<p>An article from the Brown Daily Herald about the increase in apps and decrease in acceptances:</p>
<p>I posted some stats (with help from Xiggi) on my website for all the Ivy's plus Stanford and MIT. It does look like there were more applications at all except Harvard, but whether that translates into more QUALIFIED applicants applying is uncertain. The difference in admit rates between ED and early programs is also slipping a bit at some schools, and at some of the elites, there is no advantage in terms of admit percentages. Unfortunately, we'll probably continue to see people buying into the idea that the "only" way to get into an elite school is to apply early. Sigh.</p>
<p>Carolyn,
You make a very valid point. I really wonder if the quality is what is driving the numbers down, or possibly if the adreps are able to sense that a student is not really totally sold on the ED school.</p>
<p>carolyn:</p>
<p>great stuff, as usual. You might also consider including the SAT scores for each year....I've only looked a few of the schools, but some accepted scores appear lower this year (excluding writing).</p>
<p>I'm sorry, the statement by the Yale admissions officer is smoke blowing. The admit percentages in the ED round are driven by 2 or 3 factors - the yield in the RD round, the total number of ED applicants, and whether or not the school is binding or SCEA. Perhaps some schools consider what it means to the overall class or the future admissions pool, to have a larger or smaller number admitted ED - but I doubt that, they are concerned about who they get this year, and who they need.</p>
<p>At the elite of the elite, the SCEA schools, the admit percentages are slipping because there is no advantage to the school to admit students early. I don't think it will ever fall as low as the RD %s at Harvard or Yale, because there are athletes in the pool that the school does want, and probably a few other students that have been recruited or are highly desireable for some other reason. Also, as long as the pool doesn't split 50-50 ED/RD, outstanding students in the ED pool will have a slightly better chance to stand out in the smaller pool - that's just human nature.</p>
<p>Binding admissions, though, will still give some small push to students applying early - but I bet money, they know down to 2 decimal places what their yields both ED and RD are likely to be. Brown's ED rate may usually be lower than Dartmouth, because Dartmouth has a less desireable location for a lot of the overall pool of applicants.
Brown may know, we don't need to pick out so many specific people in ED because we will get plenty to pick from in RD that will see us as top choice. Dartmouth says hey, we know from experience that there are a number of kids who get here during accepted student days, and it is their first visit - they did not really understand how small, or how rural the school is, whatever, so our accepted student yield is not what we would like it to be - so we take a lot of kids that want us. Or maybe dartmouth wants to cultivate a student body that really wants to be there (they certainly seemed to be brainwashed into loving the location), so they turn a favorable eye to ED kids.
Yale and Harvard, on the other hand, have the luxury of saying, heck, we will have the finest students in the country to pick from, whether we do it now or in the spring, let's wait until the spring.</p>
<p>I think the SCEA admit percentages will go down until they reach a minimum, which may flutuate from year to year, and I think that astute players on the students side will begin to realize that SCEA offers them little advantage unless they have some reason to believe that they are desireable/recruited to the school, and truly love it, OR, they don't really know where they want to go, and while they are still deciding, little is lost by sending a shoot the moon app to Harvard.</p>
<p>Is either healthy? Who knows. I think the best thing for the kids would be one round for the very elite privates, due Dec 15, results March 15, allow the kids until May 1 to decide - no ED at all, but that's not happening. One thing I really like about this is that it brings the notification of FA from the privates closer to when the kid has learned about FA from any rolling admission school, or less selective school still offering EA, or merit scholarships. But again, ain't happening.</p>
<p>Excellent well-thought out post Cangel. You do raise some very valid points.</p>
<p>I also want to point out that there is an opportunity cost involved with going the SCEA route. You are giving up the opportunity to apply early elsewhere. If you have a realistic shot at Yale or Harvard or Stanford, that may not be an issue. However, if you are not quite in the ball park and are just applying EA because you (falsely) believe it will boost your chances of acceptance, than you are giving up the opportunity of applying EA (and in some cases, ED) to schools where it might indeed make a big difference. Again, probably not a major point to most applicants, but I do worry that people don't see that even with SCEA you are giving up something.</p>
<p>The merits and demerits of applying SCEA have never been better explained than by the two last posts.</p>
<p>Yes. Outstanding, Cangel and Carolyn.</p>
<p>Smoke and mirrors identified and personified.</p>
<p>At all bad, though. It worked fine for this family.</p>
<p>Allow me to point out to last year's discussion about the differences in acceptance rates among Ivies and the benefits of applying early. </p>
