Downside of ED

<p>This article, by the president of Tufts, presents some good food for thought. I agree with much of what he has to say, but think it might be wishful thinking to expect that the tide will turn very quickly with respect to ED at the majority of selective schools. </p>

<p><a href="http://www.projo.com/opinion/contributors/content/projo_20060811_11bacow.1ad13ce.html%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.projo.com/opinion/contributors/content/projo_20060811_11bacow.1ad13ce.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>Thanks for posting. Bacow is being realistic, although he does not spell out the advantages of ED for Tufts, only the disadvantages, about the drawbacks of getting rid of ED for a school like Tufts; this is why he is not advocating Tufts get rid of ED, merely reducing the number of students who are admitted ED to about 1/3 of the admitted class.</p>

<p>That is what I read as well Marite. Tufts will scale back their ED acceptances, as MIT did this past fall for their EA applicants but why not just switch to EA? Maybe the article and his views would carry more weight if they went EA.</p>

<p>Kat</p>

<p>FWIW, Bacow used to be provost of MIT.</p>

<p>This could only come from Tufts, right? Their SAT;s in the RD pool are higher because it consists, to some extent, of kids who did not get in ED or EA to the Ivies and other more competitive schools. </p>

<p>Hence, if they take more kids RD than ED...they might have higher SAT;s (and more diversity), but maybe more kids for whom Tufts is not the first choice. </p>

<p>Who knows what that will do to 'Tufts Syndrome.'</p>

<p>I wish there is no ED at all but a single admssion date and kids apply and get in or rejected based on wharever college wants to do. ED actually give very big advantages to kids with resources. BUt I do not think it will ever end unless quality of a school ED pool is bad as compare to RD pool. Then colleges would be making a choice.</p>

<p>I wish there is no more even SCEA just plain EA and you can apply to 2-3 schools (based on EA formula limiting how many schools one can apply) you want and be done with it.</p>

<p>This way I admire EA colleges that they are upfront about it. IVy leauge university needs to to be taking leadership role as if they abolish ED/SCEA then everyone will foloow. BUt I know it is not going to happen.</p>

<p>Harvard used to have ED, then it went to EA and got flooded with applications. That's why it's gone to SCEA.; same with Yale and Stanford.
I have no quarrel with SCEA. There are kids who know where they want to go early on; and are glad to not have 10 more applications to fill out (and nearly $1000 more in application fees) kids who need to compare offers can still apply elsewhere.</p>

<p>Marite:
What is SCEA?</p>

<p>SCEA = single choice early action</p>

<p>Hm...I personally think early admissions are terrible for morale. If you don't get in early--you're rejected or deferred--then you spend the rest of your senior year in full-blown anxiety mode, because getting rejected so early in the year makes you feel like you are somehow a terrible candidate for other schools..you get filled with thoughts like "Oh my god what have I done wrong??!? It's too late to change my stats now...now I'm going to be rejected from all the other schools too in April! I'm going to have to obsess over schoolwork for the next few months!!"</p>

<p>MallomarCookie:</p>

<p>For kids who get rejected EA/ED, it's a wake-up call to have a more balanced set of colleges.
Also, even though my S had a clear first choice, he filled out most of his other applications early, including writing essays. He just asked his teachers and GC to hold off on sending recs, and also waited to hear the results of his SCEA app to decide on whether to send out his application. </p>

<p>You are going to have to obsess about school work for the next few months if you apply RD--which is what happens if you do not apply EA/ED anyway.</p>

<p>The one downside of EA/ED is senioritis setting in earlier. But my S had a tremendously challenging second semester anyway.</p>

<p>Weenie:</p>

<p>With SCEA, you apply for Early Action but only to one school. You are free to apply RD to other schools and to make your decision in April. The exception to the "only one school" rule is for applications to schools that have rolling admissions, such as UMich. This limits the number of applications a college receives and at the same time frees applicants to apply to other schools and compare offers while also giving the applicants more time to make a firm decision as to where to matriculate.</p>

