Two years ago Early Decision was all the rage and he did ED on what was undoubtedly his #1 choice. He did not get in. Now despite intense “showing interest” in various ways, and ED, he did not get in. Now I really don’t believe that doing ED was the issue. However, my daughter will be applying this fall (and Univ of Southern California-USC) is her #1 choice. By the numbers, etc., she should qualify (though I know it is getting more and more difficult), plus we’re in California so not as attractive to USC. We are debating ED. I am reading more and more that ED attracts the most intense competition and most schools don’t then put you in the “regular” pool. I realize that a significant percentage of admissions now come through ED, on the other hand. Does anyone have opinions or authoritative information on this strategy now. Thanks, much.
http://www.collegedata.com/cs/data/college/college_pg02_tmpl.jhtml?schoolId=1138 indicates that USC does not consider “level of applicant’s interest”, so ED may not be all as helpful there as at a school where “level of applicant’s interest” is considered.
Applying ED can still be useful – if the result is admission, then the student is done and need not send any more later deadline applications (but should have them ready to go in case the ED result is rejection or deferral to RD). However, the student gives up the opportunity to compare financial aid offers with other schools, and the school may be less prone to offering merit scholarships if the student has already indicated a commitment to attend.
I’m confused by your post. USC does not offer Early Decision or Early Action.
For colleges that do, and especially Early Decision (which in binding) as much as 1/2 the freshman class is accepted from ED applicants. Your question, as I understand it, is what happens to ED (or EA) applicants who are not accepted early? For those who are defered and then rejected would they have done better by applying RD? At one level admissions looks at them twice. At another level they didn’t make the first cut. But then the admission rate for that first cut is much higher than for applicants who apply only for RD. We’ll never know.
What to conclude? If the college offers ED and you can afford the college (or trust that need blind colleges will make it possible for accepted students to attend – typically without loans) and the college is on top of your list then apply ED. Best is not to overthink the process.
It seems to me that when students hear they might have a slightly increased chance at their preferred college, they think ED is the way to go.
The way you should really think about it is to secure a place at the best match you can likely get in early on using ED. That leaves you free to apply everywhere else with an acceptable alternative in your pocket.
JustOneDad writes
ED doesn’t work this way. When you apply Early Decision generally you are making a binding commitment to go to that college should they accept you. Perhaps you are confusing ED with Rolling Admission.
Ah, sorry, you are right; I was thinking about Early Action.
Lucky for you, USC doesn’t offer any early decision or early action.
If USC is the top choice, there is no EA or ED .
http://www.usc.edu/admission/undergraduate/faq/admission_process.html
Thanks for clarification on USC and ED. We’re still early in her process, so she may do ED on one of her other top 2 or 3 choices so it’s good to hear the current trend of philosophy behind ED. Some schools seem to roll you over to RD, but many do not, so once you don’t get in ED, you are done and no more opportunity.
Only apply ED to your number one choice. Don’t just do it to have an easier time getting into a school. If her top school doesn’t have ED, then she should not apply ED anywhere.