I’ve heard a number of reports about students who have applied Early Action to a college that also offers Early Decision and are then asked to switch their applications from EA to ED. This request comes from an admission official and is directed to the student’s counselor or straight to the student. The request seems to imply that, “If you’re willing to make the binding commitment, we’ll take you for sure. If you can’t commit now, we may not.” But then, if the student makes the change, he or she is sometimes accepted but sometimes waitlisted or even denied. And this bothers me.
I believe that, when a student has the option to apply either EA or ED and chooses EA, the student is saying, “I’m not ready to commit for personal and/or financial reasons.” So if the college then “encourages” the student to switch to ED, this “encouragement” should come with an automatic acceptance for those who comply. The college is asking the student to make a concession and thus the college must make one as well. I find it unethical for colleges to urge EA candidates to switch to ED and then to deny or waitlist them once they do.
So I’m trying to get a sense of whether this gambit is growing and which colleges are doing it. If this has happened to you (or to your child or someone you know), I’d like to hear the story. Feel free to PM me if you don’t want to publicly name (or shame!) the school.
My daughter applied RD to Tulane, but sent in the application before the EA/ED deadline. They emailed her after their first round of decisions, asking if she wanted to change her RD to ED2; the email even had a link to take her straight to a “switch your decision” page on their portal. (Both parents were cc’d on the email too.) She actually withdrew to take up an ED offer elsewhere though so we can’t tell you an outcome.
@SJ2727 - I’m glad that your daughter didn’t have to wrestle with a tough choice. So no harm, no foul this time, but it seems to me that there is enough stress–and second-guessing–in the admissions process already without colleges “reminding” students that the ED option is out there. And some of the situations that have been described to me seem especially high pressure.
i know someone who applied EA to tulane and was deferred, but then urged to switch to ED2. They agreed and then were waitlisted (which is essentially a soft rejection at tulane)
I feel that it’s okay (albeit borderline okay) for a college to send a generic “reminder” that there is an ED option when a student has applied EA or RD, as described in post #2 above. But the stories I’ve been hearing are more like yours. There is personal contact between the college and the student and/or the college and the guidance counselor, with the implication that an ED application will boost admission chances.
Well, of course, ED pretty much ALWAYS boosts admission chances–and often significantly. So a student who has applied EA usually has solid reasons for not wanting to make a commitment and is willing to forfeit the ED boost in order to leave options open.
Thus, when personal contact is made by the college recommending a switch to ED, I think there should be some quid pro quo … i.e., concessions on both sides. As I said above, if the student makes a concession, the college should, too.
It seems to me that recommending ED to a candidate who has already been deferred via EA is tantamount to saying, “If you can make a commitment to us, we will make a commitment to you.” So if the student agrees to the switch to ED but is then waitlisted, the poor kid has been put an an emotional roller coaster. This process has enough of those already, which is why I’m staunchly against colleges making personal contact with students urging them to switch to ED unless an acceptance via ED is a sure thing.
Because Tulane has already been mentioned a couple times on this thread, in the spirit of full disclosure I should point out that my son is a senior there and has had a wonderful experience. So, because of this, I’ve paid close attention to Tulane and their admission practices, and I find that this school is in a tougher spot when it comes to enrollment management than other similar institutions. I think that this is because Tulane offers a free application and lots of application options–two rounds of Early Decision plus non-restrictive Early Action (i.e., students can apply elsewhere concurrently, not only via EA but also via ED). Above all, Tulane offers VERY generous merit scholarships, with notification for many of them arriving at the time of the EA verdict in the fall.
So Tulane has become a popular place to apply for students who favor somewhat more selective competitor institutions such as Duke, Vandy, Wash U and the Ivies. And if I were a Tulane admissions officer, I would want a powerful crystal ball to help me discern which of Tulane’s applicants were most likely to enroll. (Students–and their parents–are so savvy these days that many know how to convincingly “demonstrate interest” even when the interest is minimal.) As I’ve already noted in comments above, I am clearly against the practice of encouraging students to switch to ED and then wait-listing or denying them, yet I do applaud Tulane for offering a range of application plans, a cost-free application, a down-to-earth blog by director Jeff Schiffman that enable students to better understand what is and isn’t important in their applications, and scholarships that help middle-class families, as well as high-need families, avoid college debt.
Even since my son applied to Tulane just four years ago, the university has done an impressive job of raising its median GPA and test scores and attracting a more diverse applicant pool. But I suspect that making these changes is spawning some growing pains as the school decides which strategies most effectively allow them to meet their academic and demographic enrollment goals and to draw students who will not only enroll at Tulane but who also really want to be there. Thus, although I’m not a fan of the practices described on this thread that seem to be happening at Tulane and at other elite schools that have recently added ED, I do understand that it may take some experimentation with different approaches in order to craft policies that work for both the school and its future students.