<p>FWIW, I would wait a bit in "diagnosing" the symptoms of the slippage of ED/EA rates. After all while the schools did accept a similar number of students, the numbers of applications jumped up. Let's remember that Penn's ED applications jumped by 21%. </p>
<p>The early released numbers for total applications show increases of 8 to 10%. That could translate in about 15,000 more applications for an Ivy League spot alone. </p>
<p>I'll wager that, at the end of the day, the ED/EA's advantage won't have lost much of its luster and wisdom. We'll know soon enough!</p>
<p>Oops, I forgot to add that a review of the numbers should indicate that the SCEA did not "slip" as much as their ED counterpart. Obviously, except for the anomalous MIT, the SCEA schools already have the lowest early admit rates. </p>
<p>Oh well, who is counting!</p>
<p>Everyone is counting or this thread would be growing.......hehehe</p>
<p>My son will not be applying to an Ivy, but for those that are.... don't you feel you are being manipulated? Brown isn't merely reporting the stats, they are BRAGGING about having the lowest ED acceptance rate, as if it is an achievment. Somehow 20% is better than 22% and 15% will be better still. Is their ultimate objective to admit noone?? Wouldn't the school with a zero acceptance rate win this contest? </p>
<p>I really think these hyper-selective schools should send out some guidelines to HS guidance counsellors and have candidates prescreened and make a sincere effort to reduce the number of gratuitous applications received instead of pumping up their applications through all this hype. And then the dean of admissions will write an editorial decrying all the hysteria, stress and angst that students invest in the process. It's really getting on my nerves!</p>
<p>
[quote]
And then the dean of admissions will write an editorial decrying all the hysteria, stress and angst that students invest in the process. It's really getting on my nerves!
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Amen. It makes me want to strangle them when they start up with that "boo, hoo....students shouldn't feel so much pressure" nonsense.</p>
<p>The admissions deans could end half of it if they would just stop leading kids on for no reason but to inflate their numbers. It's cruel.</p>
<p>NJRes, can we really blame the schools for being popular with applicants? </p>
<p>On the other hand, should we not turn an accusatory eye to the sizeable number of parents who are fueling this craze with their "Ivy League or nothing" philosophy. Some accounts on CC are truly eye-opening. Breaking down the massive increases in applications along ethnic and social groups helps reach yet another conclusion. </p>
<p>It is nuts, but it will get worse!</p>
<p>At least at UChicago, the admissions folks felt it was an overall stronger pool.</p>
<p>The Office of College Admissions enjoyed an 11.8 percent increase in early applications this year, with major strides made in minority recruitment. The 2,764 early action applicant mark one of the largest pools in the Colleges history...</p>
<p>Up by nearly 300 early applications compared to last years pool, the 11.8 percent increase is a large jump compared to the two percent increase seen last fall... </p>
<p>Reacting to this years admissions statistics, ONeill expressed satisfaction. Needless to say, we felt this was not only a larger pool, but a stronger one, ONeill said.</p>
<p>FWIW, the more regular applicants join the ED/EA, the STRONGER the pools will be. At most schools, the ED pool comprises more athletes, more development cases, and more legacies than the RD pool. Considering that the consensus** is that the ED pool is weaker statistically, the more students move from the RD ranks, the stronger the pool will be. </p>
<p>** or the data produced by Avery, Fairbanks, et al. :)</p>
<p>The opportunity cost of SCEA is very important, Carolyn. If a kid is really undecided, looking for more time to consider options - especially if someone in the background is really pushing HYS, then SCEA is a good option - nothing really lost, and maybe Mom shuts up!</p>
<p>But if the student has a real affinity for another reach school that still has binding ED, they have a large opportunity cost if they use that chit. We almost had this with DD - in the end she had 3 schools that were very close in her mind - each had advantages and disadvantages. She was able to separate one from the other 2 as being a first choice, but she had trouble ranking the other 2 . Problem was one of the other two had EDII, and the other did not, 4th choice school also had EDII. She was planning to send the app to the #2 as EDII, but by those last few days when everything was done, and I had energy to reflect, I really had the feeling that #2 was only in that spot because of EDII, I was preparing to counsel her to pay th opportunity cost, and just apply to the remaining schools RD. It can be a tough decision, especially for a child who is astute enough (or cynical enough) to see that there is not perfect choice.</p>
<p>Just because the number of applicants is up doesn't mean the quality is. I believe that UPenn said somewhere that the average SATs of the early applicants were in the high 600s, meaning that many kids apply early to schools just in case they can slide in on the low end of the addmittance pool.
Since I was allowed to apply to three schools when I went to college and at my daughter's school, where she is a senior, students who applied RD applied to an average of 10, it doesn't surprise me there are so many applications these days...</p>