ED also give you valuable data points. Accepted you are done and can go for a few more reaches if you want. Deferred at a highly selective probably means you are competitive for your entire list. Deferred at a school that is less selective or rejected means you have probably overshot or there is a defect in your app. For a high stats kid that probably means there is something wrong with an essay(s) or LoR.
3 Likes
Depends on the college. Some apparently reject very few in the early round, which probably means that most deferred have no realistic chance of admission. Others reject many or most early applicants, so deferred applicants are more likely to be true borderline ones.
5 Likes
Yes, agree with that. Deferred at Stanford means you are every competitive while it is almost meaningless for Harvard. Rejected at Stanford may not tell you much, but rejected at Harvard tells you a lot. For each school, you need to look at the ratios of accepted, deferred and rejected. But the point is that you are getting application feedback of some sort prior to the RD round which can be valuable.
I donât want to derail this thread, and this discussion isnât really germane to OPâs situation, but⊠going by the discussions over in the Prep School forum, elsewhere and what we (parents of a very successful unhooked selective bs kid) have been told, the back room horse trading isnât as much of a thing anymore. Legacies, athletes and urms are driving admissions numbers at bs like everywhere else. I agree the bs GC goal is to get as many kids into as many nane-brand schools as possible. And that bs GC may steer students to different schools to maximize results. Picking up the phone may happen, but it is not part of the normal practice anymore. Donât want people to get the wrong idea.
For the OP (who comes across as spectacular, hard-working, organized, thoughtful person and I wish all the best to) I think the general wisdom applies re: REA/ED/EA. Apply to the school you really want to go to more than all the rest, if there is one. Hopefully you can be done and not have to do all the other applications if you get into your favorite. If you donât have a favorite, donât apply REA or ED. Apply EA to a mix of schools. See what shakes out. You should be able to to narrow down your list of RD schools based on those acceptances. And there will be acceptances. 
1 Like
I agree that if there is a clear favorite, students should apply EA/ED1. But the dynamic between boarding school counselors and the admissions officers is very real. And palpable. Almost all of the counselors at my sonâs boarding school were former admissions officers at Ivy+ colleges. They have good relationships. One reason is that working at college admissions people donât have great career progression prospects. So transitioning over to boarding school as a counselor is a common career path. This is why the college counselors and admissions officers maintain such close contact. They do a lot of favors for each other and want to maintain good ties.
I have numerous examples from my sonâs graduating class (2018) of the horse-trading. From my interactions with other families, it is still apparently going on. I personally know of a student from my sonâs BS that was moved from waitlist to Z-list at UChicago because of college counselor intervention. Another example is a top 1% student who was shortlisted by Duke for Robertson, but then later was shut out for Ivies during the RD round (parents believe this was because the college counseling office didnât push for their child). They do this only in selected circumstances, but the ability to pick up the phone and influence a decision is real.
I guess that the influence level differs from one boarding school to another. In my sonâs BS class the influence was most evident at Princeton, where nearly 15 students each year matriculate. I would imagine that at most public schools, the guidance counselors have little to no impact with the admissions staff.
REA is non-binding; the main reason not to apply REA is if you want to apply to other schools EA that the REA school want you not to apply EA to.
Note that REA schools may have different restrictions. Examples:
- No ED anywhere else, no EA to other private schools in the US (EA to public schools ok).
- No ED anywhere else, no EA anywhere else.
- No ED anywhere else (EA elsewhere ok).
So read REA rules carefully to determine what you want to do.
As far as when to apply, I am a firm believer in applying early action everywhere you are allowed. Some schools, for example Georgia Tech, only consider Early Action candidates for scholarships. Also this year many schools had drastically lower acceptance rates than normal during regular decision. At the schools that have provided an explanation, it seems that their yield was much higher than expected early action leaving fewer spots for even superior candidates regular decision. The only time I would think it would be prudent to apply regular decision is when you need an extra semester of grades to raise your GPA or an extra few months to get a higher test score. Neither would apply to the OP.
