Early Decision - is it fair?

Sue- thank you for clarifying. Yes- for the kid who is dying to attend Skidmore or BC or Colgate or Rice how does it help him or her to have all the kids who right now are applying to Dartmouth/Columbia/Brown/Stanford early-- some of whom get in and then don’t apply to what would have been one of their backups (i.e. Skidmore, BC, Colgate, Rice)? You’re just driving down the admission rates further by pushing all those early “one and done kids” into the later round- which by necessity, is going to include the reach school (like Dartmouth) plus the match school (Middlebury) and the safer school (Skidmore) and the really safe school (Muhlenberg). Now you’ve made much more misery for the kid reaching for Middlebury, or Skidmore, or Muhlenberg. Those colleges admit the Dartmouth wannabee (assuming he or she has shown a modicum of interest) which adds more uncertainty to the yield predictions.

My guess is more aggressive use of wait lists, which really benefits nobody.

@blossom I think you make an excellent point. I’ll have to give that some thought. But when a student looks at the admit rates of a place like Skidmore and sees 25% overall acceptance rate, but 55% ED, it can’t help but feel as if the ED kids have an advantage. If I had my heart set on Skidmore, I would certainly feel disadvantaged if I were relegated to the RD round.

I have argued that I don’t believe ED is fundamentally wrong, but I do see the other side as well.

I completely agree with this point. At my daughter’s HS, the kids who applied ED applied to one match/reach and then a few safeties (usually EA places that aren’t too selective). Once accepted to the ED school the rest of the apps were pulled and no new ones sent out. Many of the ones who applied SCEA/REA and were accepted decided to see where else they could get in and sent out a ton of applications to top schools. And those who were only trying for RD sent out many apps.

The system may look like ED is easier, but don’t forget all of the hooked kids in those percentages (athletes, legacies, and dev. kids who were virtually assured they had a 100% chance of acceptance) and then realize that it’s not as helpful as it seems.

Furthermore, the ED kids, by not sending out apps to other matches/reaches/safeties left much more of the field open for the rest of the class.

I’ve seen many posters this RD cycle stating that they were denied, but that they are sure they would have been accepted in the ED round. However, if you read the ED stats by college, it shows that top grades, test scores and strong ECs don’t guarantee anything in the ED round.

@gallentjill "These are not the kids being shut out of the top 20 in my area. Its kids with 1580 SATs and near perfect GPAs but no hooks or other special perks. These kids have participated in school clubs and activities and volunteered in their community, but not much beyond that. They had every reason to believe they were qualified for any school in the country and every right to be disappointed. Personally, I think the obsession with t20 or IVY or any other prestige designation is misplaced for most kids. But these kids were not delusional. "

I agree that these kids have every right to be disappointed given how hard they have worked. But in today’s admissions landsacape a kid even with near perfect scores that “participated in school clubs and activities but not much beyond that” are delusional if they believed they were “qualified for any school in the country”.

The top 20 make no effort to hide what they are looking for and how high the bar is. Numerous schools publish statistics that they reject 80+% of the thousands of valedictorians that apply annually and that they could fill their classes multiple times with perfect test score takers. Believing “not much beyond that” is going to open doors “for any school in the country” is naive at best but delusional in reality.

You are correct that the kids you describe likely have the “abilities or qualifications” but they don’t have the distinguishing characteristics or proven track record of success beyond the classroom the super elites require.

You say…“They had very little shot because of the admissions rate”. Indeed the admit rates are low because so many kids apply that are not recognizing or listening to the schools when they say it takes more then grades and scores. These kids weren’t victims of a low acceptance rate but are those that didn’t hit the well publicized standard the T20 are looking for.

One last time not looking to diminish these kids in the least, their disappointment is justified and effort noteworthy, but let’s not portray them as victims of circumstance.

So far our children and their cousins have sucessfully applied to 1-4 schools. Two athletes (one app), two ED to top 10 (Plus 2 or 3 apps for EA with withdrawals), one rolling to first choice in state and only one student applied RD to just 4 schools. They are all happy and thriving in their environments.

Looking at the high number of applications to the top, It seems that ED applications have a more thorough read by admins getting a better understanding of your academic goals and potential contributions to the university.

@wisteria I think Merit is a great way for colleges to get smarter students who can’t afford to pay the 70+k per year (lots of people), but can afford a bit less. My issue is with athletic merit. D1 schools give plenty of athletic merit to kids they want to entice for their athletic abilities, even if they don’t qualify for FA. At some colleges, these athletic merit budgets are HUGE. Then they get on their soapbox and talk about how they only give merit to kids who have need, ignoring their huge athletic merit scholarship budget.

As to ED, I wish all schools did SCEA. Kids can show interest, reduce the number of RD apps, and still get a great yield. That way kids can get a read on merit and FA and compare offers.

“These are not the kids being shut out of the top 20 in my area. Its kids with 1580 SATs and near perfect GPAs but no hooks or other special perks. These kids have participated in school clubs and activities and volunteered in their community, but not much beyond that.”

These kids are indeed the cannon fodder of the Ivy level application process. I don’t know that they are delusional though. These are smart kids, certainly smart enough to realize what all those red x’s on the Naviance scattergrams portend for their Ivy chances. I think they just figure they will take a shot. More and more, I see these kids getting shut out of the next level of schools as well (Georgetown, ND, WUSL, Tufts etc …) and end up at school a little further down the food chain at schools like BC, University of Rochester, Villanova, Lehigh etc … Matter of fact, this is exactly what happened to the soon to be Val of my DS’s class. I think they are surprised when that happens to them.

