<p>ED vs RD</p>
<p>I have not been to Cornell for an informational visit, so is their a statistical advantage for those applying Early? </p>
<p>I would think so because they are binding but I am not sure.</p>
<p>hahaha yes definitely a very noticeable advantage.</p>
<p><a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/cornell-university/960559-cornell-early-decision-misconception.html[/url]”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/cornell-university/960559-cornell-early-decision-misconception.html</a></p>
<p>^Precludes the fact that average SAT/GPA of students accepted through ED is lower than that of RD students. Legacies and athletes can skew this to some extent but not enough that the message isn’t clear.</p>
<p>Colleges must balance “stats” & “yield” to obtain lofty ratings. With this in mind there does seem to be some advantage to applying ED…granted you are in the ballpark stat-wise.</p>
<p>I’ve read a few articles concerning ED acceptance rates and ED applicants’ advantage. Like JHU says, during ED applicants are given a more thorough review as the office only needs to go through about 1000-1300 applications in a month and a half as opposed to about 17000 in 4 months in the RD round. This is most likely one of the only advantages an ED applicant gets. If you wouldn’t have gotten in RD by a long shot, you most likely won’t get in ED.</p>
<p>I’m not sure if this is an adequate analogy, but imagine meeting a colleague for the first time. In scenario 1, you’re given 10 seconds to scrutinize him before you go into the nearby restaurant for lunch. However, you notice he has a big blob of semen coming out of his ear.</p>
<p>In scenario 2, you’re given 2 minutes to do exactly the same thing because he received an unexpected phone call. The semen ear is still clearly visible and you start forming the exact same impressions as you would in scenario 1, no? No matter how much time you get to analyze the colleague, you can’t overlook the random blob of semen jutting out of his ear and you want to rush through and hope to never see this dude again.</p>
<p>Same thing for ED vs. RD - a major flaw in an application isn’t going to be excused just because your action plan is more statistically stable than the other.</p>
<p>^ That has got to be the weirdest analogy I ever heard/saw.</p>
<p>…again, YIELD (the % of admitted students who enroll) is very important to upper level colleges, thus they love ED because it improves their yield (this is why ED was ever even “invented” by colleges), thus it improves chances of quailified canidates because if accepted you must attend…it has nothing to do with your application “given a more thorough review”…</p>
<p>Exactly, it helps a lot to apply ED, end of discussion. It is what it is</p>
<p>Also *** at post #6</p>
<p>lol what the **** is up with post 6 I’m sure you didn’t have to resort to such a twisted analogy</p>