<p>Mythmom,</p>
<p>"I've come to feel that there are no true matches, just reaches and safeties." Boy do I agree with that statement!</p>
<p>cardinalalum80: Let's start a movement! LOL.</p>
<p>mythmom: it doesn't matter if music chairs have input. If an adcom is looking at apps from five clarientists, and one of them has played in Carnegie Hall and in London and....which one (or two) will they select, if any, if they already have a full complement of clarinetists?</p>
<p>btw: I was really surprised at your son's list: Dartmouth/Williams --Bard/Vasser are all great schools, but virtual polar opposites socially.</p>
<p>Well that's the response he usually got, yes, but he is an unusual person (aren't they all?) His brand is that he is VERY politically left, but quite reserved in his dress/behavior (one exception -- he grew a beard.) He has never fought with anyone in his 17 years (yes maybe repression) but he has mild, gentle, witty personality -- for purposes of bachelor basket his soubriquet was "the softy." His four closest friends in high school were: Danish physicist science nerd, Republican football jock, music superstar who studied with Perlman and is going to Princeton and extroverted, service oriented Indian guy. All new each other: S cement between them. He said common thread was they were all emotionally open and not striking poses.</p>
<p>He can fit in almost anywhere, just his nature. </p>
<p>I know my son's characteristics aren't interesting to most people, so sorry, but I want to make a point. We tend to stereotype people and places, and we limit our options. With new conservatory Bard is attracting different students. H.S. valedictorian was drawn to Vassar because it was close and elegant, not because it was hip. One of my favorite young cousins graduated from Williams raving about how politically progressive and cohesive the Jewish community was (don't think S will be interested in this) and the majority of Dartmouth students voted for Kerry. </p>
<p>He found kindness, intelligence and humor at all these schools: Gehry's building at Bard, Dartmouth's Dylan symposium, Chicago's essays and blog, Brown's old time blue grass band, Williams purple cow and Vassar's wonderful type face, for examples. I really think he would have been happy at any or all of these schools.</p>
<p>Please forgive long post; it has been my life-long habit to think outside the box and "i guess I passed this on to my son. There is often a monolithic point of view that everyone subscribes to that my own experience contradicts.</p>
<p>But what can you expect from a poet?</p>
<p>Another reason in favor of ED is that if you don't make it in ED, there is a chance for deferral and eventual acceptance in the RD round. That's how it worked for my son.</p>
<p>and my daughter chose to apply ED to a college for which she was well qualified and was a legacy.>></p>
<p>Marian brings up an important point. At some schools, the ED pool tends to be heavy with legacy applicants, and that can skew some of the difference for acceptance rates between ED and RD.</p>
<p>Even if money isn't an issue, I don't believe in limiting kids too early in the game and would suggest weighing the ED choice very carefully. Don't use the ED card just for some hoped-for advantage if there is ANY chance your kid (or you) will have "what-if-itis" if they do get in. To me, if a kid says that "I like all of these schools equally" that is not a greenlight to apply ED out of fear that some "advantage" will be wasted. </p>
<p>In my opinion, ED is best used when there is no doubt that this is "THE" school for this particular student AND the student is already in the ballpark stats-wise. </p>
<p>That means the student has done their research, has considered all other options fairly, has visited, and, if possible sat in on some classes or stayed overnight on campus at various schools. Because there is no going back, and many kids change quite a bit between October and April of senior year. The student also should not be using ED out of fear - either fear that they won't be able to make up their minds and actually decide on a college list, or fear that they don't have other options. There are ALWAYS other options. They should be using it because this is the only school they can see themselves at. </p>
<p>I also agree with Calmom: ED seldom gets borderline candidates in and it almost never gets a really unqualified student in. If there's a chance that another semester of grades, and a few extra chances at testing will make a borderline applicant a better admissions-fit, waiting for the RD round can sometimes be a better plan than applying ED.</p>
<p>If a borderline student still wants to throw their bet down on ED, they need to have a back up plan BEFORE the ED application goes out. </p>
<p>Keep in mind that the differentials for EA can be very different than ED. At a few schools, the EA acceptance rate is actually lower than RD or not all that different. So, do your research carefully. Don't make assumptions. </p>
