Early Decision?

Parents Forum
21

<p>ED is like walking a tightrope.</p>

<p>The kids have to really LOVE their ED choice because, if admitted, they are bound.....and they have to live through 5 months of "nothing" while all of their friends are waiting, deciding, visiting, stressing. Only the 100% LOVE of their ED school will carry them through all of that. While all of their freinds are getting calls, letters, interviews, etc...they will just be waiting for prom/graduation/ summer, etc. Admitted ED students don't even get the fat envelope until April (when everyone else gets theirs). So, their parade ends early.....before the spectators arrive.</p>

<p>Couple this with the difficulty of preparing for rejection. </p>

<p>What if they aren't admitted? They really need to love other schools, too. But, wait.....they can't love the others TOO much!!! If they do, they may come to regret their ED choice when March, April, May rolls around - if admitted. </p>

<p>You really have to know your child. Know how they make decisions and how good they are about sticking with their choices - not only logically, but emotionally. Understand their self-esteem levels. How much will a rejection crush them? How sensitive are they? What other schools do they love? What is the likelihood of admission to those schools? </p>

<p>Finally, use rolling admission to get a couple of acceptances very EARLY in the year.....apply in Sept/Oct. That way, any ED/EA rejection might be accompanied by a couple of acceptances. This also serves well for kids who are admitted to their ED choices....as they get a couple more "congratulations" letters while they're in the "lull" between Dec and April.</p>

22

<p>Interestedad, nice analysis and advice. Basically if you are a BWRK and you want to go to HYP you will need the 75% SAT score which means 1560+ along with a myriad of other things.</p>

<p>Personally I think that ED is a bad policy and should be abolished. SCEA is much better but I really prefer open EA. You have just moved your deadlines up a bit but you also get the benefit of hearing from a number of schools before the New Year.</p>

23

<p>
[quote]
Interestedad, nice analysis and advice. Basically if you are a BWRK and you want to go to HYP you will need the 75% SAT score which means 1560+ along with a myriad of other things.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Correct. It's a little more qualitative than that. But, there would be a lot less heartbreak if folks would be more realistic about their chances.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Personally I think that ED is a bad policy and should be abolished. SCEA is much better but I really prefer open EA.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I have exactly the opposite view. To me, non-binding EA is basically worthless.</p>

<p>It's a commercial transaction. With binding ED, the school gets something of real value -- guaranteed yield without a financial aid bidding war. In exchange, they give something of real value -- a tiebreaker edge over other solid, qualified applicants. If you are a solid, qualified applicant, you probably will be accepted in the ED round. If you are solid, qualified applicant, you may or may not get accepted, depending on what other solid, qualified apps are in the stack.</p>

<p>The college gets little or no value from non-binding EA. Maybe they keep you from applying to other schools and shopping aid packages, but usually not. Therefore, there is no incentive to accept anyone but the most absolute stellar candidates EA.</p>

24

<p>interesteddad, agreed on being realistic.</p>

<p>I guess my real point about ED is 2 things:</p>

<ul>
<li>Those who are not concerned about the financial component of the transaction can apply. This results in an applicant pool weighted to the rich and creates the perception like the recent article in US News.</li>
<li>You agree to give the school all the bargaining power</li>
</ul>

<p>I understand your perspective on open EA but I do not think you get the craziness you get with RD with students applying to over 10 schools. By applying open EA the schools should know that the student have their choices down to a few schools. Thus the reason I do not have much of an issue with SCEA, it is something in the middle.</p>

<p>On a slightly different topic, I have always wondered why all the catholic schools, i.e. Notre Dame, Villanova, Santa Clara, Georgetown, Holy Cross and BC are all open EA and have never had an SCEA or ED policy. Is there a reason for this?</p>

25

<p>interestedad and others, perhaps this is a topic for another thread but let me start. I agree with interestedad's perspective about putting you student in the top 25% of the SAT component of the applicant pool. The information on this is easily available.</p>

<p>However, I would like to know the averages for the SAT2. The closest I can get to this information is the Ivy League Academic Index (AI) and how it is calculated. Additionally, the UC system provides some of this information. Is there someplace I could get this information for all schools?</p>

26

<p>
[quote]
Those who are not concerned about the financial component of the transaction can apply.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Do you think the number of full-fare acceptances would change without ED? I don't. </p>

<p>It's all budgeted. The college knows that it needs 50% (or 60% or 70%) full fare students and the admissions office gets them. ED just happens to be the most efficient mechanism. Without it, the acceptance rates for wealthy students would have to skyrocket in the RD round.</p>

<p>To me, the worst flaw in the whole system is low yield -- the inability to match up colleges and students most interested in each other. ED is remarkably efficient in matching up the kind of students the college wants with the students who most want to attend that college.</p>

<p>As far as EA goes. It's an unrepresentative sample. However, the most common use I see of EA here (and among D's friends) is applying to unrealistic, no-prayer reaches. IMO, the better strategic use of any EA/ED application is to apply to a plausible match/mild reach where you actually have a shot of getting accepted and avoid the chaos and uncertainty of placing your app in the mountainous RD pile.</p>

27

<p>My son’s experience with ED was similar to I-D’s daughter’s and it was overwhelmingly positive. The parameters were: 1. We knew we wouldn’t be getting any financial aid. 2. The school was by far son’s first choice 3. His stats were medium for the school but he had some pretty good hooks. 4.He continued with enthusiasm to work on his other applications and convinced himself that any one of the other 7 (including three less selectives) would be good choices.</p>