You have impressive stats and a hook, so you are likely to be admitted to at least one of the more selective schools on your list, and almost certainly to Pitt and PSU (unless you show no interest and they protect their yield. Which is a lesson in itself: demonstrate genuine interest at all the schools to which you apply).
But your choices are all over the map in terms of location, size, academic vibe, social vibe, and in other important areas like academic calendar: are you ok doing an internship for a year while at Northeastern? Are you cool with the D Plan?
So to help you narrow down your choices, choose some variables that are most important to you, and evaluate colleges that way. Ideas thereto:
- Academics (available majors, academic calendar, curriculum, academic âvibeâ if it can be ascertained, etc. Would you be cool with the cores at Columbia or Chicago, or do you need greater academic liberty?
- Location/Weather/Logistics
- Setting (city, suburb, small town/rural?)
- Size of student body (small, medium, large?)
- Athletic/Social/Political vibe (party central? laid back? big time sports? free speech or vacuum chamber?)
- Housing and food (Princetonâs eating clubs vs. Harvard and Yaleâs residential houses, for instance. You will spend a lot of time sleeping and eating, so this could be a tiebreaker)
Also, as mentioned above, you want to add probably a couple more match-range schools and at least one safety, unless you would 100% be happy at PSU or Pitt.
1 Like
Yup. My sense of the trade-off for REA schools - Stanford, Harvard, Yale and Princeton- is that you get to pick one. And if you pick one, you arenât applying anywhere else in the early round (except publics). So for the early round you are choosing either one ED school or one REA school. If you are applying REA, you are giving up any benefit to the early round for any other school, so you better really want that REA school. If you arenât applying REA, you can apply to other schools EA along with an ED application. But you better really want to go to the ED school over any of those EA schools. Combined, you pick one REA or ED1. Thatâs it. you better really want want your one ED or REA school. If you arenât sure, you are giving up options you may want.
For example, if a kid really likes Stanford (REA) and Princeton (REA) and MIT (only EA available first round) and UofC (all options available),
If the kid applies to either Stanford or Princeton REA, they have to wait to get rejected before they apply anywhere else. UofC can be an ED2 option, but not if they want MIT more than UofC. If they apply to UofC ED1, they can apply EA to MIT, but if they get into both, they are going to UofC (unless the financial aid doesnât work out at UofC). And they will never get a shot at Stanford or Princeton. If they apply nowhere REA/ED1, but EA MIT and UofC, then Stanford and Princeton are still possible RD. If you donât know where you want to go, the last option gives you most flexibility.
The question is whether there is a significant bump to the REA/ED1 round that justifies cutting out options for other schools. If you know you want Princeton over the others, then the choice is more clear - the trade off of an additional bump for Princeton REA may be worth the possible decrease in chances in RD elsewhere. That is such an individual calculation, though (it could be the odds are so low for a student for any option, it doesnât make a material difference which strategy you use). OP doesnât have a clear front runner and the bump for REA/ED1 may not be as different as for others because of OPâs strong profile (and solid chances in RD). So the flexibility from not doing REA or ED1 might be important in this instance. OP has to run through the pros and cons for each schoolâs options, though.
Most students who donât want to be restricted by SCEA/REA certainly wouldnât want to be bound by ED. Theyâre more likely to apply only EA in the early round.
Actually applying REA to HYPS only limits the kidâs ability to apply early to another private. You can apply RD to any school, whether you are accepted, deferred or rejected. There is almost no downside other than perhaps losing an ED1 bump somewhere. If the kid likes the ED school better, then that is where that kid should apply. So even if the OP doesnât have a clear favorite at this point, I think applying REA to Princeton, Harvard or Stanford is a good call. He is not really limiting his choices other than losing an ED1 opportunity somewhere.
1 Like
This topic was automatically closed 90 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.