<p>I am surprised to read that while Harvard rejected last year only 156 of the 3,800 applicants in the ealry decision pool, deferring almost 3,000 and accepting around 800 - that Yale, rejected 33% of the applicants outright in the early pool and deferred only 47% of those who were not accepted early. How does anyone explain why Harvard rejects only about 156 early, but Yale rejects almost 1,100 early, when both schools have close to the same number of early applicants. That means that at Harvard competitive candidates are automatically deferred if not accepted. At Yale, one must imagine that many in the 33% that were rejected outright had high SAT scores and high grades/rigor of curriculum ect.</p>
<p>Not to assume, but yes the better applicants are in the early decision, but Yale does have smaller groups of students and cuts of a certain percentage that is lowest in the early pool.</p>
<p>Would the "applicants" in the ED pool include the ones that more likely have a chance in the RD pool? Meaning, the ones who don't stick out among the rest of the responsible ED applicants?</p>
<p>I dont think that there is such a thing at Yale as having a better chance in the early decision pool verus the regular decision pool. For applicants who are not legacies, recruited athletes, development cases or a particular category in need by the school, it is very tough to get in SCEA. The reason is that if there are 3,800 applicants for about 800 early spaces (this is just an estimate), 200 of those early spaces could go to athletes, 200 could go to legacies. That would mean that there were only 400 spaces left for applicants who did not fit in one of those categories, resulting in an acceptance rate of less than 10%, which would be similar to regular decision. In the early pool those who are not in one of the categories mentioned tend to be the most competitive applicants, that makes getting admitted even harder. In the regular pool however it is just as difficult. Now 20,000 applicants may be competing for the 800 spots that are left. The admissions office still has to balance the class and give equal opportunities to low income applicants who might not have applied in the early round. In addition the admissions office has to make sure that there is an equal balance of accepted students from all backgrounds and cultures.
Added to that there has to be diversity in terms of geographic distribution.
I do not believe there is any advantage to applying early versus regular at schools like hyp unless one is a recruited athlete, legacy or development caes whose family has given a large amount of money to the school. Those who are accepted to HYP and are not in one of the categories mentoned, unless applying to a particular program in demand at the school - ie. like Engineering at Princeton, probably hve the same odds of getting in early decision as regular decision.</p>
<p>aaaaaaaaahhh!!!</p>
<p>that is so disheartening...
well, you know what?! I'm applying early anyway! so there</p>
<p>Being a legacy is NO WHERE NEAR as much of a hook as being a recruited athlete is, and there definitely aren't 200 recruited athletes who get accepted early to Yale collegebound5. Unless an applicant's family donates millions of dollars as well as a couple of buildings to Yale every year or the prospective Yalie has relatives who are faculty members or work in the admissions office, being a legacy is merely a tip factor when "all other things" are relatively equal between a legacy and a non-legacy applicant. This is clearly stated on the Yale website and has been mentioned before by many credible posters such as parents on this website. Please don't try to create your own hypothetical admissions scenario and pass it along as a likelihood please.</p>
<p>Yale indicates that in articles that legacies have a 40% acceptance rate. So that is a big advantage. Recruited athletes have a huge advantage but dont underestimate legacies, and if they have given a large amount of money the statitstic is even greater.</p>
<p>Please. A 40% admissions rate doesn't prove causality. It's not so much that Yale admits 40% of legacies, but rather 40% of kids with the kind of stats they're looking for (which legacies happen to have). Think about the difference - legacies are likely to come from comfortable socioeconomic classes, attend top secondary schools, and do well on standardized tests, as well as be more inclined to matriculate if admitted. That's the average legacy. The average non-legacy applicant may not come from such a privileged background, have lower scores, don't do as well in school, etc. (remember it's the AVERAGE applicant, not the average CC'er!). So, in the end, it makes sense that Yale admits 40% of legacies.</p>
<p>Probably true, but there are always going to be legacy applicants who have high grades and high SAT scores but no real extra curricular involvement, or leadership, community service who believe that they will get accepted on the weight of their connection which very well might include not only the legacy connection but also a financial commitment to the school - coming from families who have given extremely generously. On the other hand there are always going to be applicants who are not legacies who have high SAT scores and high grades, perhaps even higher than the legacy candidates and these unconnected applicants also will have superior extra curricular involvement, leadership, community service, great passion, commitment, talent, accomplishment who will not get accepted while these other applicants do. And then you are going to see a lot of legacy candidates who have good grades but not great, above average SAT scores but not great, and no real extra curricular involvement to speak of, and nothing spectacular about their application get accepted while some realiy amazing applicants who are not legacies wont. If you read the book The Price of Admission by Golden the Wall Street Journal Pulitizer Prize winning reporter you can see some clear indications of this in some of the top high schools in the country.</p>
<p>30% actually. Yale is on the lower end of the spectrum. Harvard and Princeton are around 40%.</p>