<p>yes, the October round of SAT/ACT scores count. The november round should count too, but that is cutting it WAY too close.</p>
<p>Do you think they’ll release the stats for Harvard SCEA in early November? I’d be interested in seeing what kind of numbers the new policy brought out.</p>
<p>Lol @ the people who said SCEA wouldn’t give you an edge</p>
<p>It didn’t.
It favors URMs, legacies, and recruited athletes.
For those unhooked applicants admitted under SCEA, they were truly superstars - winning international awards like they were plucking grass. The pool for EA is so much stronger that anyone who was accepted would easily have been accepted in RD too. If you don’t believe me, just check out the EA decisions thread - even those ~70% that were deferred look like perfect candidates. The bottom line is, the majority of those deferred had very little to no advantage from applying early.</p>
<p>^Athletes and legacies each make up ~10% of the freshman class. If say all of them were accepted in the SCEA round, that would total ~400 kids out of the ~2,000 kids Harvard accepts each year. Harvard accepted around 750 out of 4,500 through SCEA, meaning the SCEA rate, when you deflate the athletes and legacies from it, for normal people (not excluding URMs) would be 750-400 = 350 / 4500 = 7.78% SCEA acceptance rate, compared to the 5.9% overall acceptance rate and ~4.5% RD acceptance rate.</p>
<p>^ They were accepted SCEA so H will have time and exclusivity to aggressively recruit them to select the school and create an emotional bond towards H. Their tactic appears successful as they accepted 20% URM for the SCEA but announced that they accepted less URM for RD. They also expect 90+% yield for EA vs the 77% they had for last year’s RD. There is no reason for H to waste the advantages that EA gives them on average students. I also argued on another thread that there is no point to waste EA spots even on legacies as they would have a greater incentive to enroll at H. An average, unhooked student can be easily replaced from the WL. You assume that H will accept the same % for athletes and legacies for EA as they do for RD. The URM example clearly proves otherwise. There are also posts here that H encouraged athletes to apply EA. Also, legacy has its own distinction levels between development, primary, generational and common one.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>No, I assumed that H accepted <strong>all</strong> its athletes and legacies during the EA round — I am assuming the worst case scenario for normal unhooked EA applicants + URM EA applicants. Based on stats that H has released, athletes and legacies each make up 10% of the freshman class.</p>
<p>^ 10% of the whole class, not just EA. Non-development legacies are accepted to protect the yield so there is no incentive for H to accept them EA. H does not have the 40 and lower yield that other schools have. At those schools primary legacy has up to 60% possibility of acceptance during EA. The real stats is that for an unhooked US/permanent resident caucasian student there are 250- 300 slots per gender. When you understand the role of EA and look at the crossacceptance stats and RD yield then it is clear who the target students are for EA.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>That’s what I said…I thought that was very clear. What did you think I meant by “athletes and legacies each make up 10% of the freshman class?” </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Uh, doesn’t that mean the SCEA acceptance rate for normal unhooked applicants + URM applicants is even higher, since the hooked group of applicants that would inflate the SCEA acceptance rate would basically be mainly athletes, rather than both athletes and legacies?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>What is the process of logic behind this claim? Where are the stats and data on this?
Wait, that doesn’t even make sense. Harvard accepts around 2,000 applicants total. If they accepted 300 slots per gender for Caucasian/US citizen-permanent resident people, that would be 600 total slots max for Caucasians in general – around 30%. </p>
<p>However, if you look at Harvard’s racial demographics, Caucasians make up nearly 60% of the freshman class. International students make up less than 10% of the freshman class (~200 people), and not all of them are Caucasian. Add that to the 600, and the figure for the total Caucasian students, both US permanent resident and international accounts for 40% total, and that’s assuming ALL international applicants are Caucasian – which they aren’t. Harvard accepts more than “250-300 slots” for US/permanent resident Caucasian students as you claim.</p>
<p>And I don’t even see how it was relevant singling out the chance for a particular race in this discussion — I thought we were talking about the general chance across all races in SCEA.</p>
<p>Lol it’s clear you’re just pulling all these claims out of nowhere at this point.</p>
<p>You subtract the various groups distribution from the total class and the remainder are the unhookeds. Divide by 2 as the gender split is ~50-50. So you have less than 300 unhooked white students per gender. The role of the EA is to cuddle those students that belong in highly coveted (legacy is not one of the hooks for EA, except for development ones) hooks and convince them to commit, before the RD decision date if possible. Based on the crossadmits, H knows they have a 75% yield for RD among the ivies, and certain top schools. They have years of stats of who chooses to attend a different school and what the school is so they can adjust their yield algorithm prediction. If you notice the form that students send to a school when they do not enroll asks where they plan to matriculate. H does not need to inflate the EA yield. They need to increase the whole yield. So they want to increase the time they have an exclusive relationship with the most desired hooked students. Let’s say student A who has perfect math test scores and multiple math awards is interested at H. He is definitely a good prospect for MIT. Thus, H will encourage student A to apply EA so they will have 4 months to persuade him/her to enroll at H. Otherwise H will have only 1 month and compete with MIT and other top schools for the same student. When RD time comes, H has limited time to compete with all other schools that accepted the same students so H hedges against that to protect the total class yield (not just EA or RD) by accepting average legacies during that time as the family pressure to attend H will be a strong motivating factor for these students to select H.</p>
<p>^^Race distribution is reported for non-internationals and it is for US government reporting purposes. Schools used to be clever and included the internationals as well. That’s why the accrediting bodies specified it has to be only for US/permanent. The info is both from the common data set for H, as well as what the school released itself for the last years. Start deducting from the class total internationals, athletes, URM, legacies, what other special category exists and you come to the unhookeds which by definition are caucasians since URM and minorities have already been deducted. Obviously I do not know the cross distribution of each hook category with another category that’s why I did not use absolute percentages. We also do not know what the percentage of super exceptional students are in the pool each year, the percentage of the sappy category (first generation/homeless/foster care, etc), and the percentage who used a consultant. Obviously we are making assumptions under the veil of ignorance but that’s the fun of sportcasting. Those who have the stats and study them religiously are also the ones who get a very large bonus if the class yield reaches a certain benchmark.</p>
<p>Asians are also unhooked.</p>