@elodyCOH You are 100 percent right. The early-decision process has a priority for students who have an official hook, which in most cases, is being very wealthy or a talented recruited athlete. That’s the way for most schools, along with students who have VIP status, such as being a famous celebrity or the child of a celebrity. After that, the rest of the seats are reserved for the most exceptional students. The ED pool is generally more competitive than the regular pool, meaning that the applicants have the highest STATS. They have to choose the cream of the crop, or the students that they think would be probably accepted into a more selective school, and are willing to commit to their particular school. The cream of the crop students who get admitted also protect the yield rate of schools. That’s why the majority of excellent candidates get differed to the RD pool, because of the limited number of slots reserved for them.
reply is above
But then the question is, if the advantages or disadvantages are gotten because *others/i made good or bad choices (or had good or bad luck), then how do you evaluate fairness?
For example, many college students are limited in their college choices by parental money more than they are by their academic credentials for admission.
This is exactly the point of a pre-read. The family has the chance to sit down with a human being in the FA office, with their financial documents and explain special circumstances. The college then offers an idea of what kind of FA student will receive. Its not a guarantee, but if the aid doesn’t match the estimate, the student is able to withdraw.
This is a different question. If the ED school gives an estimate that is affordable, the family can apply ED. Yes, they lose the chance to compare all offers and find the least expensive school, but that doesn’t seem particularly unfair. Its a choice.
For all the people in this thread insisting that ED is somehow fair for the applicant, how does it’s fairness compare to EA?
@UCBalumnus1 I was strictly responding to the comment about FA being lower for ED students which isn’t true. Anyone depending on merit aid should not apply ED as not getting enough is not an acceptable reason to decline an offer.
You know, I’ll just never agree that for the wide swath of the population that has to worry about cobbling $70,000/year worth of college funds together, whether through merit or something else, shouldn’t have the same admissions boost for ED for their first choice school.
Petra- where is the evidence that those families don’t get the same boost for ED? They do. What they lose is the ability to compare the Princeton fin aid of 35K per year with what might be the Alabama full ride or the Drexel full tuition. There is zero evidence that Princeton is discriminating against the family that needs to worry about cobbling together the 70K in its admissions policies. It’s just that since they don’t offer merit aid (which anyone who can read at a fourth grade level can see on their website- it’s not like they obfuscate or lie about it), a kid who is evaluating a generous merit offer (potentially) vs. a generous need based award, will NOT be able to apply ED. So that kid applies RD.
What is your beef? That affluent people have more choices? Yes, they do. Affluent people get second opinions (and sometimes third) before getting a mastectomy, even if the second or third oncologist is out of network. Affluent people check into a hotel when their house gets flooded- they don’t have to live in the garage and worry about mold contamination and their kid’s asthma. Affluent people replace their cars when the muffler, transmission, and brakes all need to be fixed the same month-- they don’t drive around in junkers worried about adding more debt to their credit cards.
This is kind of obvious, no?
I think you’re confusing systemic disadvantage with individual discrimination.
Of course Princeton isn’t like “Bwah hah hah hah! Applicant 2DLK432 will NEVER attend, because they can’t take this risk! One more poor person thwarted! Bwah hah hah!”
Instead, Princeton just very politely and elegantly demands that applicants meet certain standards which are nearly impossible to meet if you’re poor. And then, to ensure that they have some early wins in their yield, they say “Hey everyone, if you could just pretend finances aren’t an issue, we’ll give you a bonus.”
Well, poor people can’t do that. They can’t pretend finances don’t exist. It’s clearly a bonus that can only be taken by the rich.
Now, as I posted above this is probably the least egregious of all the indignities of being poor in this system. So I don’t mind it.
But it is in no way fairer just because it’s systematically unfair rather than personally targeted discrimination.
@blossom The question is if it’s “fair,” no? Isn’t that the title of the thread? And I’m not talking about Princeton or other schools that don’t offer merit, that’s beside the point. I’m talking about schools that do: Bryn Mawr, URochester, BC, etc. It’s a huge admissions boost to go ED if those are your first choices. A boost that only goes to the people who can afford it or who REALLY can’t, not to anyone in the middle. No matter your stats. So no, I don’t find that fair.
I’m well aware of the choices of affluent people.
It would make the process far more fair if lack of merit aid were considered a reason to decline an ED offer at schools which award merit. If there was some way to apply conditionally. “I agree to attend if I get the presidential scholarship.”
That said, as someone whose kids could not take advantage of ED, I agree that it is really a drop in the bucket of all of life’s unfairness.
@MmeZeeZee But in the example of Princeton, the poor person can feel comfortable in applying ED because they are need blind and meet 100% of need.
@PetraMC BC doesn’t have ED. They will offer it for the first time next year so we have yet to see how much of an admissions boost those applicants will receive.
You’re right, Princeton was a bad example because it looks like not only are they need blind but they essentially have a sliding scale for tuition payments.
https://admission.princeton.edu/who-qualifies-aid
I guess a better statement would be to say in general, for colleges that do not meet full need, this is systematic disadvantage. Thank you for pointing this out. It’s too late to edit the post but I learned something new about Princeton.
When you apply ED and need financial aid, if you are accepted, you will get an aid package. You can are released from the ED commitment, if you decide the offer is not affordable. You are getting first dibs on the pot of money they have, which is usually beneficial, certainly more so than scraping what’s left at the end of the season. You have some time to discuss the offer and try to negotiate. Since schools really hate to lose ED acceptees, they may be more inclined to bend a little. They aren’t as busy at that time of the year either.
If you reach an impasse with the ED school, and simply cannot swing it with what they offer in aid, it gives you a very good idea of what’s to come in like schools when you enter the RD rounds. It’s a good early warning signal. If a school with a great rep for fin aid is not coming up with a package that is doable, and is that far off your FAFSA EFC, or your NPC is not coming up accurately because of self employment income or other factors that may not be addressable using that online quick calculator, you know that you have to go for merit and cheaper schools to meet your needs.
THe big drawback of ED for those who need financial aid is that you cannot compare offers. You have to accept or reject College A without any idea what colleges B, C, D might offer. You may well get some generous merit money at some other colleges that make them much better deals than College A. I’ve seen that happen. Buyer remorse can run rampant with ED with kids just applying ED to get a leg up and because it’s the thing to do. BUt for those who need financial aid, and get accepted to a first choice school, but that package might be somewhat short of what’s comfortable for the family to pay (It often is), it can lead to a tough decision. If you go for it and then see classmates coming up with what you perceive are better packages that you think you could have gotten, merit awards, etc, you can get a really bad case of Buyers Remorse.
@cptofthehouse — your first two paragraphs in post #114 raise really important points. Thank you.
As a related aside, there are private schools near me that make everyone apply to at least one college early (ED or EA, I have to assume) regardless of income. Tuition is $50K+, but they have students on FA. I always found that to be very odd, and kind of assumed it was to make their college placement stats look better. Doesn’t that potentially take more affordable options off the table?
It doesn’t take anything off the table if they apply EA. It may be the school’s way of trying to make sure kids have at least one place to go. There is really nothing better than an EA acceptance to a school you like and can afford. it takes so much pressure off the whole process.
As long as there are schools that offer EA (or begin rolling admissions very early, essentially the same thing) then it takes nothing off the table.
Doesn’t University of Alabama open applications in August, for example?
I guess? With my one kid who didn’t care for the legacy school, there weren’t any on the list that offered EA and it seems to be a shrinking pool ever since. Guess we would have had to add one. I just found that kind of an odd requirement but I guess that makes sense.