<p>Rolling admissions and EA (and SCEA to a point) are great for the applicant. If one of the colleges that you desire offers these choices, then you’re all set, win/win. If, however, the college you want is ED, and only ED, then applying somewhere else EA isn’t going to do much for you. </p>

<p>It’s important to accept, as I-D said, that ED benefits both the college and the applicant, even though it appears to lean toward the college. EA or SCEA may benefit both as well, but appears to lean toward the student. The schools that have resisted the move from ED to EA/SCEA do so for a very good reason. ED is a lock. The schools use it exactly for the purpose of enticing and corralling desirable students – URMs and hooks of all kinds, athletic, artistic, cultural. </p>

<p>The key figure to look at is not just the ED/RD acceptance rate but also the matriculation rate. </p>

<p>[I’m using Williams because that’s the school that I’m most familiar with. I would think these comments would apply to other selective LACs as well. According the website I looked at matriculation rates for AWS+Pomona are 38/49/26/40% respectively. Since those numbers include ED admits of 100% matriculation I’d have to assume that the RD matriculation rates for this group averages around 30%. If anyone has more exact figures, please post.] </p>

<p>LACs like Williams lose as many highly desirable students as they admit, more, in fact, in the RD round. Williams has a fierce competition for targeted admittees -- based on scores, GAP, EC’s and hooks -- with HYPSM as well as with A/S+P, so for Williams, ED is beneficial. </p>

<p>And for the 40% of all ED applicants who were successfully admitted, it’s also beneficial. Aside from the financial implications (more on this below) I don’t see any downside to the college or to the 200 ED admits. So the question is what about the 300+ kids who were rejected or deferred? Was their experience all negative, full of hurt feelings, wasted energy and bitterness? Maybe, but my intuitive feeling is no, for the most part. I would guess that for a good portion of those who didn’t get in ED, Williams was a super longshot. Hopefully, these kids benefited by getting a wakeup call in time to recalibrate their college list. And some were deferred and later admitted, which although aggravating is at least a happy ending. </p>

<p>That leaves the ones who were passed over for no good reason. In their cases the decision to use up their ED or SCEA bid with Williams was not such a good idea. Again, I’m just free-ranging here, but I honestly think these – the inexplicable ED rejects -- are few at LACs. If you want it badly enough and your profile fits what the college generally admits, you’ll most likely get in.</p>

<p>HYPSM are a separate category all together. Their matriculation rates are so high that they don’t much care who accepts and who doesn’t. [According to the website I looked at the total (early + regular) matriculation rate for H is 80% and for the others in the mid-to-high 60’s] There’s a long waiting line of qualifieds and as we’ve heard ad naseam they can fill their classes many times over. So, whether their system is SCEA or ED, the odds of admittance are slim, slim, slim! </p>

<p>I can see the advantage of getting the HYPSM rejection over with early so that the applicant has time to re-evaluate his/her list and maybe add a few more achievable choices. If s/he has an unrealistic and singular focus on HYPSM, an April rejection is likely to hurt just as much as a December one; but at least if s/he knows upfront, s/he has time to recoup. I’m not advocating a singular focus on HYPSM for ANYONE, but since it’s a common occurrence and since rejections are a lot more frequent than acceptances, it seems to me that the sooner the student can get on to the next good thing the better. </p>

<p>On the financial implications of applying ED, common wisdom says that if you need to compare and negotiate financial aid offers, then ED is not for you. This may or may not be factual, as no one can try it both ways to see which is better. We all know ED admittees who received adequate or even excellent financial aid. Of course we can’t say that they might or might not have done better financially somewhere else and we can’t say that they might or might not have done worse. What is accurate is that ED may be a financial risk. What is not correct is that it is necessarily a financial failure. Thus vulnerability to financial risk is an important factor to consider.</p>

28

<p>Low yield that results from large numbers of shotgun scattershot applications is undermining the whole college selection process.</p>

<p>Swarthmore's overall yield for last fall was 39%. But, that includes 100% yield for the early decision group. The yield in the RD round was 28%.</p>

<p>If they did away with ED, they would have to accept 496 additional RD candidates to replace the 141 acceptance letters currently sent to ED, just to end up with the same 366 incoming freshmen. There's no assurance that the high yield would carry over without ED. If forced, against their wishes, to apply to ten schools, many are going to get acceptances to HYPSM (which are hard to turn down) and many more are going to get price-cutting discounts to lure them to schools they don't like as well. You've just given up the single most efficient part of the entire college application process -- a near ideal matching of enthusiastic, highly self-selected students with their prefered college.</p>

<p>I suppose that is good if you are looking for an acceptance letter, but it is nightmare from the standpoint of trying to predictably enroll a freshman class. In the process, you lose the ability to identify those students who have done their research early and are most confident of a great fit with your school. To me, identifying that kind of fit and enthusiasm is the ultimate win-win for the student and the college.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Hopefully, these kids benefited by getting a wakeup call in time to recalibrate their college list.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>No kidding. Our attitude was that, if D wasn't going to get into Swarthmore, better to find out in December and get on with life. Figure a deferral would have confirmed that her overall list was probably OK. An outright rejection would have probably led to a little recalibration.</p>

<p>One of the problems I have with EA applications to super long-shot impossible dream reaches is that rejections don't necessarily help much in the re-calibration process.</p>