@Bigchef I didn’t mean to suggest they were delusional for applying or thinking themselves worthy. My belief is that “anyone” is delusional to think “they are qualified for any school” or likely to get admittedly a top 20. They are reaches for everyone.

RE: being shut out- disappointment is absolutely understandable. And I get it in a 17 year old. But parents and guidance counselors would have to have been asleep for the last decade not to understand what the shift to single digit admissions means. Do they get that an 8% admissions rate means a 92% REJECTION rate? It’s not like the newspapers and the media don’t cover this with a frenzy.

The other piece that mystifies me is the conflation of “qualified for any college in the country” and “I’m going to get in to Yale”. There are kids at over a hundred colleges- today- who are qualified for any college in the country. The top students at Missouri M&T, majoring in chem eng or mechanical engineering- absolutely qualified for MIT, Cornell, Cal Tech. Some didn’t apply- they live in Missouri, and the combination of academic rigor and price tag made it their “one and done”. Some did apply more broadly and either didn’t get in, or couldn’t afford it, or COULD afford it- with some pain- and decided it wasn’t worth it. Or the top kids at Pitt in one of the Life Sciences disciplines, or a pretty wide swath at UVA, Michigan in both humanities and the sciences. Or the kids at UIUC in comp sci.

And then dig deeper to the small schools- Earlham, Rhodes, Beloit, Lawrence. No- not every student there is going to have his or her equivalent at Stanford or Princeton. But the top of the class- yes.

I do see these high scores, great grades, participate in student government and yearbook kinds of kids with their crazy college lists. And I’m just a friend/neighbor, or friend of a friend who gets asked “are there any colleges we’re missing?” And people don’t like my answers. Kid wants to study Classics and thinks it’s U Chicago or bust. Sure- put it on the list. But where is Holy Cross on the list?

I know I’m preaching to the choir here. But some of these “kids with 1580 SAT’s” haven’t fully assimilated what an 8 or 10% admit rate means, and the grown ups in their lives don’t do them a favor by suggesting “if you love Princeton, put Amherst on the list too”. I’m the one suggestion Goucher, Conn College, Trinity, Brandeis, Bard to the kid who is in love with Princeton and is in that “high scores, good grades, loves yearbook” kid. Maybe Princeton will happen-- terrific!!!

@Nocreativity1 I agree with you but push back a bit at the terms. I think it’s increasingly necessary to differentiate between “qualified” and “likely to be accepted.” Mainly because top schools routinely reject more qualified applicants than they accept.

My daughter had “stats” that suggested she would be in the top quartile for virtually any school in the US. And she was active in ECs and had good recos and essays. She was the prototypical “average excellent” student—one that was fully qualified for tippy-top schools but not likely to stand out from the crowd. She realized that, despite her “qualifications”, her likelihood of being accepted during the RD rounds at schools like Brown or Northwestern were slim to none. So, she knew ED was likely her “shot” of getting into schools like those. However, she actually chose to apply ED to a school that had everything she wanted—including merit aid—but had a more realistic acceptance rate. She’s never regretted it because she didn’t weigh the prestige factor too heavily.

One thing to garner about ED, whether it’s fair or not, its tends to give you the same kind of bump that a hooked applicant gets (except for athletic recruits who are in a different category altogether) in the RD round.

“One thing to garner about ED, whether it’s fair or not, its tends to give you the same kind of bump that a hooked applicant gets (except for athletic recruits who are in a different category altogether) in the RD round.”

I think this is the main reason the number of ED applications has exploded - people are looking for an edge. That said, I think how much of a bump ED gives you varies greatly from school to school. My own conclusion is that ED/restricted early action doesn’t give you that much of a bump at Ivy level schools. However at many schools, it can make the difference between getting in and not getting in.

Do the math, chief. A few point bump in a school with a 7% admission rate is huge. For example, a 3 point bump for the totally unhooked is 3/7= 42% increased chance of admission.

I also don’t think we should underestimate the appeal of “being done”, not doing further applications, relaxing senior year as a motivator among students for whom FA is not a factor in driving the growth in ED. Kids recognize they can only attend one school so if money isn’t a concern they will take their best shot to put the uncertainty to rest. I also know a parent or two that pushed their kid based on a similar desire to just streamline the process.

HYPS don’t even offer ED so for them it’s irrelevant.

@Nocreativity1 For my family, money was a factor but my son applied ED to a school that meets 100% of demonstrated need. For my son it didn’t come down to applying ED to his “dream school”. He applied ED to his school because he said that if offered a spot it wasn’t one he would ever turn down. There were many schools on his list that would have made him happy but this was one that he knew he wouldn’t say no to.And yes being done in mid-December was a huge plus. His group of friends are incredibly bright but none of them other than my son got into their schools ED. It was a huge relief to have everything done before the holidays.

The “being done” factor should NOT be underestimated. My daughter sent in her ED app on October 15. Three weeks later her 27-year-old brother died of an accidental overdose. While she had a number of other applications half done by November 5th, getting that acceptance to her first-choice school by the first week in December made all the difference for her.

My son was accepted ED to his first choice school which eliminated his unsent applications to a number of selective college. The same was the case for a number of his peers. That alone is an example of how ED makes things a bit less competitive for the RD round.

You can also be done if you get in EA right or SCEA? If say MIT is your first choice school and you get in EA, you’re also done, and you don’t even have to officially withdraw your apps because you’re not under a contract to do so.

There is very little benefit to ED for the applicant, anything that locks in a customer is bad, plain and simple.

@theloniusmonk I strongly disagree. For a family depending heavily on FA, ED to a needs met school can be a God send. Without the ED boost you may not get into a school that meets all of your need.