Great “ps” post. Tulane is “hot ticket” these days for sure.
I think if you have been deferred EA, letting the student know that Ed2 is an option is an excellent practice. But they should really stress that it’s not any indication on their file or potential admission. When you think the change is a soft likely letter, the wl or rejection is twice as strong. Needless.
“There is personal contact between the college and the student and/or the college and the guidance counselor, with the implication that an ED application will boost admission chances.”
That does sound shady, especially given the personal contact. But I have to ask - is it really a personal contact? Obviously a phone call is a personal contact. But if the system generates a form email to all applicants who have applied RD prior to ____ date, even if that email is “signed” by the AO, that’s not exactly a personal contact.
As shocking as it sounds, we see copious evidence at how people misunderstand mass marketing and interpret form letters as personal invitations. How many posts have we seen from parents bemoaning that a selective college was personally recruiting their child when that college should know their child’s GPA isn’t high enough for entry (hint… those letters your child is receiving, even the ones addressed to the child and “signed” by the AO aren’t personal recruiting mechanisms, they’re simply mass produced junk mail.)
Unfortunately, given how gullible people are, I’d want to know more about what was happening before judging.
The “easy to apply” option to Tulane is tbh exactly why my D applied (and one of her best friends applied, and was accepted, ED1). I didn’t even know she was applying until it had been done, because no fee payment is required!
For general consumption here I think it’s fair to point out that the email my daughter received was simply along the lines of “if we are your first option then ED2 is a good idea” - no urging, no pressure.
I belong to an admissions professionals Facebook group with a huge membership. There are currently rants on there from high school guidance counselors who have been contacted directly by admission officials to discuss their advisees who’d applied EA. (The colleges in question were not disclosed.) And the admission officials strongly implied that switching from EA to ED would turn the tide … but then it doesn’t.
While I agree that what some folks call “personal contact” is not really personal in the least, in the cases that are cited in my FB group, the contact is VERY personal and specific … and that’s the stuff that bugs me. The more general invitations to apply ED, like the one that @SJ2727 's daughter received, are not problematic.
Thanks for sharing this, I was wondering what ‘personal contact’ meant. The AOs bringing the GCs into the process makes it worse IMHO, because 1)the GC is obligated to tell the applicant of the discussion with the AO, and 2) the GC is now complicit in a situation that is ethically on the edge (strongly implying switching to ED will result in an acceptance and then it doesn’t and/or putting pressure (however subtle) on an applicant who wants to compare financial offers and/or implying the applicant won’t be accepted during the round they applied).
I wonder if there is any will at NACAC to weigh in on this practice.
I think that once a student has applied it’s inappropriate for schools to suggest they consider other forms of application. Presumably, they considered all the possible options before they sent in the application.
@austinmshauri - hm, maybe. In my D’s case,for example, she applied very early (when she sent in ED1 elsewhere) so an ED2 reminder (just a reminder, not pressure) for kids who may have been rejected at ED1\REA elsewhere kind of makes sense to me, especially as many kids may not be aware that they can switch.
We personally know of a student who applied EA to UChicago & was contacted & offered the option to change to ED2. Admissions@ UC clearly indicated this would boost the chance of admission. The student strongly considered switching, but in the end chose not to. The student was then denied admission.
One of my daughter’s friends applied EA to U Chicago and RD to several other schools. She was contacted by U Chicago and offered the option to change to ED2. She did and was admitted. She is very happy at U Chicago. However, her Dad was a U Chicago alum and her older sister is also a current student, so the legacy status may have played a role.
I think universities and LAC at the top end are gradually recognizing they have the unbelievably better hand to play. Each year there is an increasing population of near perfect kids and so schools can really push to get the group they want and improve their school standing. Here is an example of a slightly different issue but still showing that school power. D1 who plays a sport at top ten university has a room mate from same team who’s younger sister had ed rejected this year( 1 week before date) after being green lighted by school and backed by coach (34/4.0 UW)(coach had never had this happen before) because … another team had a better student from the same state. I think this is only going to get worse until parents realize the " Second level schools are now full of brilliant kids that would rival the ives from 20 yrs ago" and make decisions based on that.
My friend’s daughter received emails to switch to ED from EA from Colorado College. Mom didn’t like it, especially since CC is so expensive and not much merit aid. They didn’t do it.