I have interviewed for both ED and RD at Brown, and although the data may appear as though applying early is a HUGE advantage, you are not accounting for the strength of (some) of the applicants in the early round.
We’re talking about kids who are off the charts talented (in whatever way) and for some reason- they prefer Brown to Harvard or Yale or Duke or Princeton. So they apply early to Brown-- and they get in. They would have gotten in anyway- that’s how phenomenal they are- but they preferred Brown, they applied, they got in. And not all of them are rich kids btw- and many of them need substantial financial aid to attend. But superstars- academically, musically, published novelists. Or not superstars yet- but clearly heading that way. And teachers who don’t write “Susie is a hard-working student who does every single extra credit assignment to improve her GPA”, but teachers who write, “In 25 years in the classroom, I have never met as voracious an intellect as Jonny. Despite being assistant manager at Pizza Hut, which consumes his entire weekend, he still finds time to volunteer as the school systems webmaster and he led a tech conversion last year which saved the town $20K. He is the most humble and kind student in his class and a joy to teach”.
In the regular pool- yes, you have some phenomenal kids as well. But you also have loads and loads of kids (in the aggregate, it’s likely a big number. I only interviewed a handful per year) who pretty much tell me that since they’re not the #1 or #2 kid in their HS they knew they couldn’t get into HYP, and because they are “artsy” or “boho” they knew they wouldn’t fit at Cornell or Dartmouth, and their best friend is applying to Columbia so they couldn’t “compete” with that, and “everyone knows” you need to apply to at least one Ivy “Just to see what happens”-- so voila, I’m sitting in a coffee shop with a kid who has never looked at the course catalog, knows that Providence is somewhere between Boston and NY and maybe is on the beach? (no).
The ED kids have done their homework to a fare-thee-well.
So yes- it looks as though applying ED is hugely advantageous, but you are ignoring the fact that every fraction has both a numerator AND a denominator. Who gets in- that’s important. But who is in the pool to begin with- that’s also a piece of the analysis. And you don’t have the “I’m applying because everyone needs an Ivy so Brown is it” gang in the early pool, nor do you have “I know I won’t get in but Grandpa, class of '59 said he’ll disown me if I don’t apply so here I am” gang in the early pool (I’ve interviewed a lot of them- we end up talking about the college they REALLY want to go to), and you don’t get the “where is Providence anyway” crowd in the early pool. So that denominator of who is getting denied- wow. Can’t ignore it.
Brown is also an extreme on admit rate. Look at a selective school with a higher admit rate like Bucknell. If they have 250 hooked admits with a 100% admit rate, then the ED and RD admit rates are equivalent, while the chart shows a factor of 1.89.
Hi Blossom and bp0001,
I think this is soooo interesting to think about! Love your thoughts.
As for Brown, as luck would have it, I’m ALSO an alumni interviewer there!! And yet I only ever get assigned maybe 2 kiddos to interview for early, and typically 3-4 per year for regular, at most. I always think it’s not enough to compare at all! Perhaps your region assigns you more kids to interview each year. Anyway, my experience has not been so clear as yours at all. I agree that I’ve met a LOT of kids who are like your superstar example (it’s honestly humbling; I certainly did not do nearly as much as these kids back in my day). But I can also say that not a single one has ever conveyed the lacksidaisical attitude that you have come across (giving the impression that they aren’t really interested in Brown specifically, applying because Grampa wants them to, etc). I really don’t remember any! Certainly there have been some that are less impressive, though. But I have not detected an unusual strength to the ED pool vs the RD pool. Typically they are mostly all amazing.
Most kids who are Brown-worthy are smart enough to do some research before interviewing and know more than that it’s a great school between Boston and NYC. Even if it’s not their top choice; it’s not hard to fake extreme interest! And the kids who did SCEA at HYPS and are in the regular decision pool for Brown are in my mind likely even stronger than the ones who apply to Brown ED, even taking into consideration fit.
So I hear you and I do believe it’s possible that removing the hooked kids, it is possible that there is a difference in the overall quality of the ED vs the RD pool, but I can’t say that it’s obvious to me that the ED pool is the stronger one. But of course both of us are just interviewing a tiny tiny tiny portion of the applicants, so we probably can’t generalize.
