In regard with the Ivies, is it common to be deferred, then accepted?
<p>It really depends on the school.
Harvard, for example, hardly accepts any its deferrees, while Yale's deferrees have like a 14% chance regular decision versus 7% or what ridiculously low number it is for plain RD candidates. </p>
<p>On the other hand, you're more likely to be rejected from Yale in the early round than Harvard, who defers more than it rejects early.</p>
<p>I was deferred then accepted for Princeton, but I don't think there were that many like myself.</p>
<p>someone i know of got deferred @ harvard then accepted...but he turned it down for amherst.</p>
<p>The ED pool is typically weaker than the RD pool, and so not making it there probably means that you can't make it later either. However, some people are able to pull up their stats during the intervening months. In this case, they have a better shot during RD than they would have had otherwise because they showed interest in the school.</p>
<p>(Don't apply ED if you also plan to apply for finan aid since you give up your ability to compare FA packages, and you may lock yourself into a really high $ amount.)</p>
<p>The ED pool is NOT weaker than the RD pool...a lot say that it's stronger so your chances don't improve that much by applying early.
I think you might mean that the SAT scores/grades are slightly lower, and perhaps that is true, but the early group usually have more hooks. They are the legacies, sports recruits, urms, talented artists, etc, so I don't really think the ED group is weaker. I, for one, didn't do anything to "pull up my stats" during the intervening months and I was still accepted later. I don't think a deferral = no chance RD.</p>
<p>i know someone who got deferred and then accepted to yale this year...salutatorian 1550+, 98 average</p>
<p>The vast majority are deferred than rejected, though there are a lot of deferred than waitlisted which is generally the same thing.</p>
<p>Well Zant, what I think did it for you was your scores. It makes sense that your numbers would help boost Princeton's average stats. Furthermore, your letter to them indicated continuing interest which ensured (in the adcoms' minds) that if you were accepted, you would attend. Lastly, I think the photo professor you met with was probably able to put in a word or two for you. I doubt that went to waste.</p>
<p>"I don't think a deferral = no chance RD."</p>
<p>Well said</p>
<p>Well my scores stayed the same from my early app to RD time, so I was just pointing out that that wasn't what changed their mind about me.
A lot of people write a followup letter and are still rejected. It's getting to be common practice now, not something that really distinguishes you from others.</p>
<p>I really have no clue about whether the photo teacher visit had an impact, since I lost contact with him and don't know if he ever even told the adcom anything about me.</p>
<p>Your school has a good relationship with Princeton and I am sure the photo teacher said *something, because otherwise that would be a waste of a trip (and his time) wouldn't it? What else would it be in your mind?</p>
<p>also with weak legacies and athletes sometimes they defer them and then see if they can fit them in rd (i know two people this has happened to at ivy league schools)</p>
<p>I don't mean to insult anyone personally, but I have never read of anyone saying that the ED applicant pool is not "weaker". That is the whole purpose of applying ED because it is easier to be accepted ED. There is a huge amount in the literature currently about the negative impact of the phenomena. Educators are concerned that colleges are filling up 30-40% of their freshman classes with ED applicants having lower stats than the RD round. They are also concerned that students are using ED only as an admissions strategy. USNWR has stopped using yield as a metric because of it. Special interest minority groups are complaining that it discriminates against URM's because they are less likely to apply ED because of lack of knowledge and the need to apply for financial aid. The whole controversy is why Stanford, Yale and Harvard switched to SCEA in 2003.</p>
<p>Well the photo teacher wanted me to send in slides so that he can evaluate them and tell the adcom something, but I never sent slides because it was too late...
I personally think it was for financial reasons...I know pton is need-blind and all that, but a finaid officer from another high school told me that they need to budget and balance their acceptances so sometimes a person needing finaid may be deferred and then accepted when they know they can handle the financial need.</p>
<p>As in, if you had not applied for finaid you think you would have been accepted ED?</p>
<p>
[quote]
I have never read of anyone saying that the ED applicant pool is not "weaker"
[/quote]
Then you haven't been reading that much because there have been lot of people on CC who say that the ED pool is stronger. The admissions officers also say that, but they might be lying. I'm not saying either is true...it's debateable, but there are definitely people arguing the other side.</p>
<p>legendofmax,
perhaps. who knows?</p>
<p>zantedeschia: When I said that I hadn't read of anyone saying that, I didn't mean on CC.</p>
<p>You mean professional articles?
A lot of college viewbooks say that the early group is stronger.</p>
<p>In terms of some earlier comment about colleges deferring almost everybody, colleges publish the percent accepted during RD and ED. The ED acceptance rate can be several times the RD rate, and the scores are lower.</p>