<p>It seems to me that EA/ED, especially ED, has evolved to the point where it serves the needs of the colleges far more than the needs of applicants/students. That's too bad, but reflective of how all too many families and colleges approach the college admissons game. Of course, the entire admissions process is designed for the needs of the colleges. Our poor kids all too often are the tool by which a college receives revenue and generates prestige, I fear. Cynical? Sure. but real world.</p>

<p>IMHO, all too many families are focused on getting into the most competitive schools, regardless of fit. This has been well discussed elsewhere, so I won't belabor the point here.</p>

<p>Hmmm...Learn something new everyday.</p>

<p>I like the sounds of SCEA. I've been a foe of ED for a long time. </p>

<p>I think it gives kids who have no financial concerns way too much priority. </p>

<p>Also, as anyone who's had a kid go through the college admissions process knows, a lot can change between September and May! Kids start to see all the other schools their friends get into, they start wondering "what if," while their friends' decisions are all shiny new theirs seems like old news, they change their major, wish they were farther/closer to home, oh lord the list is endless.</p>

<p>Marite, as a student who is contemplating applying early to college (SCEA)...I have to say that if I get deferred or rejected, I will spend the rest of the year until April stressing out! There will be an extra onus on me to get extremely high grades and work extra hard for the rest of the year because clearly I'm not "good enough." Imagine the kind of pressure I'd be under...every B would have an extra stigma attached to it...ick...</p>

<p>Won't you stress out if you decide to apply RD anyway?</p>

<p>MallomarCookie,</p>

<p>Why not apply to at least one rolling admission school, get that application out by the end of September and get that acceptance (hopefully) in the mail in November?</p>

<p>That way, no matter what happens in SCEA on December 15th, you will have one acceptance in the bag.</p>

<p>Marite, I won't stress out as much if I apply RD because I won't have a rejection letter staring into my face for the whole year. To KNOW you've been rejected/deferred from your top choice school early in the year puts unnecessary stress on you to perform at a higher level for the rest of the year--because you don't know whether you got passed over because you just got unlucky or because you really do suck! But I am still applying to college SCEA...the benefits of getting in early far outweigh the problems. Also I feel confident about myself right now...hopefully that won't change :)</p>

<p>UMDAD, I am applying to one early notification school, my state school. You're right, it will definitely help to have an acceptance letter :D</p>

<p>
[quote]
From a purely economic perspective, ED is a splendid tool for colleges to manipulate the overall percentage of admitted students who choose to matriculate and thereby ensure high admissions "yields": the larger the percentage of students admitted early, the greater the yield and the more selective the school appears in the eyes of U.S. News & World Report, for example.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Hasn't U.S. News and World Report dropped yield as a criterion? That's what I thought I read.</p>

<p>Personally, I would have liked to read something like this from the dean at WUSTL. Now, that would be interesting!</p>

<p>
[quote]
Tufts has discovered over the past two years that its regular-decision applicant pool is stronger academically and more diverse ethnically, geographically, and economically than its early-decision pool.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I think this is probably true for many colleges, that the stats of the RD pool are higher. Kids who are "borderline" for a particular college are inclined to apply ED in order to boost their chances (and I don't mean to insult anyone by the use of that word).</p>

<p>
[quote]
But I am still applying to college SCEA...the benefits of getting in early far outweigh the problems. Also I feel confident about myself right now...hopefully that won't change

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Precisely. S1 did not apply EA; S2 applied SCEA. Both liked the results they got. </p>

<p>Good luck in your applications!</p>

<p>For kids seeking financial aid, SCEA is definitely better than ED. ED helps college better then the kids. Many kids with lower stats apply to ED and get in. Have they applied in RD round results would could have been different.</p>

<p>If all SCEA schools offered EA option, that would have been to our family advantages. I am so glad that ED is not the only options.</p>

<p>There are only 3 schools, to my knowledge, that offer SCEA, and I like the idea. It really forces kids to think harder and yet, it allows them to change their mind regarding fit and to compare financial packages. if they so wish.</p>