Bp…good point! I wonder if Bucknell has as many hooked kids (ie do they have fewer recruited athletes. Brown has 900 total varsity athletes (some portion are walk-ons not recruited) on 38 varsity teams. Bucknell has 27 varsity teams (still A LOT given undergraduate enrollment of only 3700 students…I couldn’t find number of athletes).
I do think it’s important to try to investigate each school you are interested in to better flesh this information out. The chart is a great starting point, but does not factor in everything we can think of. There is definitely variation among the schools for sure!
But I don’t think I have as much access to information as you do, Blossom. Upon re-reading your last post, it looks like Brown shows you the teacher letters of rec?? I am not given any of that information when I interview. Maybe you are an actual admissions officer; I’m a lowly alumni interviewer. So you may have more info that I have. But I wouldn’t make any conclusions about the relative strengths of the ED vs RD applicant pools based on my measly 5 or 6 total interviews per year.
My own conclusion is that for unhooked “average excellent” students, applying ED or SCEA doesn’t give you much of a boost at Ivy League schools like Brown, and from a strategic standpoint, you are probably better off using the ED “magic bullet” at a school with a higher acceptance rate, but difficult to get into if you wait until the RD round.
Speaking of fairness - what do you think of schools who dangle a lot of merit to high stats kids to entice them to enroll which enhances the score profile of the school, but then do not meet full need or are need aware to the kids who are solid matches for the school? If they didn’t offer merit, perhaps they could meet full need/be need blind.
Well, two schools my S is considering both dangled a lot of merit for his high stats and he will probably enroll in one of them because they are really the only affordable options. So, without schools line this, none of his options would be affordable.
@wisteria100 Honestly, thats a tough question. The EFC that FAFSA and CSS calculated for our family was completely unafordable. Without “merit” I don’t know what we would have done, so I’m biased. Scholarships to attract top students have always been around. I can only assume that the school community benefits in some way from having these top students.
I particularly dislike that ED pushes kids to feel that they have to apply ED for the admissions advantage. I was pretty shocked to find out that my kid almost applied ED to a school that ended up being his least favorite of the places he applied. In October it seemed okay, by spring he knew he wanted a bigger school and he was much more solidified in what he thought his major would be.
I think you are correct about the importance of ‘fit’ but completely wrong about ED strategy. If you and your kids do not have an absolute ‘dream’ college that has emerged (for ‘fit,’ for finances, for thrill of attending) then ED is not for you. And that’s perfectly fine. 3 of my kids did ED (2 accept, 1 deny), but my 4th and final child had absolutely no clear #1 choice in November let alone today.
Don’t feel pressured to use the ED bullet. It’s not for every situation. Go to accepted students days to make the right choice.
For some students, “fit” may mean a category rather than a specific school.
All the colleges my daughter was interested in were (1) big, (2) academic, (3) in the East or Midwest, and (4) a little less selective than HYPSM, but not by much. None of them had an unusual curriculum, and she was interested in a very common major that’s offered everywhere. She could have applied ED to any of them and been happy if she was admitted. She chose to apply ED to the one where she was a legacy. It worked out great.
Just chiming in to say that the issue of ED is so individual. Depending on the kid, it doesn’t have to be a “dream” school, or in the ABC example, an A school.
D19 has the stats, rigor, sport, and unique service EC that sub 10% schools are looking for. But, that wasn’t what she wanted. Her dream is not the most selective college—it’s about her version of quality of life and the best environment for her personality.
After a year of research and experience, she applied ED to a 30% acceptance rate school, got in, and has been walking on sunshine ever since.
I’m not saying that it’s fair that we could do this, just that ED doesn’t have to be “shoot for the moon”. The circumstances are so varied that my post will likely only help a couple people, but I wanted to throw it out there.
As an aside, this is worthwhile remembering when looking at what appear to be abysmal acceptance rates, and thinking “with a 3% acceptance rate for RD, what chance does even a very high stats ‘unhooked’ kid have to be accepted to an Ivy?”. It’s not only Brown which get kids who are “I’m applying because everyone needs an Ivy”, because many of these kids are even more clueless, and only know HYP by name. Top stats kids (the top 1% or 2% of kids at a HS) “unhooked” aren’t really competing against all the 35,000 RD applicants to a selective college, but against a much smaller group.
Back now to the discussion on the fairness of ED, or lack thereof.