<p>Finally, weigh the opportunity costs of applying ED (especially to ED schools that prohibit simulateously applying EA) or to Single Choice EA schools. Make sure the "advantage" you think your child might get is worth giving up other opportunities.</p>
<p>Both ED and EA can be great options, and are worth considering. But they should be chosen for the right reasons, and not because you are afraid your child won't get into a "good" college otherwise.</p>
<p>One more thought: it's only July. Many (perhaps most) kids don't yet have clear "This is the one" preferences yet. Many (perhaps most) kids can see things to love and to hate on every college visit. It's exciting and terrifying all at once for many kids at this point - and, I, for one, think that it is good to give them lots of space to sort things out before confusing them with admissions strategy. :)</p>
<p>I've had students tell me in July that a particular college was their "top choice" and that they planned to apply ED, and then watched them come up with a different "top choice" each month straight through to November. </p>
<p>Give your kids more time before starting to talk about ED. "Where do you want to apply ED" shouldn't even be the question at this point.</p>
<p>ED is heavy with full-freight customers. Need-blind or not (and, frankly, other than Cooper Union or Olin or the military academies, I doubt there is a need-blind school in the country, the only question being the degree to which they use the information in admissions), ED will be weighted toward those who apply, which is more likely to include full-freighters and recruited athletes. There is nothing wrong with that, even from a need perspective. Filling up enough of the class with full-pay customers in the ED round makes it more possible for admissions to choose among all (including needy) applicants in the RD round.</p>
<p>In an article published in the Williams Alumni Magazine about the ongoing admissions process, the admissions director asked repeatedly how many "socio-ec" applicants they had accepted thus far. They clearly had a quota, or target. Their budget may or may not have allowed them to go over that target, or their goal might have been to stay under it, but need-blind they certainly weren't.</p>
<p>Recruited athletes are accepted before ED apps are due. They get their acceptances by mid-October and must confirm before mid-November--at least at Stanford and Harvard and UCB. That's what I saw with the two athletes I know best. One was flown in from overseas to make sure she could make the decision by mid-November. (She got 2 five-year offers from that trip (4 years as athlete, 1 year to catch up)--including 2 rt airfares from overseas--per year).</p>
<p>Therefore, the ED round STARTS with a number of recruited athletes who have accepted admission offers. The rest of the ED group is mostly full-freighters. Elite highschools push their full-freighters to go ED if at all possible. ED can skew the scattergram ever so slightly for girls and a bit more for boys. Says me.</p>
<p>Best bet--check your school's scattergrams. The smart schools are keeping stats for the ED round.</p>
<p>
[quote]
The Best 361 Colleges 2007 handbook shows the following:
Emory - 52% acceptance for early decision and 37% for overall acceptance.
Carnegie-Mellon - 58% acceptance for early decision and 39% for overall acceptance. Hope this helps.
[/quote]
Seeing that the % accepted ED is higher than the overall % accepted or the % accepted RD does NOT mean that an individual student's chances are higher.</p>
<p>It is entirely possible that the applicant pool for the ED round is stronger. Thus the higher acceptance rate can simply mean that those who were accepted ED would have been accepted RD as well.</p>
<p>It is not a simple question and there is not a simple answer.</p>
<p>"It is entirely possible that the applicant pool for the ED round is stronger."</p>
<p>It's also possible that it's not stronger, especially because many people have the perception that it gives you an advantage if you're borderline.</p>
<p>This is a reprint of a post I made a few days ago, on the same topic.</p>
<p>"One refreshing moment during the college search was when, at the info session, in response to a direct question the adcom at one selective LAC just out and said, </p>
<p>"yes applying ED materially helps your chances of admission here. Most schools will deny it, and the stats for both RD and ED pools will look about the same. But at a school like ours, stats are only a small part of what it takes to get admitted. I read these applications, and I can assure you that the bar is substantially higher in RD than in ED". "</p>
<p>The above is not my opinion about whether or not ED is an advantage, at that selective liberal arts college. And it is not my reasoned argument.</p>
