<p>Hi all,
MIT and Princeton are my two favorite schools. However, my mom likes MIT a lot more and, if I were accepted, would be more willing to pay the tuition.
So here's the issue, I'm currently ranked in the top 10% of my class, we don't rank numerically. However, I'm right on the edge of the 5th percentile. I have the most AP classes out of my entire class this year, and will hopefully be able to get into the top 5% after first semester.
Should I apply early (to increase chances) or apply regular decision to increase my GPA and possibly increase my chances? Which gives the better boost? Is it something they would reject me for? (assuming I have adequate test scores and ECs?)
Thanks!</p>
<p>Neither applying EA nor RD provides an edge for MIT – in many years, the acceptance rates in the two rounds are statistically identical. </p>
<p>Relatively few applicants are rejected from MIT early. Most of those who are not admitted EA are deferred to RD, where their applications are considered again, and they are given the chance to submit additional material.</p>
<p>Thank you so much! that really helps me calm down 
I guess I may as well apply early then!</p>
<p>I would not be as definitive as Mollie as to the absence of effect of early action at MIT, especially in recent years when overall acceptance rates have dropped below 10%. </p>
<p>For the class entering in the fall of 2012, there were 6,008 early action applicants. Of these, 680 (11.3%) were admitted outright and another 224 (3.75%) were eventually admitted after deferral to the regular round for a total of 904 or just around 15% of the early action pool was admitted.</p>
<p>If you look at the regular pool, there were 12,101 applicants (excluding the deferrals from EA). Of these 716 were admitted or just around 5.9%. </p>
<p>Comparing raw numbers you find the RD pool admitting applicants at a 60% lower rate than the EA pool. That is very significant. </p>
<p>A significant portion if not most of that differential has been attributed to a referral bias i.e. that the EA pool is inherently a stronger pool and therefore will have a higher admit rate everything else being equal. One way to validate that referal bias, would be to have a breakdown of the percentage of so-called academic stars between the two rounds from MIT. These are the candidates with recognized national/international math/science awards. I have not seen that data published.</p>
<p>From my own experience interviewing candidates in a very competitive district, I have not found the referral bias to be as big a factor. I interview just as many academically qualified candidates for EA as for RD. In fact, now that Harvard and Princeton have switched back to SCEA, I see more top shelf candidate applying RD than a few years ago, when they would have applied EA. Invariably, though the numbers of EA admits is higher. </p>
<p>I think the explanation is more subtle and does involve a certain degree of self-selection. More EA applicants have MIT as their clear first choice. This can be shown in the yield from admission where over 80% of EA admits actually enroll while only around 50% of RD admits do so. EA applicants are also giving up on the option of applying SCEA to HYPS. They tend to be highly motivated and more passionate for a career in science or engineering. </p>
<p>This is highly consistent with the philosophy of MIT which takes into account soft factors such as drive, passion for science, persistence and resilience during admission. if the EA aplicants show more of these traits, then proportionately more will be admitted. The higher yield in this pool also works in the candidates favor. MIT spends a lot of time and money with events such as CPW to make sure admitted students actually enroll and the higher the yield from EA the less they need to do later. </p>
<p>Therefore, when I visit high schools and get asked the OPs question by potential candidates, i always advise them to apply EA if MIT is their clear first choice (and obvioulsy if they are academically qualified). Their chances will very rarely improve by waiting to apply RD, and if their application clearly demonstrates their commitment, they may actually get a more thorough and positive evaluation during EA when things are less hectic than during RD admissions. If not, most will roll over to RD anyway.</p>
<p>OP,</p>
<p>My son did the opposite of what you suggest. He applied SCEA to Princeton, was accepted, and then applied to MIT RD. Know that 21% of the kids who applied to Princeton SCEA were admitted. It’s probably because it’s a self-selecting groups to begin with, but it is worth noting.</p>
<p>We originally wanted our son to choose Princeton over MIT but he’s headed to MIT and I think, after all, he made the right choice. F. Aid was better at Princeton but with outside scholarships, they both were about the same cost.</p>