<p>I was looking online on my high school college acceptance database, and it showed for every college I looked at that the lowest gpa accepted for regular action was always lower then the lowest gpa accepted for early action. Is this just a coincidence in that more academically sucsessful kids tend to apply earlier, or do colleges hold higher standards if you take early action? My parents are pressuring me to apply early and this has put some fear into me. Thank you.</p>
<p>EA picks the cream of the crop because it isnt binding. they are accepting students who they KNOW would get in during RD anyways.</p>
<p>so usually people accepted EA are the strongest applicants</p>
<p>It makes sense that a college would only admit EA the students that they would select in ANY applicant pool. They don't know what they'll get in the RD round, so they accept the top kids, defer the borderline and wait to see how this latter group compares to the RD pool. The advantage of accepting a top student EA is that it gives them more time to entice the student to attending, as such a student is likely to get more acceptances in the RD round.</p>
<p>Absolutely. You've got to understand that colleges are courting students as much as students are courting potential colleges. They "recruit" and woo in order to secure the best applicants as well. The great EA applicants who are admitted receive the welcome wagon and lots of attn (to heighten chances of matriculation).</p>
<p>I'm a regular joe, so should I stay away from early action in that case?</p>
<p>therisingsun312--depends on whether the school you're applying to would defer you to the RD pool if you weren't accepted during the EA round. For instance, I'm applying to Georgetown EA (and it's a reach for me) and I know that if I don't get in, they'll consider me again. However, some schools (I don't know of any at the moment) an EA rejection means a complete rejection from the school altogether. If the school you're going for EA does defer to RD, I say go for it--you're gonna be applying RD anyways so why not?</p>
<p>Is it the same for people that apply ED? It would seem to me that ED would be less competitive due to the fact that it is binding. Since it is binding the students that are truly the top applicants wouldn't want to lock themselves into any one school (except perhaps HYMPS) and thus wouldn't apply ED making the ED round somewhat less competitive. What are your opinions on this?</p>
<p>No ED means that all applicants will have uni as their top choice, thus they will be the ones who in general will write good 'why X' essYS, have visited, know poeple there, or think they can get in. ED has a higher admit %, but no student will be admitted ED who is unqualified and wouldnt have got in RD. It's all about looking behind the % - like 10% of students get into HPYS, but applying to all four of them doesnt give you a 40% chance to get admitted to one. Applying EA gives early applicant pool a better percentage, but it doesnt necesarrily give you a easier way in - and it might even be a harder.</p>
<p>For Georgetown, for example, EA admittance rates are about 22%. Regular are 18%. Everyone is deferred EA at Gtown - and there is a 15% chance you'll get accepted RD if you are deferred. Thus, the acceptance rate for EA at Georgetown is somewhere around 37%... Even considering a better applicant pool in early, that number is leaps and bounds ahead of your 18% chance RD!</p>