<p>It is what the admissions officer at that college actually out and told us, at that information session.</p>
<p>Don't argue the point with me; you can argue with him.</p>
<p>jmmom:</p>
<p>the ONLy study on applicant pools showed that the ED pool was weaker, not stronger, after deducting hooked apps, i.e., athletes, URMs, etc. It showed that ED was worth 100 SAT points. Of course that study is based on ~'89 data....</p>
<p>Lee Steton at Penn has taken ED to new heights. Other highly selective colleges admit to a higher admission rate (a "few percentage points") for unhooked ED apps vs. RD.</p>
<p>Logically, the applicant pool for the ED round should be weaker because there aren't any people in it who are using the college in question as a safety school.</p>
<p>Consider this example: A student with extraordinary qualifications wants to go to Harvard but applies to Northwestern as a backup. This student is in the RD pool. There is unlikely to be anyone like him in the ED pool.</p>
<p>An additional thought: the common data sets contain each institution's own statement about whether and how strongly they weight demonstrated insterest (and applying ED is about the strongest statement of interest you can get). </p>
<p>Carnegie Mellon says "not considered"; Emory says "considered". Some schools, typically LACs with holistic admissions approaches, rate the applicant's interest as important. I don't recall seeing a school rate interest as very important, but that's the top rating, and there's doubtless some school out there that rates it very important.</p>
<p>"The Early Admission Game" by Avery, Fairbanks, and Zeckhauser performed a detailed analysis of this. For the top schools, normalized for other factors, there was a clear advantage roughly equivalent to 100 SAT points.</p>
<p>Cheers: Sometimes you are a veritable font of interesting but questionable information! Are you really suggesting that Harvard regularly sends kids acceptance letters in mid-October and demands a response by mid-November? That's a new one! I'd love to see someone else confirm that that has happened, ever (say, in my lifetime).</p>
<p>"The Early Admission Game" by Avery, Fairbanks, and Zeckhauser performed a detailed analysis of this. For the top schools, normalized for other factors, there was a clear advantage roughly equivalent to 100 SAT points.</p>
<br>
<blockquote> </blockquote>
<br>
<p>A few points to keep in mind about the oft-quoted Early Admissions Game study. The data is based on ED data from the late 1990's. There were fewer people using ED, or even aware of ED, back then. </p>
<p>And, no school makes decisions based solely on test scores. The equivalent of a "100 point increase in test scores" won't get a kid with so-so grades in. In fact, it won't always even get a kid with already great test scores and great grades in, unless there is something else the school wants/needs that they have to offer. Anyone that doubts that only needs to look through the ED threads from the past couple of years and see how many great kids didn't benefit from the so-called "100 point advantage."</p>
<p>There are schools where ED will definitely help (Penn for example) if you're a decent candidate. If you're a decent candidate for RD, and are sure that the school is your absolute favorite, applying ED makes sense. </p>
<p>But, I stand by my comment that ED in and of itself won't get a poor applicant in, and, while it may improve the chances of a solid applicant, the decision to apply ED should come from the desire to attend that particular school, not fear that you won't get in elsewhere if you pass up "using the ED ticket" somewhere, anywhere.</p>
<p>ED can be a great option in some, perhaps many, cases. But everyone shouldn't rush to apply ED just because they think it's their only shot. Think it through, and encourage your children to do the same. If they and you believe it is the right choice, go for it. But no one should feel they HAVE to apply ED or be banished to admissions hell forever.</p>
<p>Sometimes you are a veritable font of interesting but questionable information! Are you really suggesting that Harvard regularly sends kids acceptance letters in mid-October and demands a response by mid-November? >></p>
<p>JHS, Cheers was referring to recruited athletes getting their notices early in the year. She is correct. Recruited athletes in Division I schools do often receive offers early in senior year, even from the "elites"</p>
<p>If H. or any other school wishes to compete for a qualified Div. I quality athlete, they have to have the applicant nailed down by November 15th, which is the Div. I first signing date. I expect it happens "regularly" but not "often", as there is not a huge raft of Div. I quality athletes who likely view H etc. as desirable places to go to school. </p>
<p>(About that, I can speak personally, with a potential Div. I gymnast - Brown and Yale don't even offer her potential major, and Penn is not seen as desirable.)</p>