Little specific details about Brown are available, but the Harvard lawsuit provides specific numbers about the degree of SCEA boost and differences between the SCEA and RD applicants. With full controls (controlling for applicants with similar stats, similar hooks, and similar dozens of other criteria), the Plantiff analysis found the following regression coefficients. The higher the number, the greater the influence on admission decision. Applying SCEA had a notable positive influence on chance of admission, similar to the effect on increasing one of the core ratings category from 3 (typical applicant) to 2 (high) . However, the analyzed SCEA effect was not as strong as the boost for more traditional hooks, such as URM or legacy.
They provide some stat differences between the class of 2016 regular and early applicants. The early applicants were stronger academically as whole. While the RD applicants were less White and less wealthy as a whole. Almost all of the early admits attended in spite of it being SCEA rather than ED. I’d expect the SCEA yield to be even higher today.
:Which college to use ED is more complex, depending on estimating chance of admission, individual preferences between schools, and estimating ED effect. along with the discussed financial criteria. If one could estimate these factors accurately, then they could be plugged in to a game theory type model. In most cases, I’d expect the ED would best be used on schools where there is a decent shot of admission, rather than a first choice with little hope of admission. SCEA/EA is also a good option that may be favored over ED, depending on specific preferences.
Aid was very generous earlier. We just did it as a country to improve our country, instead of as individuals to further our own groups’ achievements by selectively applying it.
It’s hard to compare aid over time. The fact of the matter is that if you had a half tuition scholarship back in my day for a private school, it meant you had to come up with $2500 for the rest of the tuition. Now days, half tuition can easily be more than 10 times that. Coming up with $25K is just not as doable.
My father was a GS employee so I can do a direct comparison on what he was paid back in the 70s and what someone with that same job is paid today. When I take that salary and look at the college costs and scholarship possibilities, the gap is far more insurmountable. That large dollar amount is just not reachable by cutting back expenses, kid working the summer and parttime.
Data10, thanks for that! I think it’s pretty incredible that Harvard shows a statistically significant positive correlation for applying EA, controlling for same stats, etc. They are the one school that I would think would give the least bump, for two reasons:
EA obviously gives less of a bump than ED because you are not committing. You are not giving them a real gift (your promise to attend), so they don’t need to give you a large gift (higher acceptance rate) in return. But mostly:
They have the highest yield, even higher than Stanford. I think it’s in the 80%-84% range in recent years. Basically they don’t need your promise—they know if you apply you want to come (84% of the time)!
So to see that even Harvard, with its high yield and non-binding EA program STILL gives a bump to EA applicants over similarly qualified RD applicants is really something! Imagine then the schools with yields in the 20%-60% range, and with binding ED programs, how much more they appreciate your early application. Too bad we can’t see this data for other schools.
MmeZeeZee,
Such interesting information. I guess I meant specifically the private schools (e.g. Ivies) were not so generous with financial aid back then—none of them as I recall were need blind, and they also didn’t promise to meet full need. Now they have extremely generous programs. At Harvard and Yale, the students from the lowest SES not only pay nothing but get $2000 spending money! If they were home they’d have to pay for food, etc, but my understanding is that it is all completely covered now, plus these start up grants so that they can do the things they need to do (buy a winter coat if needed, go out to eat with friends if their hallway is going out, etc). Their financial aid even translates to if they want to do a summer program in Europe or abroad elsewhere, it’s all covered. If they want to join a Finals Club at Harvard or other programs that cost money, they get the same FA deals. I think it’s great, but it was not like that 30 years ago. But the state funding changes are a worthy topic!! I’ll read up on it, thank you.
THough there may be a lot of ED athletic recruits, there are also quite a few who are not. In fact, none of the athletes I knew in all of the years my kids were applying to schools went the ED route, my sons included. The very top recruits in impact sports tended to go a whole other route in college apps, but they were very much up in the air in their choices until they got the final offers from all of the colleges. SIgning day for those kids a very big deal. Often these deals are cut completely outside of the usual college admissions seasons. Some kids accepted junior year even.
For my kids who were not looking for the best scholarship deals, but for the preferred colleges, again, they wanted to choose among the schools. Only one school asked my oldest if he would apply ED, which he declined–was accepted anyways. Only one recruit from that school was ED that year.
are smart enough to do some research before interviewing and know more than that it’s a great school between Boston and NYC. Even if it’s not their top choice; it’s not hard to fake extreme interest! And the kids who did SCEA at HYPS and are in the regular decision pool for Brown are in my mind likely even stronger than the ones who apply to Brown ED, even taking into consideration fit.